SHELL - OFFICIAL STATEMENT RELEASED

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 4 2005, 12:12 PM

er.... use main stand? If no main stand then patronise another brand that allows pumping without dismount lor...

 

Anyway, the main objective of this exercise is to prevent situation where riders get caught in a fire because of direct exposure to petrol fume, or worse, if the bike should fall before sealing of the fuel cap.

 

Having passengers in cars during refueling is less dangerous than having bikers on bikes, because they are not exposed directly to the combustible fume, although one can argue it's dangerous too nevertheless.

 

Anyway, the use of side or mainstand aside, it is less dangerous for bikers to dismount before refueling - period.

A rider has free, unimpeded access to his surroundings for an escape attempt. Passengers in a car, however, could be so blissfully unaware of a fire that by the time they realise they're in the hot pan, the car doors may be too hot for them to touch it to open it for instance; they do not enjoy the same lack of impedements that bikers do. So how can you say it is less dangerous?

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 4 2005, 02:24 PM

I am not sure most will find them unacceptable, but most certainly don't like to be forced into doing it, whether in a petrol station or not.

 

The pump station is ALSO considering safety of other pump users, people in the station's vicinity, and the premise's safety.

 

The way I see it? It's dangerous to pump before dismounting in the 1st place, so this requirement is actually just stating and requiring the obvious, just like the requirement to wear helmet. People in the states are still argueing that there's no need to wear helmet. Go figure.

 

Anyway, perhaps someone can provide precise measurement about this 'unable to pump full tank' issue? How much less fuel is pumped if the bike is on side stand? Is it significant enough to justify the need to pump while mounted?

 

 

The way I see it? Pumping while standing up is more dangerous; I'll spill petrol because I am not used to it. And that this requirement is stating anything obvious or not is still unclear to me.

 

So why doesn't the pump station consider the safety of riders who like me, pump petrol with 5 thumbs when dismounted and spill petrol all over the place? How does this, then, consider the safety of other pump users, customers and the premise's safety?

 

Go figure.

[skai]

Hmmm.. was wondering... if this safety issue is so important, how come other petrol company are not implementing it, and why the gahment is not making it a law?

 

[whyh]

Originally posted by william_liu@Mar 4 2005, 02:49 PM

When you mentioned the safety of other petrol station users, I can agree that it is a valid point. I don't have a problem with the no usage of handphone, smoking or switching off the engines ruling. These are very reasonable rulings.

 

However, I don't really see how the risk of an accident occurring is increased regardless of whether one is standing or sitting down. As our friend Metalfyre pointed out (in another thread) that when you force people to refuel in a manner they are uncomfortable with, the chances of spillage, bike toppling and flash fire occurring are in fact increased. This is the primary point to note I feel.

 

For my TA200, I did not record the exact figures, but I have tried refueling with my bike on the side stand first, and when it appeared to be full, I straightened (very very awkwardly) the bike and managed to pump in approximately another liter. This figure will differ for different bikes, perhaps the next time I refuel I will note down the exact difference.

People will always be uncomfortable with changes, but the chances of bike toppling with unsealed feul cap will always be alot greater and real then if it is on side stand or main stand.

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 4 2005, 02:51 PM

A rider has free, unimpeded access to his surroundings for an escape attempt. Passengers in a car, however, could be so blissfully unaware of a fire that by the time they realise they're in the hot pan, the car doors may be too hot for them to touch it to open it for instance; they do not enjoy the same lack of impedements that bikers do. So how can you say it is less dangerous?

Car passengers are better protected from the fire than your bare skin, isn't it?

 

If having speedy access to one's surroundings is important to you, the less reason you have against dismounting before refueling!

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 4 2005, 02:53 PM

 

The way I see it? Pumping while standing up is more dangerous; I'll spill petrol because I am not used to it. And that this requirement is stating anything obvious or not is still unclear to me.

 

So why doesn't the pump station consider the safety of riders who like me, pump petrol with 5 thumbs when dismounted and spill petrol all over the place? How does this, then, consider the safety of other pump users, customers and the premise's safety?

 

Go figure.

If using 4 fingers and a thumb to refuel and you still spill petrol 'all over the place', then I suggest it's time you visit your doctor and refrain from refueling till your hand has recovered. You will still spill petrol all over the place if u were on the bike anyway.

 

Don't think they will modify the rule to suit your physical condition.

[whyh]

Originally posted by skai@Mar 4 2005, 03:36 PM

Hmmm.. was wondering... if this safety issue is so important, how come other petrol company are not implementing it, and why the gahment is not making it a law?

 

I think Shell is either trying to be more kiasu with it's property, or it's trying to be a responsible corporate citizen.

 

Anyway, this is a free country, and Singaporeans should live like people with freedom, and vote with their dollar!

[william_liu]

I think you have your points, and so do I.

 

And I agree, let's vote with our money! At the same time, let those who are dissatisfied's voices be heard.

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 4 2005, 04:42 PM

Car passengers are better protected from the fire than your bare skin, isn't it?

 

If having speedy access to one's surroundings is important to you, the less reason you have against dismounting before refueling!

They ARE better protected, until the flames engulf the car while they're trapped inside it.

 

I never mentioned the importance of easy access to the surroundings to myself. Just pointing out the differences between cars and bikes. In any case, how many seconds does dismounting from the bike take? Especially in the event of a fire, when one's reactions are decidedly much faster. How much faster can you get away if you dismount in the first place as compared to straddling the bike? Getting on and off the bike takes less than a second unless you're really fat. Does the nanosecond saved really make a difference??

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 4 2005, 04:47 PM

If using 4 fingers and a thumb to refuel and you still spill petrol 'all over the place', then I suggest it's time you visit your doctor and refrain from refueling till your hand has recovered. You will still spill petrol all over the place if u were on the bike anyway.

 

Don't think they will modify the rule to suit your physical condition.

You don't know 'figure of speech' when you see it, do you?

 

Fine. Let me spell things out to you then.

 

'5 thumbs' means clumsy.

 

I am proficient at refuelling while astride my bike because I am used to it. I have been doing so from the very beginning of my riding career, if you will. I do NOT spill petrol while refuelling on my bike because I am used to it.

 

I am not so proficient at refuelling standing beside my bike because I am not used to it. Don't tell me that the very first time you pumped, you didn't have a single drop of petrol landing up anywhere else other than in your fuel tank?

For me, I am unused to the position, and the stiff nature of the cables makes handling the pump awkward for me in such an unfamiliar position. Allow me to assure you that this is not a physical condition.

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 4 2005, 11:21 PM

They ARE better protected, until the flames engulf the car while they're trapped inside it.

 

I never mentioned the importance of easy access to the surroundings to myself. Just pointing out the differences between cars and bikes. In any case, how many seconds does dismounting from the bike take? Especially in the event of a fire, when one's reactions are decidedly much faster. How much faster can you get away if you dismount in the first place as compared to straddling the bike? Getting on and off the bike takes less than a second unless you're really fat. Does the nanosecond saved really make a difference??

So if the rider is also engulfed in flames, just like the car is, who is better protected? Besides, It takes alot more time to engulf a car than to engulf a rider through his fabrics, giving car passengers ALOT more time to escape.

 

Anyway, it's the haste in dismounting that makes toppling the bike more probable, besides other fatal mistake like forgetting to engage the side stand. Speed of dismounting is not the issue at hand.

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 4 2005, 11:34 PM

You don't know 'figure of speech' when you see it, do you?

 

Fine. Let me spell things out to you then.

 

'5 thumbs' means clumsy.

 

I am proficient at refuelling while astride my bike because I am used to it. I have been doing so from the very beginning of my riding career, if you will. I do NOT spill petrol while refuelling on my bike because I am used to it.

 

I am not so proficient at refuelling standing beside my bike because I am not used to it. Don't tell me that the very first time you pumped, you didn't have a single drop of petrol landing up anywhere else other than in your fuel tank?

For me, I am unused to the position, and the stiff nature of the cables makes handling the pump awkward for me in such an unfamiliar position. Allow me to assure you that this is not a physical condition.

You will spill a few drops initially, but you will get used to it, and eventually be proficient in it. I dunno what riding career you have had that makes it so hard for you to adopt a safer refueling habit. Care to enlighten my lack of understanding in this particular 'figure of speech'?

 

In any case, you can run away faster and not topple your bike if you are already standing firmly on your feet with your bike firmly at rest, should that few drops developed into a fire.

 

My advice for clumsy people like you is to be less clumsy.

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 4 2005, 11:46 PM

So if the rider is also engulfed in flames, just like the car is, who is better protected? Besides, It takes alot more time to engulf a car than to engulf a rider through his fabrics, giving car passengers ALOT more time to escape.

 

Anyway, it's the haste in dismounting that makes toppling the bike more probable, besides other fatal mistake like forgetting to engage the side stand. Speed of dismounting is not the issue at hand.

For the rider to be 'engulfed in flames', he'd have to be drenched in petrol.

 

Fine. Assuming he is and he is engulfed by the flames, I shall conceed this point to you. However, being drenched by petrol, standing or straddling won't make an iota of difference, would it?

 

And since we assume the rider is drenched in petrol, let us make a similiar assumption for the car to make a balanced comparison. If the car is engulfed in flames as a result, being made of metal, which is a conductor of heat, won't the doors be far too hot to open to provide an avenue for escape? Even if the doors are open, won't the flames impede a hasty retreat?

 

Toppling the bike...that is probable. But most riders have their side stands down already since they have to dismount later to queue up and pay.

 

Moreover, I've seen no rider falling over dead from neglecting to engage the side stand, and therefore fail to see how it can be likened to a fatal mistake.

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 5 2005, 12:01 AM

You will spill a few drops initially, but you will get used to it, and eventually be proficient in it. I dunno what riding career you have had that makes it so hard for you to adopt a safer refueling habit. Care to enlighten my lack of understanding in this particular 'figure of speech'?

 

In any case, you can run away faster and not topple your bike if you are already standing firmly on your feet with your bike firmly at rest, should that few drops developed into a fire.

 

My advice for clumsy people like you is to be less clumsy.

Haha if only I could be less clumsy simply by heeding your advice.

 

Different people have different preferences. I cannot force you to write with your right hand if you prefer using the left and hence are more proficient at manipulating writing instruments with it. Are you to say that since most instruments (ie scissors) are made for right handers, and since right handers are predominant, left handers should switch so they can use these instruments made for right handers?

 

You have yet to convince me how dismounting first is a safer refuelling habit.

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 5 2005, 12:06 AM

For the rider to be 'engulfed in flames', he'd have to be drenched in petrol.

 

Fine. Assuming he is and he is engulfed by the flames, I shall conceed this point to you. However, being drenched by petrol, standing or straddling won't make an iota of difference, would it?

 

And since we assume the rider is drenched in petrol, let us make a similiar assumption for the car to make a balanced comparison. If the car is engulfed in flames as a result, being made of metal, which is a conductor of heat, won't the doors be far too hot to open to provide an avenue for escape? Even if the doors are open, won't the flames impede a hasty retreat?

 

Toppling the bike...that is probable. But most riders have their side stands down already since they have to dismount later to queue up and pay.

 

Moreover, I've seen no rider falling over dead from neglecting to engage the side stand, and therefore fail to see how it can be likened to a fatal mistake.

1st of all, you brought up the point of cars being engulfed in flames, and I was just matching your scenario on the rider.

 

Then you argued that for a rider to be engulfed, one has to be drenched in petrol. May I then ask what is the chance of a rider or car being drenched in petrol?

 

In any case, should the car be engulfed in flames, a passenger in a car still has a higher chance of survival compared to the rider who is already engulfed in flames. The passengers still has a chance to open the 'hot' door to escape. No chance for the rider to make any retreat at all. He's already being roasted, like the car.

 

For your view that most riders will have engaged their side stand, well.... Most would, Some won't. Many riders have experienced dropping their bike before while being stationery.

 

Even if you had engaged your side stand, haste in dismounting presents other chance of disaster by rendering the side stand ineffective. eg, instinctively dismounting hastily to the starboard side. Imagine all the flammable fuel pouring out from your fuel tank onto the ground, with your metal tank and hot exhaust on the ground too....

good chance of fatality.... and have I added that you could be pinned under your bike?

 

Nothing beats steadying your bike like dismounting and steadying it on a side/main stand 1st.

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 5 2005, 12:18 AM

Haha if only I could be less clumsy simply by heeding your advice.

 

Different people have different preferences. I cannot force you to write with your right hand if you prefer using the left and hence are more proficient at manipulating writing instruments with it. Are you to say that since most instruments (ie scissors) are made for right handers, and since right handers are predominant, left handers should switch so they can use these instruments made for right handers?

 

You have yet to convince me how dismounting first is a safer refuelling habit.

I am just saying habits can be changed, and good habits should be promoted and cultivated.

 

If you still think dismounting before refueling is not a good habit, and refuse to adopt, then perhaps you should not patronise Shell lor.

 

If the other brands also adopts this stand, then you need to go JB liao.

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 5 2005, 01:20 AM

1st of all, you brought up the point of cars being engulfed in flames, and I was just matching your scenario on the rider.

 

Then you argued that for a rider to be engulfed, one has to be drenched in petrol. May I then ask what is the chance of a rider or car being drenched in petrol?

 

In any case, should the car be engulfed in flames, a passenger in a car still has a higher chance of survival compared to the rider who is already engulfed in flames. The passengers still has a chance to open the 'hot' door to escape. No chance for the rider to make any retreat at all. He's already being roasted, like the car.

 

For your view that most riders will have engaged their side stand, well.... Most would, Some won't. Many riders have experienced dropping their bike before while being stationery.

 

Even if you had engaged your side stand, haste in dismounting presents other chance of disaster by rendering the side stand ineffective. eg, instinctively dismounting hastily to the starboard side. Imagine all the flammable fuel pouring out from your fuel tank onto the ground, with your metal tank and hot exhaust on the ground too....

 

I think nothing beats steadying your bike like dismounting and steadying it on a side/main stand 1st.

There is hardly a mint of chance for a rider or car to be drenched in petrol.

But under what other circumstance can a rider be 'engulfed'?

 

Again I present to you that when a fire occurs, there is only a split second difference when the mounted rider clears his vehicle as compared to one who has already dismounted. Now we're talking about avoiding the fire, right? So what are the chances that during this split second the rider can actually catch fire? Or be engulfed? The only scenario I can think of is if he is drenched in petrol. Of which chances are slim.

 

True. There is a chance that a mounted rider will tip his machine off balance in his haste to escape. But the dismounted rider while pumping would certainly be in contact with his vehicle as well. Again, there is the chance the bike may topple as a result of reflex actions.

 

The chances are slightly slimmer tho

 

Nice presentation of ideas dude

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 5 2005, 01:26 AM

I am just saying habits can be changed, and good habits should be promoted and cultivated.

 

If you still think dismounting before refueling is not a good habit, and refuse to adopt, then perhaps you should not patronise Shell lor.

 

If the other brands also adopts this stand, then you need to go JB liao.

Habits can be changed. But habits die hard. After writing with one hand for so long, can you switch to the other with ease? Even if I tell you its for a good habit?

 

I never thought it was not a good habit. Some individuals like you may choose to err on the side of caution. I simply think it is an unnecessary precaution. That's all. And all I seek is for someone to make me understand why this precaution might be necessary.

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 5 2005, 01:32 AM

There is hardly a mint of chance for a rider or car to be drenched in petrol.

But under what other circumstance can a rider be 'engulfed'?

 

Again I present to you that when a fire occurs, there is only a split second difference when the mounted rider clears his vehicle as compared to one who has already dismounted. Now we're talking about avoiding the fire, right? So what are the chances that during this split second the rider can actually catch fire? Or be engulfed? The only scenario I can think of is if he is drenched in petrol. Of which chances are slim.

 

True. There is a chance that a mounted rider will tip his machine off balance in his haste to escape. But the dismounted rider while pumping would certainly be in contact with his vehicle as well. Again, there is the chance the bike may topple as a result of reflex actions.

 

The chances are slightly slimmer tho

 

Nice presentation of ideas dude

We are talking about avoiding a disaster.

 

Rare cases of riders catching fire while mounted on a bike will reveal riders instinctively flapping their hands on the flame while still clutching onto the fuel pump!!! Or losing balance and fall down in panic with their bike!!!

 

With the bike properly mounted on the side/main stand, one does not need to be close to the bike to pump petrol. It's more troublesome, but there's alot of advantages in terms of safety, over the method with riders mounted on the bike.

 

BTW, I do not work for any petrol brands. I just happen to be fortunate enough to be able to read news and articles all day long, and come accross alot of articles not related to work... like refueling accidents

[Metalfyre]

Originally posted by whyh@Mar 5 2005, 01:45 AM

We are talking about avoiding a disaster.

 

Rare cases of riders catching fire while mounted on a bike will reveal riders instinctively flapping their hands on the flame while still clutching onto the fuel pump!!! Or losing balance and fall down in panic with their bike!!!

 

With the bike properly mounted on the side/main stand, one does not need to be close to the bike to pump petrol. It's more troublesome, but there's alot of advantages in terms of safety, over the method with riders mounted on the bike.

 

BTW, I do not work for any petrol brands. I just happen to be fortunate enough to be able to read news and articles all day long, and come accross alot of articles not related to work... like refueling accidents

Don't you hold on to the pump when you dismount as well? How else can you pump? So what makes you think a dismounted rider would have the presence of mind to let go of the pump when a fire occurs?

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 5 2005, 01:34 AM

Habits can be changed. But habits die hard. After writing with one hand for so long, can you switch to the other with ease? Even if I tell you its for a good habit?

 

I never thought it was not a good habit. Some individuals like you may choose to err on the side of caution. I simply think it is an unnecessary precaution. That's all. And all I seek is for someone to make me understand why this precaution might be necessary.

Precautions are... precautions.... to prevent something from happening. Old habits die hard, which is why good habits are introduced gradually through the years.

 

The good habits have to be introduced at one time or another, and it happens to be now.

 

If a refueling disaster should have happened last month, people will be complaining why Shell never implement this sooner.

 

Haiz.... Hao ren nan zuo.

[whyh]

Originally posted by Metalfyre@Mar 5 2005, 01:47 AM

Don't you hold on to the pump when you dismount as well? How else can you pump? So what makes you think a dismounted rider would have the presence of mind to let go of the pump when a fire occurs?

Just put the nozzle in, squeeze the trigger and leave it la. No need to hold on to the handle, and stay away from the vapors rushing out from the fuel tank.

 

In any case, even if you hold on to the handle and a flame develops, you are still further away from the petrol tank than if you are mounted, and you have higher and faster mobility than if u are mounted.

 

No cases yet of anyone running away with the handle in hand.

[danieltanboonhuat]

haha... like my old bike. Xr200.... full tank from reserve is around 5 litres... so i put thenozzle in,.,.,, firstly, my bike is in danger of falling off, as it is only on a side stand and the pump is not light mind u...

 

next... the moment i press and leave it, it click almost immed (five litres).... u realise as it stops it jerks violently?

 

who's gonna pay for my damages if the bike falls.?

 

especially if i am standing one side so as to be sure i can run away,.?

[whyh]

Originally posted by danieltanboonhuat@Mar 5 2005, 10:09 AM

haha... like my old bike. Xr200.... full tank from reserve is around 5 litres... so i put thenozzle in,.,.,, firstly, my bike is in danger of falling off, as it is only on a side stand and the pump is not light mind u...

 

next... the moment i press and leave it, it click almost immed (five litres).... u realise as it stops it jerks violently?

 

who's gonna pay for my damages if the bike falls.?

 

especially if i am standing one side so as to be sure i can run away,.?

I find it hard to believe that your bike cannot handle the weight of the pump handle plus it's tube. Smaller scramblers also can handle it. Have your bike really been toppled this way?

 

Can you lift your bike with one hand?

 

Which is easier? pulling your bike up with one hand from side stand, or pulling the pump handle to you with one hand?

 

Besides, the weight of the handle is resting ON your bike when refueling, adding stability.

 

Anyway, dismounting before refueling will buy precious time for you to escape from a fiery death, should your bike really topple.

[hohosaint]

I still can not find a acceptable and satisfactory answer which can convince or induce me from understanding the 'thoughtfulness' of dismounting whilst refuelling. Above debatings too. Being a purchaser or buyer in Company. I do not oversee that Buyer needs to match sales manager/engineer criteria when businesses are concluded. Application is comparable to shell safety precaution.

 

Implement something that will be beneficial to both parties in the shoe of customer will be better than initiating something prohibiting consumer conveniences. Example like existing having added services to driver which requires no execution. Refuelling, cleaning windshield and etc.

 

Anyway. I still evaluate that those who find it a hassle in refuelling must boycott shell to articulate our dissatisfaction until futher justification can be made or, revised.