|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :  
|
 Posted: 12:49 - 05 Sep 2011  Post subject: Consultation on "EU anti tampering crap" now open |
 |
|
I'm starting this as a new thread to be sure that this link is front and centre.
The DfT has today opened a consultation on EU proposed regulation for the type approval and market surveilance of 2 and 3 wheeled vehicles and quadricycles aka the "FUN IST VERBOTEN!" Directive.
It's being touted by Mike Penning, who has been shockingly sensible so far. This is our opportunity to make our views known.
Can I respectfully suggest that we take the time to read the proposals and see exactly what it is that we're raging against, before replying.
I'd also suggest focussing on concrete implications: pricing basic bikes and scooters out of the hands of the commuters who most need them; the cost burden of "surveilance" (sic) versus the relatively small number of motorcycles in use and the tiny number that are significantly modified; the jobs impact on the after-market supplying those people. Note: either that jobs impact is insignificant, or the problem itself is insignificant - they can't have it both ways.
Let's go through it together, shall we?
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
Last edited by Rogerborg on 13:16 - 05 Sep 2011; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
  |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
| Wafer_Thin_Ham |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Wafer_Thin_Ham
Super Spammer
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Karma : 
|
Posted: 12:56 - 05 Sep 2011  Post subject: |
|
|
My acrobat won't load the larger files. 
____________________
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Wafer_Thin_Ham |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Wafer_Thin_Ham
Super Spammer
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 13:05 - 05 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
Working now. Most bikes already have daytime running lights, so little point in that. Compulsary ABS/CBS seems daft and they admit in the report they have no data for current uptake levels of ABS/CBS. Why can't we have the choice? They seem to be forgetting that Honda tried CBS in the 1990's and it wasn't exactly a hit.
Also admit they have no current data for the size of the tampering "problem" and therefore cannot say what the benefit would be. Surely this also means they don't even know if it's a problem. They're only assuming it is.
____________________
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| multijoy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
multijoy
World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Oct 2008
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
|
| Posted: 13:13 - 05 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, blow me down with a feather. 
OK, here's the meat of it:
| DfT wrote: |
23. Advanced braking is proposed for new types of motorcycle approved from January 2017. Larger bikes, e.g. those over 125cc, will be fitted with ABS while smaller bikes may be fitted with either ABS or combined braking systems (CBS).
24. The proposal requires measures to prevent tampering of a vehicle's power-train with the aim of preventing modifications that may prejudice safety and to prevent damage to the environment. Details of the measures are not included in the proposal and will be laid down later in a delegated act.
25. New lighting measures are proposed requiring the fitment of "Automatic Headlamp On" or daytime running lights.
27. Environmental measures include three new stages of air pollutant emissions limits which would be mandatory for all new machines on 1st January 2015, 1st January 2018 and 1st January 2021 respectively.
28. Two stages of On Board Diagnostic systems are also required at the second and third emissions stage. The first stage OBD requirements are met by many new machines already; the second stage requirements require new technology. |
Now, the good news: the talk of "surveillance" is only aimed at stopping penguin-murdering bits getting into the EU in the first place. The emissions burden, including the long term performance of emissions control systems, is on manufacturers. There is no suggestion (yet) of MOT emissions tests for bikes, or actually targetting riders.
In fact, the current lot of clowns in the DfT seem to be pretty much against these proposals! See sections 35 to 47, where they rip the stuffing out of the cost versus benefits.
However, it's vital to bear in mind that there will be a new lot of clowns along sooner or later, likely from the outfit that thinks everything that isn't allowed must be prohibited; just because there's no suggestion now that bikes will be emissions tested (at MOT or roadside) doesn't mean that it cant sneak up on us later.
The devil will be in the details - note "Details of the [anti tampering] measures are not included in the proposal and will be laid down later in a delegated act." We'll want to nip that one in the bud, methinks.
So on the face of it, it looks like the DfT are wanting ammunition to support the position that most of this is burdensome tosh. Let's hear it for Mike Penning, for whom I am developing a serious man-crush. 
Ahem.  Fill your boots!
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Charlie |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Charlie
World Chat Champion
Joined: 27 May 2007
Karma :
|
| Posted: 13:36 - 05 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
Just had a read through and it seems the DfT is actual working in our favour. I guess they are just looking for some public support for their role.
Will have a think before I put fingers to keys and write a response.
Thanks for posting it though 
____________________
Past: Honda x8rs, Honda City fly, Honda Hornet 250, Honda VFR750, Yamaha xt600e.
Current: Honda CBR929RR & Yamaha XT660Z Tenere |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| DrDonnyBrago |
This post is not being displayed .
|
DrDonnyBrago
World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:11 - 05 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
OK, on further reading of the actual proposal, which still lacks a definitive reference number  here are the grounds for concern for owners, which the DfT consultation doesn't touch on:
| Some snivelling Brusselscrat wrote: |
Article 17
Prohibition of defeat devices
The use of defeat devices that reduce the effectiveness of safety, electromagnetic compatibility, the on-board diagnostics system, sound abatement or of pollutant emission abatement systems shall be prohibited [NOTE: the "use of"!]
Article 18
Measures regarding modifications to the powertrain of vehicles
1. ‘Powertrain’ means the components and systems of a vehicle that generate power and deliver it to the road surface, including the engine(s), the engine management systems or any other control module, the pollution control devices, the transmission and its control, either a drive shaft or belt drive or chain drive, the differentials, the final drive, and the driven wheel tyre (radius).
2. L-category vehicles shall be equipped with designated measures to prevent tampering of a vehicle's powertrain, to be laid down in a delegated act by means of a series of technical requirements and specifications with the aim:
(a) to prevent modifications that may prejudice safety, in particular by increasing vehicle performance through tampering with the powertrain in order to increase the maximum torque and/ or power and/or maximum designed vehicle speed as declared by the manufacturer of a vehicle upon type-approval, and/or
(b) to prevent damage to the environment.
Article 21
Requirements for environmental performance
(d) that in-service conformity testing requirements shall be introduced at the Euro
In-service conformity" means testing of representative vehicles from the market fleet in order to verify if the technical measures taken by the manufacturer continue to be such as to ensure that the tailpipe and evaporative emissions are effectively limited and the functional safety measures and associated safety performance levels are actually met, pursuant to this Regulation, throughout the normal life of the vehicles under normal conditions of use.
|
So, actually, ignore the above. PANIC STATIONS.
Based on the plain language, the "fitting" or "use" of anything not approved by Brussels will be "prohibited". That effects owners.
Anti-tampering is to be "technical". I was going to suggest that anti-tampering should be by warning labels or plaques saying that tampering is prohibited and kills polar bears. What kind of possible "technical" measure can you use to prevent owners fitting a different sprocket or tyre, other than to prohibit us from doing it at all?
Bikes need to be monitored for life. This could be at the MOT, or it could be roadside swoops. The aim is to check on the manufacturer, but surely the result of that can only be vehicle recalls. And what if they can't fix the issue? What then? That effects us.
I intend to focus on those end-user issues in particular in my response. If there's to be any burden, I want it put squarely on the manufacturer, and not hived off to owners or the mechanics that we may or may not choose to have work on our machines.
As an aside:
| Same Brusselcrat wrote: |
2. This Regulation does not apply to the following vehicles:
(d) vehicles exclusively intended for on-road or off-road use in competition;
|
So presumably there will continue to be provision for selling and fitting all of the prohibited polar bear murdering devices "for competition use". Just as there is now. So... all this sound and fury, for no effective benefit. 
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rowey |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rowey
World Chat Champion
Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| multijoy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
multijoy
World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Oct 2008
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Im-a-Ridah |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Im-a-Ridah
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
 |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| MarJay |
This post is not being displayed .
|
MarJay
But it's British!
Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
|
| Posted: 22:31 - 05 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
| multijoy wrote: | Although DfT have clearly said that Government is against the technical measures, although notes that their may be some justification for vehicles restricted by design (learner vehicles, etc). |
So now it'll be doubly illegal to ride a vehicle for which you don't have a licence?
I don't think there's much of an "etc" there. Post 3rd directive, the license classes will be:
 Peds, I believe currently defined as <50cc <=45kph - just 28mph! - design speed vehicles.
125cc / 11kW
35kW
Unlimited, the proposed 74kW limit having been nixed in this document.
Peds get modded routinely, as they should - bloody dangerous contraptions. 11kW 125s, well, maybe some, but I doubt many make it over a genuine 11kW at the crank.
Above that, the 35kW class currently consists of some 25kW 250s, plus the new BMW F650GS. The former won't get past 35kW, the GS isn't exactly bought by racer kiddies, and I don't see many other manufacturers bothering to introduce 35kW machines when they can just restrict down their usual 600+ bikes. And again, existing and pending licensing laws cover that, or should.
For everybody else, pimping a bike's powertrain is always going to be a glorious folly compared to just buying a slightly faster stock model.
This looks like a punishment seeking out a crime to me. Ecomentals and curtain twitchers who just hate bikes and always will.
I'm going to take a deep breath before responding, as I'd like to think about how best to focus on the issues that will effect us directly.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Kris |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Kris
World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Feb 2002
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| multijoy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
multijoy
World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Oct 2008
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Poseidon |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Poseidon
World Chat Champion
Joined: 15 Aug 2008
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hockeystorm65 |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hockeystorm65
Spanner Monkey
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| pinkyfloyd |
This post is not being displayed .
|
pinkyfloyd
Super Spammer
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Karma :
|
| Posted: 08:56 - 06 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
This just appeared on a FB page I'm on. Interesting reading.
| Quote: | STILL THINK WE ARE PARANOID? This is a reply to someones letter ref; EU Legislation, to William Dartmouth, MEP.
by Plymouth MAG on Monday, September 5, 2011 at 5:35pm
This is interesting reading. William Dartmouth replies to my letter ref EU motorcycle legislation. The interesting part is explanation that this is part of the EU's attempts to completely remove motorcyclists from EU roads! I urge every motorcyclist to read this letter, take note and REACT by writing to your MP.... Or we WILL lose the right to ride our motorcycles anywhere....
The reply:
Dear Sean Holland,
Thank you for your email concerning the EU regulations on motorbikes.
The EU wishes to enforce the so-called "Anti-tampering regulation",
aimed at preventing bike mods and enforcing absolute conformity to EU
motorbike specifications, however bad they are. This is merely part of a
raft of interfering and patronising regulations. (Another example would
be the Day-Glo jackets for motorcyclists.) All of these are all
ultimately aimed at removing the motorcyclist from the roads in Europe,
except perhaps as officialdom such as the police may wish use them.
The EU Commission and Council are hostile to the personal car, and are
making the lives of drivers ever more expensive and regulated, but they
of course cannot deny the personal use of the car as being of huge
importance and the huge value of its market. The EU parliament is merely
a tail-end appendage on the body of the Commission and the Council in
this process, designed to prevent the public having any real say in the
matter. This is all in line with the EU obsession of planning and
taxation, and only public mass transport is so easily controlled and
planned as they wish. They only think of people as "the masses", not as
individuals. They only ever speak approvingly of the use of personal
cars in their documents or in committee for "car pooling" - as promoted
by officialdom of course. Their interfering attitude is quite
unstoppable.
They are uniquely hostile to the motorcycle and the motorcyclist, as
they are so individual and unnameable to collectivization, and they have
therefore been also curiously negligent of their existence for decades.
They are only now considering how to eliminate the motorcyclist, but by
small, slow, stages, as is normally their manner. The two easy ways to
regulate and eliminate them is via the "climate change and pollution"
demonization method, and the ubiquitous "Health and Safety" nanny-state
control. In the parliamentary transport and trade and commerce
committees this is the universal approach.
For example, the European Commission 2010 White paper on "European
Transport Policy" at:
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/strategies/doc/2001_white_paper/lb_com_200
1_0370_en.pdf
treats motorcyclists purely negatively, unlike all other forms of
transport discussed, not at all recognizing their value for in normal
road use for personal transport, courier transport, and pleasure, but
rather as a hazard to be controlled. It mentions motorcyclists three
times only, as I detail here:
The first mention on page 68 is part of the paragraph about, "the
scourge of drink-driving", and the Commission recommendation for a
"maximum permitted blood alcohol level of...0.2mg/ml for commercial
drivers, motorcyclists and inexperienced drivers".
Page 85 unhelpfully notes that, "In terms of safety, one fatal accident
in two takes place in urban surroundings, and the highest casualties are
among pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists." (This useless statistic
fails to provide any way of judging whether more or less than "one in
two" journeys "takes place in urban surroundings", thus making in it
impossible to judge whether urban journeys are relatively more or less
dangerous than any other type, presumably they mean compared with rural
only. They do not seem to mind if these incommensurable methods of
travel are all lumped together - spurious statistics are foisted upon us
in a fatuous rhetoric, later to be used to justify any safety measures
they then wish to impose. The fight starts with resistance to these
nonsensical figures.)
Page 89 has you as an afterthought, "Some [European] local authorities
are planning to allocate priority lanes to public means of transport
(buses and taxis) and also to private vehicles being used for car
pooling, for example, while increasing the number of lanes reserved for
cyclists and even motorcyclists."
I shall oppose this at every turn (As shall my UKIP colleagues) and vote
against any such proposals should they come before us in the EU
"parliament".
Please feel free to lobby your local MP as this is a matter of UK
democracy too, rapidly disappearing as it is. Also, I would recommend
linking up with the UK and French motorcycling associations, who are all
up in arms about this. Write letters to the motorcycling press, and be
absolute in your opposition to this and all other EU interferences in
our lives and liberties. Finally, please support UKIP in all elections -
we cannot do much without your vote.
Best regards William Dartmouth |
____________________
illuminateTHEmind wrote: I am just more evolved than most of you guys... this allows me to pick of things quickly which would have normally taken the common man years to master
Hockeystorm65:.well there are childish arguments...there are very childish arguments.....there are really stupid childish arguments and now there are......Pinkfloyd arguments!
Teflon-Mike:I think I agree with just about all Pinky has said. |
|
| Back to top |
 |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Chalky. |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Chalky.
World Chat Champion
Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 09:01 - 06 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
I'm going to just ignore it all and keep riding like a dick. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Wafer_Thin_Ham |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Wafer_Thin_Ham
Super Spammer
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 09:02 - 06 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
Remind me why we're still in the EU. Switzerland manage fine being out of it?
____________________
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| pinkyfloyd |
This post is not being displayed .
|
pinkyfloyd
Super Spammer
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg
nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
|
| Posted: 10:14 - 06 Sep 2011 Post subject: |
|
|
| multijoy wrote: | You know, the plus side to all this is that it might put FI International out of business - the text refers to modification of the powertrain, which on first read would actually prohibit aftermarket restriction  |
Oh, I'd love to think so.
But what's more likely is that they'll give a bung to some greasy little Belgian and then finally be able to make a truthful claim that their washers and throttle stops are the only legal, approved way to modify a bike. 
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Codemonkey |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Codemonkey
Crazy Courier
Joined: 18 Oct 2009
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| wiznyme |
This post is not being displayed .
|
wiznyme
Derestricted Danger
Joined: 08 Jul 2011
Karma :  
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| LordShaftesbu... |
This post is not being displayed .
|
LordShaftesbu...
World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Sep 2008
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
Old Thread Alert!
The last post was made 13 years, 297 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful? |
 |
|
|
Help & FAQs
Search BCF
Members
Groups
Events Calendar
.......or maybe that was Let's Bone Trudy? I can't remember...........
rating
rating