Quad Bike Safety: Issues Paper

Response 567734060

Back to Response listing

Make a submission

What is your name?

Name
Alicia Smith

Questions 1-6

2) Would design changes to quad bikes be likely to reduce the number of injuries and fatalities caused by quad bikes in Australia?

2) Would design changes to quad bikes be likely to reduce the number of injuries and fatalities caused by quad bikes in Australia?
Yes

3) If you answered ‘yes’ to question 2, what design changes do you consider would have this effect? Which design features, if any, should a safety standard mandate or prohibit? In particular the ACCC is interested in understanding design changes that are likely to reduce:

3) If you answered ‘yes’ to question 2, what design changes do you consider would have this effect? Which design features, if any, should a safety standard mandate or prohibit?
One major factor in serious injuries and deaths can be attributed to the isolation and lack of assistance a rider is able to obtain when an incident does occur. I think fitting all quads/SSVs with automated emergency alarms that initiate in the event of a roll over would be a great initiative. Possibly mandatory for areas with limited to no communication options.

The design feature between locked/unlocked differentials should be further researched as to whether this is impacting on more rollovers occurring, what type of terrain etc. unfortunately there doesn't appear to be enough evidence to suggest that this could be a mandated design feature, however strongly believe it should be looked into.

Lowering the centre of gravity - with anything, the higher the centre of gravity, the more unstable an item of plant becomes. Perhaps a mandatory requirement is to look into only allowing quads/SSVs with a centre of gravity lower than 'x' to be used within Australia.

My brother was killed when the quad he was riding rolled sideways, crushing him under it's weight. The weight of the bike itself was a large contributing factor in that there was no way he would have been able to lift it off him. Quads appear to be getting bigger and heavier which does push for the need for CPDs or ROPS. Although a CPD would not have saved my brother in this instance, it does have the potential to save lives when a bike flips vertically.

One item not addressed in the Issues paper is the tyres that are used on quad bikes. I am not a mechanical expert and don't pretend to be, however the heavier bike in which my brother was killed on had tyres which had blow outs 3 times in a short space of time, with no apparent reason for the blow outs. Determining whether the tyres fitted to quads are actually suitable for their size could be something to consider also.

4) If your view is that design features should be mandated or prohibited to increase quad bike safety, could the regulation be designed to encourage innovation rather than prescribing particular products or technical solutions (for example by ensuring fitting points or attachment mechanisms to allow the development of improved CPDs or ROPSs or by prescribing performance-based outcomes rather than technical designs)?

4) If your view is that design features should be mandated or prohibited to increase quad bike safety, could the regulation be designed to encourage innovation rather than prescribing particular products or technical solutions (for example by ensuring fitting points or attachment mechanisms to allow the development of improved CPDs or ROPSs or by prescribing performance-based outcomes rather than technical designs)?
Automated emergency beacons are already something riders could be using in the event of an incident when isolated, however the installation of automated emergency alarm on the actual bike would mean medical treatment is being provided to injured persons sooner, and hopefully saving lives. Something as simple as fitting these to new ATVs upon purchase rather mandating would be an innovative approach (part of a star rating system).

For CPD and ROPS, so far the statistics have not shown fatalities relating to these being fitted to quad bikes (from my personal knowledge), however am aware that many suppliers are still against fitting of these devices. More research and evidence would be required before being able to mandate, but agree that fitting points and attachment mechanisms would assist in improvement of these devices and how used.

Questions 7-12

7) Are consumers currently getting adequate information at the purchase point about quad bike use and limitations or safety information and equipment? Should there be additional warnings or instructions displayed at the point of purchase or provided with the sale of quad bikes?

7) Are consumers currently getting adequate information at the purchase point about quad bike use and limitations or safety information and equipment? Should there be additional warnings or instructions displayed at the point of purchase or provided with the sale of quad bikes?
I believe consumers have been able to access more information at the point of purchase around quads/SSVs in the last 2-3years as Government and advocating industries have become more vocal. One aspect however is around the safety information and equipment, knowing that suppliers are against fitting of CPDs and many riders I have spoken to will not fit CPDs based on their supplier information received, reporting that they could cause further risks, for example, tipping backwards if drive under low branches. In this instance I think there should be information which provides riders with all the necessary information to make informed choices on their own accord.
Most suppliers now provide information on training and helmets which has been great to see.
Possibility of more decal on the bikes themselves, knowing many riders just jump on and go, as well as possibility for a fact sheet or checklist (available online to download) to be developed as a nationwide approach to provide drivers with the general information around safety and available equipment. (Minimum cost approach) For example, checklist on helmet use, training, CPD information and where to buy etc.

8) In relation to the option of a consumer safety rating system:

In relation to the option of a consumer safety rating system:
The only ATV report I have come across was through a research report undertaken by Kondinin Group in 2010. They tested and compared handling, steering,
braking, comfort, ergonomics for active riding, and rider protection. I think this report is a great start to identifying testing criteria and how results could be displayed. The only concern with a rating system is the issue of riders then feeling safe because they bought the quad bike with a 5 star safety rating, however would have been safer in a SSV or similar with roll cage. It could lull purchasers into a false sense of security. A rating system would need to include safety aspects in relation to looking at SSVs as well as quad bikes and the rollover factor. It may be very difficult to ever agree on a 5 star system given the bikes are purchased for different reasons and quad bike stability is subject to a large amount of dynamic variables.
I would expect costs to be extremely high in testing and delivering results and would also require extensive consultation on clarification of the criteria of each star rating. As well as undertaking research on quads involved in incidents and understanding the mechanisms of what may have failed resulting in rollovers or crashes.
A safety rating system would be of benefit to consumers, as it would help them identify risks associated with bikes, which bikes may be better on certain terrain, buying vehicles better suited for their purpose etc.

10) If the ACCC recommends a mandatory safety standard for quad bikes:

10) If the ACCC recommends a mandatory safety standard for quad bikes:
should the standard apply differently to quad bikes used for different purposes, for example agriculture, sports, recreation, tourism and commercial hire? - No, it should be across all consumers. Given most states have adopted the Model WHS Act this could be as simple as mandating helmet use within a clause (as with tractor roll over protection when it was mandated). A transition period would be strongly recommended.
• should the standard apply to SSVs as well as quad bikes, and if so how should the vehicles be defined? It would depend on the standards being mandated, ie if wearing a seatbelt, is there a need for a helmet on a SSV?
• when should the standard commence? In the next 1-2 years
• should the standard include a transitional provision? Yes
• should the standard have an expiry date? A review date
• should the standard apply to both new and second hand vehicles, or be limited to new quad bikes sold after the transitional date? both

12) Please provide any other information you consider may be relevant to the ACCC’s consideration of these issues.

12) Please provide any other information you consider may be relevant to the ACCC’s consideration of these issues.
I believe further research is required before mandating any requirements in Australia. Coroners reports make for great insight into causes and rates of serious injuries and fatalities, which has aided in the push for helmet use, training and CPD/ROPS however there is little information as to whether there is any correlation between quad bike deaths and machine make, model, colour or size.