Jump to content

motor bike on stage


wrixo

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Depends on the rules of the venue, the rules of your insurers, and your risk assessment.

 

Should be doable provided that the petrol tank is emptied of liquid fuel and that petrol vapour is also removed, and that the battery is removed.

 

If a modern machine is required, then perhaps a dealer might be willing to loan a display one that has not yet been filled with fuel. If a vintage bike is required, then it might be worth asking around if anyone has an exhibition machine that has already been made safe for indoor public exhibition.

 

Whilst fire may be the most obvious risk, to be controlled as above, don't forget that your risk assessment should consider the risks of injury from the bike falling onto someone, or running over their feet even if only moved by hand.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usual safety stuff - no fuel, or spill able fluids, and the potential for them falling over. I've seen then modified with a tiny external transparent fuel tank, and then driven across the stage wing to wing. No real issues you can't control with thought. The worst bit is storage, weight and stopping somebodies precious bike getting scratched.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bike is a lot easier than a car, especially if not running. I've had scooters on stage running for short bursts (to get on and off stage as part of the show). Key issues were

  • Fuel supply.... keeping the tank near empty 'just in case'.
  • Getting access to and from stage. We had a built in scissor lift that made it easy.
  • Secure storage in the wings
  • Ventilation
  • Risk of injury to rider or other cast ,or conceivably the audience

The risk assessment was long and detailed. We worked out that if you ran the engine for less than 30 seconds, the exhaust did not get hot enough to cause a burning risk when in the wings.

 

If its a big bike and you are not running it, you will need to add the risk of it being pushed on and off. Not as easily as regular riders make it look!

 

Edit to add. Seeing Paul's post reminds me that they had tiny tanks directly fitted to the fuel line with a couple of tablespoons of fuel. The tanks themselves were emptied and vented days before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll probably find that the venue/building insurance will insist that it's emptied of all fluids (petrol, oil etc) which can be a pain and expense.

Motorbikes are also heavier, less stable & less manoeuvrable than people think so the physical process of getting it on to the stage, stopping it falling over as other people brush past and turning it around to take it off stage again will turn out to be a lot more time and labour consuming than you would expect. In the effects world there are a number of companies who build fibreglass / aluminium "fake" bikes that look like real bikes but at a fraction of the weight and infinitely more manoeuvrable precisely because using real ones became too much effort. That said I'm fairly sure they're still well out of the price range of an am-dram group.

 

I'd be looking at scenic hire companies / props suppliers for an appropriate prop one that will do the job; all the hassle involved in using a real bike would probably cost you more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've had a couple over the years.

 

A few points to mention;

 

Bikes are heavy! Even with no fuel, there's not much you can strip off a bike to shed weight that won't stop it looking like a bike. You could remove the engine, but you'd need to fill the hole with something that looked like an engine. Even just the wheels are a fair weight. It takes a bit of practice and experience to be able to handle the weight of a bike. Make sure your actors are happy handling it and putting it on its' stand.

 

The most flammable thing about petrol is the vapour, not the liquid. Even if you empty the fuel tank there will still be petrol vapour kicking around (indeed, I think I'm right in saying that the emergency services consider an almost empty fuel tank to be more dangerous than a full one). The engine, tank and pipes need to be properly drained of fuel and washed through. It might also make sense to drain the oil if you're keeping the engine in. It'll save leaks later!

 

I've seen bikes attached to trucks before, braced so they're upright. This might make it in to a more manageable item. It also might mean you could do things like filling the tyres with expanding foam so you don't have to top them up if they go flat (they won't be needed to roll again). I also daresay that if this was a project I was involved with, I'd also look to make the wheels turn whilst held slightly off the ground so it gave the impression of movement.

 

 

 

 

What's the production? We Will Rock You and Whistle Down The Wind are both favourites for bikes!

 

Edit to add; don't think I've ever seen so many posts at the same time before saying the same thing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

last gig I did with bikes on stage required a sacrificial floor so donuts and burn outs could be performed and 2 bloody big fans to remove the smoke from the burning rubber,also a straight through harley engine needs a bloody big PA to get over the noise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To doubly reinforce what Cedd says and flag a warning about what RobinD writes as extremely dangerous.

 

Petrol vapour and air is more explosive than TNT and inordinately easier to ignite. DO NOT use a tank with just a smidgeon of petrol in it. You would be far, far safer using one full to the brim, not that I am recommending anything but a fully purged system in a non-professional environment.

 

Here's one they made earlier. Watch through to the end bearing in mind it is only two litres of fuel and that just about anything emulsified can explode. The US Youtube nutters seem to have peculiar fetish for custard powder fireballs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to reinforce that, yes, they're a lot more unwieldy than an experienced rider makes it look. As a rider I'm perfectly happy slinging them around by hand or astride them, but I've seen people who've never touched a 'bike before have problems with learner 'bikes. Also, be aware that brake fluid is eminently burnable, and in a fire situation it will act as a very efficient accelerant so nees to be taken into consideration for your risk assessment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and flag a warning about what RobinD writes as extremely dangerous.

Fair point, but I did edit it within a couple of minutes of posting. The point I was trying to get across that that was only a couple of thimblefuls of fuel were involved. I'd just forgotten when originally posting that the 'engineers' added a minuscule tank (I think designed for a model aircraft) to the fuel line for precisely that reason. As ASM I was reassured that the tanks had been professionally emptied and vented by the guy dealing with it who was also a sub officer in the local brigade!

 

My apologies if I still misled anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a problem, Robin, I saw your edit later.

My mind is on the two allegedly experienced pyro operators killed this weekend in Lakeland and the fact that the OP is doing an amateur performance. It is dangerous territory.

 

If we have to edit for safety reasons can we all agree to delete what we initially posted. Not everyone reads every word carefully enough and addenda might get missed? Just a suggestion. Is there some way the mods could alter Robin's post about keeping the fuel tank "almost empty" to clarify his edit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think personally that the real issue here is that of fumes and the possibility of ignition. I was involved with the on stage use of a Smart Car. The venue and production company were both concerned about potential problems, but the car was part of a sponsorship deal, so everyone - including the car suppliers and sponsor agreed that the best and safest policy was to ask the local authority, who would be the ones tasked with determining after an accident if the process was safe or not, to advise on their preferred system of minimising the risk - and there were quite a few options on the table, including fitting a replacement limited capacity fuel tank. The LA preference was to limit the quantity of petrol in the existing standard fuel tank. As Kerry points out, this in itself could be considered a greater risk, however, this was the process we followed, and all the documentation between interested parties was in the safety file.

 

I am working from memory here - so forgive me, but I understand the fire service who were consulted determined that a full tank of petrol was unacceptable. I can only assume that the vapour risk was considered less risky than the full tank.

 

We have here a number of views on the subject, and I would suggest that the readers consider the implications of the contradictory comments and determine a system that works for them, and their enforcing authorities.

 

It would seem that the professional advice is not 100% absolute, and depends on local information and implementation.

 

I'm not certain that the suggestion to keep the fuel tank almost empty is the 'official' one - at least, not based on the example I was involved in.

 

We have a number of options - but in reality, a purged real fuel tank, and a replacement smaller capacity tank filled, would seem another to consider.

 

I don't think an edit is required, as there doesn't seem a rubric to follow that is some kind of industry standard.

 

Very much down to local conditions and advice, and a thorough assessment of the individual circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.