Accident Causation Info
Discussion
Further to Speed Kills - A Statistical Analysis:
www.petrolheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?t=122783&f=10&h=0
Warning: don't think and drive
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
(Filed: 05/07/2003)
Common mental tasks can cut a driver's ability to see signs, cars and traffic lights by as much as 30 per cent, accoding to a new study.
The findings underline how what is going on in a driver's head can be as important - and distracting - as a crying child in the back seat, or driving past the scene of an accident.
Some mental tasks can be so complex and distracting that they result in those all-too-familar accidents in which drivers claim they "didn't expect it" or "saw it too late,"....
....."In Spanish accident statistics, distraction is the first factor of accident causation . . . and this is independent of other causes that also involve distraction: fatigue, drowsiness, alcohol and other drugs''.....
......After studying the effects of conversations, whether with a hands-free phone or a passenger, they concluded: "Complex conversations, whether by phone or with a passenger, are dangerous for road safety.''
However, Prof Nunes added that "trivial low demand conversations either inlive or by hands-free phone produced no distraction effects at all".......
http://motoring.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2003/07/04/ecncar.xml&sSheet=/connected/2003/07/10/ixconn.html
www.petrolheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?t=122783&f=10&h=0
Warning: don't think and drive
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
(Filed: 05/07/2003)
Common mental tasks can cut a driver's ability to see signs, cars and traffic lights by as much as 30 per cent, accoding to a new study.
The findings underline how what is going on in a driver's head can be as important - and distracting - as a crying child in the back seat, or driving past the scene of an accident.
Some mental tasks can be so complex and distracting that they result in those all-too-familar accidents in which drivers claim they "didn't expect it" or "saw it too late,"....
....."In Spanish accident statistics, distraction is the first factor of accident causation . . . and this is independent of other causes that also involve distraction: fatigue, drowsiness, alcohol and other drugs''.....
......After studying the effects of conversations, whether with a hands-free phone or a passenger, they concluded: "Complex conversations, whether by phone or with a passenger, are dangerous for road safety.''
However, Prof Nunes added that "trivial low demand conversations either inlive or by hands-free phone produced no distraction effects at all".......
http://motoring.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2003/07/04/ecncar.xml&sSheet=/connected/2003/07/10/ixconn.html
Asleep at the wheel study:
www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_504599-06.hcsp
Note that speed was the cause of under 4% !!!!!! - Official!
www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_504599-06.hcsp
Note that speed was the cause of under 4% !!!!!! - Official!
Lincs Police Breakdown:
www.lincs.police.uk/stats/annualreport1999/accidentfigures.shtml
4. Going Too Fast (196 collisions out of 2732)
www.lincs.police.uk/stats/annualreport1999/accidentfigures.shtml
4. Going Too Fast (196 collisions out of 2732)
www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,588-727451,00.html
Tackling the roads from hellby David Brown of The Sunday Times
Engineers are trying to design safer roads to cut death rates
New route: experts think 'natural' traffic calming measures will save lives
....Lee found that an arch over a road slows drivers by 15mph while a bend reduces speeds by about 10mph. Despite many local authorities’ efforts to cut down on roadside parking, he also found that motorists were more likely to drive safely on streets filled with parked cars than on those where parking is banned. “But we found that this wasn’t the case with roads enclosed by hedges and trees. People associate them with clear rural roads and high speeds, so are more likely to drive faster.” The research also found that while 30mph signs had little impact on speed the presence of people acted as a strong incentive to slow down. Pictures of pedestrians or speed limit signs made to resemble pedestrians from a distance could help.....
.....Engineers have identified four main causes of death on the major roads assessed in the EuroRAP study. Accidents involving a single vehicle running off the road cause between 25-40% of deaths. In Britain more than 500 motorists die each year hitting trees, lampposts, signs and other roadside hazards. As a result, designers are planning to replace the poles for road signs with lattice supports made out of a honeycomb of wires that deform when struck. Similarly, frangible lampposts that topple when hit by a vehicle would also cut the death toll. Head-on crashes account for 20-25% of deaths, with collisions at junctions leading to further 20-35% of fatalities. Therefore new road designs use roundabouts rather than traffic lights, T-junctions and crossroads wherever possible. Vehicles colliding on a roundabout usually hit each other at an angle, causing much less damage than the head-on or T-bone crashes that occur at traffic-light-controlled junctions. Separating carriageways further reduces the risk of head-on crashes. Wire fences on single-carriageway trunk roads, the most dangerous type, are already being rolled out in Sweden and could be used in Britain. The fourth major cause of death is impacts with “vulnerable road users”. On the most forgiving roads cyclists and pedestrians are kept away from the traffic, with cycle lanes and pavements protected by barriers. Porous asphalt road surfaces allow rain to drain away quickly, reducing spray, flooding and the risk of ice. Rumble strips already common on the edges of motorways will spread to most major roads to alert drivers who fall asleep or lose concentration. Experts believe that every £50,000 spent on road safety saves a life......
Tackling the roads from hellby David Brown of The Sunday Times
Engineers are trying to design safer roads to cut death rates
New route: experts think 'natural' traffic calming measures will save lives
....Lee found that an arch over a road slows drivers by 15mph while a bend reduces speeds by about 10mph. Despite many local authorities’ efforts to cut down on roadside parking, he also found that motorists were more likely to drive safely on streets filled with parked cars than on those where parking is banned. “But we found that this wasn’t the case with roads enclosed by hedges and trees. People associate them with clear rural roads and high speeds, so are more likely to drive faster.” The research also found that while 30mph signs had little impact on speed the presence of people acted as a strong incentive to slow down. Pictures of pedestrians or speed limit signs made to resemble pedestrians from a distance could help.....
.....Engineers have identified four main causes of death on the major roads assessed in the EuroRAP study. Accidents involving a single vehicle running off the road cause between 25-40% of deaths. In Britain more than 500 motorists die each year hitting trees, lampposts, signs and other roadside hazards. As a result, designers are planning to replace the poles for road signs with lattice supports made out of a honeycomb of wires that deform when struck. Similarly, frangible lampposts that topple when hit by a vehicle would also cut the death toll. Head-on crashes account for 20-25% of deaths, with collisions at junctions leading to further 20-35% of fatalities. Therefore new road designs use roundabouts rather than traffic lights, T-junctions and crossroads wherever possible. Vehicles colliding on a roundabout usually hit each other at an angle, causing much less damage than the head-on or T-bone crashes that occur at traffic-light-controlled junctions. Separating carriageways further reduces the risk of head-on crashes. Wire fences on single-carriageway trunk roads, the most dangerous type, are already being rolled out in Sweden and could be used in Britain. The fourth major cause of death is impacts with “vulnerable road users”. On the most forgiving roads cyclists and pedestrians are kept away from the traffic, with cycle lanes and pavements protected by barriers. Porous asphalt road surfaces allow rain to drain away quickly, reducing spray, flooding and the risk of ice. Rumble strips already common on the edges of motorways will spread to most major roads to alert drivers who fall asleep or lose concentration. Experts believe that every £50,000 spent on road safety saves a life......
From various sources:
at least 20% of motorway fatalities and 10% of other road fatalities are supposed to be down to drivers asleep at the wheel.
20% to 25% of fatalities have drugs in their system and 15% are drunk.
Badly planned roadworks account for another couple of percent, then there are the people killed by trees, bridges, scaffolding, buildings, etc collapsing. 5% of fatalities result from cars impacting trees, and god only knows how many result from impacts with stupidly located lamp-posts. The BBC has reported that some research suggests poor road design contributes to 33% of crashes.
5% are down to mechanical failure, 1% are down to police drivers, no doubt a large, but never publicised, percentage are down to joy riders, car thieves, getaway drivers, unlicensed drivers of unregistered, untaxed and unMOT'd cars, and the like.
at least 20% of motorway fatalities and 10% of other road fatalities are supposed to be down to drivers asleep at the wheel.
20% to 25% of fatalities have drugs in their system and 15% are drunk.
Badly planned roadworks account for another couple of percent, then there are the people killed by trees, bridges, scaffolding, buildings, etc collapsing. 5% of fatalities result from cars impacting trees, and god only knows how many result from impacts with stupidly located lamp-posts. The BBC has reported that some research suggests poor road design contributes to 33% of crashes.
5% are down to mechanical failure, 1% are down to police drivers, no doubt a large, but never publicised, percentage are down to joy riders, car thieves, getaway drivers, unlicensed drivers of unregistered, untaxed and unMOT'd cars, and the like.
In 1999 the primary causes of pedestrian deaths in the West Midlands were:
Pedestrians stepping, walking or running from footpath under wheels of car 61.76 (as opposed to walking or standing in the road and hit by driver 0.00%).
Other interesting statistics:
Pedestrian slipping or falling in the path of a car 2.94% (as opposed to driver losing control 0.00%).
Excessive speed for conditions 2.94% (compared with reversing, errrmmmmmmm, what was it again, oh, yes: 2.94% yet again).
None were killed in these categories, but pedestrians seriously injured as a result of being under the influence of drink alone counted for 3.07% (compared to drivers under the influence of drink or drugs amounting to a whopping 0.72%!).
The primary causes of non-pedestrian deaths were:
Losing control 32.56%, other error/ negligence 16.28%, Failure to conform to traffic sign or signal 11.63%, right turn without due care or attention 9.30% which was equalled by under influence of drink or drugs and, yes, excessive speed for the conditions (ie every case could have been within the speed limit).
In 2000 the number of pedestrians who threw themselves under the wheels of cars was the same.
However, the number of pedestrians killed by excessive speed for the conditions was a whopping........ 0.00% (and less than caused by reversing)!
And some more interesting statistics:
Again no pedestrians died as a result of drink or drugs, but pedestrians seriously injured as a result of being under the influence of drink alone counted for 2.66% (compared to drivers under the influence of drink or drugs amounting to a whopping 0.95%!).
If you want some 2001 figures you'll have to get them yourself as the webmaster has just uploaded a scan of pages faxed to him of the results of a new recording system.
However, the consultants who prepared the report give this summary, and I quote:
"It is clear from these figures that the most dominant problem has been the errors by the pedestrians themselves."
And: 72% of [all] accidents involving pedestrians were due to pedestrian error.
Excessive (ie could be within the limit) speed was not given as a main precipitating factor at all and was given as a definite causation factor in 22 out of 2059 cases.
Excessive speed was given as a definite causation factor in 209 out of 6202 non pedestrian accident cases.
www.ringroad.org.uk/westmidsacc.htm
Pedestrians stepping, walking or running from footpath under wheels of car 61.76 (as opposed to walking or standing in the road and hit by driver 0.00%).
Other interesting statistics:
Pedestrian slipping or falling in the path of a car 2.94% (as opposed to driver losing control 0.00%).
Excessive speed for conditions 2.94% (compared with reversing, errrmmmmmmm, what was it again, oh, yes: 2.94% yet again).
None were killed in these categories, but pedestrians seriously injured as a result of being under the influence of drink alone counted for 3.07% (compared to drivers under the influence of drink or drugs amounting to a whopping 0.72%!).
The primary causes of non-pedestrian deaths were:
Losing control 32.56%, other error/ negligence 16.28%, Failure to conform to traffic sign or signal 11.63%, right turn without due care or attention 9.30% which was equalled by under influence of drink or drugs and, yes, excessive speed for the conditions (ie every case could have been within the speed limit).
In 2000 the number of pedestrians who threw themselves under the wheels of cars was the same.
However, the number of pedestrians killed by excessive speed for the conditions was a whopping........ 0.00% (and less than caused by reversing)!
And some more interesting statistics:
Again no pedestrians died as a result of drink or drugs, but pedestrians seriously injured as a result of being under the influence of drink alone counted for 2.66% (compared to drivers under the influence of drink or drugs amounting to a whopping 0.95%!).
If you want some 2001 figures you'll have to get them yourself as the webmaster has just uploaded a scan of pages faxed to him of the results of a new recording system.
However, the consultants who prepared the report give this summary, and I quote:
"It is clear from these figures that the most dominant problem has been the errors by the pedestrians themselves."
And: 72% of [all] accidents involving pedestrians were due to pedestrian error.
Excessive (ie could be within the limit) speed was not given as a main precipitating factor at all and was given as a definite causation factor in 22 out of 2059 cases.
Excessive speed was given as a definite causation factor in 209 out of 6202 non pedestrian accident cases.
www.ringroad.org.uk/westmidsacc.htm
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF EUROPEAN CHILD PEDESTRIAN EXPOSURE AND ACCIDENTS (S214T)
In the early 1990’s the number of child pedestrian accidents, relative to the number of children in the population, was considerably larger in Britain than the average for the EU countries......
.....In particular, children in Britain spend more time near, and undertake more road crossing activity in, more major roads; wider roads; roads with higher flows of traffic; and roads of higher speeds, than children in France and the Netherlands.......
.......There are also apparent behavioural differences between British children and those in the other countries, in that British children are much more likely to use unmarked crossings than those in France, and are more likely to cross mid-block than those in either of the other countries. Moreover, children in France are more likely to be accompanied by an adult, and those in Britain are more likely to be accompanied by other children. All these factors could increase the accident risk in Britain relative to the other countries, though estimates of the risk do not always make a clear distinction......
www.roads.dft.gov.uk/roadsafety/compend02/01.htm#8
In the early 1990’s the number of child pedestrian accidents, relative to the number of children in the population, was considerably larger in Britain than the average for the EU countries......
.....In particular, children in Britain spend more time near, and undertake more road crossing activity in, more major roads; wider roads; roads with higher flows of traffic; and roads of higher speeds, than children in France and the Netherlands.......
.......There are also apparent behavioural differences between British children and those in the other countries, in that British children are much more likely to use unmarked crossings than those in France, and are more likely to cross mid-block than those in either of the other countries. Moreover, children in France are more likely to be accompanied by an adult, and those in Britain are more likely to be accompanied by other children. All these factors could increase the accident risk in Britain relative to the other countries, though estimates of the risk do not always make a clear distinction......
www.roads.dft.gov.uk/roadsafety/compend02/01.htm#8
Police Accidents By Force 1994-5
www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199596/cmhansrd/vo960717/text/60717w10.htm
-------------------------
From Hansard?:
Police Vehicle Accidents
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many accidents police vehicles have been involved in, in each year since 1997. [116920]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: The total number of police vehicle accidents in England and Wales since 1997 are as follows:
Number
1997–98 16,946
1998–99 17,338
1999–00 18,068
2000–01 19,266
2001–02 16,826
Notes:
1. The information is provided by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, to which forces submit statistical returns.
2. All figures are for financial years.
3. Figures for 2002–03 are not yet available.
4. The figures include all incidents in which a police vehicle sustains damage, including those where no other vehicle is involved. They encompass a very wide range of incidents from the very serious to the trivial, such as a scratched vehicle in a police yard.
----------------------
Police Relatated Road Traffic Incidents
[And Other Deaths Caused By The Police]
...In 2001-2002, there were 44 such fatalities and
24 serious injuries resulting from 44 incidents.
.... four were pedestrians and in three cases the police
were responding to an emergency call.....
.....five were in another vehicle, not involved in
the pursuit.......
......eight people died and nine
were seriously injured in 15 incidents unrelated to
pursuit by a police vehicle....
1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002
Pursuit/follow fatalities 22 25 44
Other RTI fatalities 9 6 8
Total RTI fatalities 31 31 52
Table 5: Supervised investigations into RTIs
.......The police are now involved in more than
1 per cent of all road fatalities in the UK....
Interestingly:
........The number of people who died in police care
or custody rose from 32 last year to 36 this year.....
So that would be the equivalent of another 1%.
5% are down to mechanical failure.
From:
www.pca.gov.uk/pdfs/R%2032-54.pdf
----------------------
A Summary:
1994 - 95 17,948 Included 5,388 arising from pursuits and emergency calls
Two were Police fatal injury, 53 Police serious injury, 19 Civilian fatal injury, 56 Civilian serious injury.
1997-98 16,946 Pursuit/follow fatalities 8.
1998-99 17,338
1999-00 18,068 Pursuit/follow fatalities 22, other RTI fatalities 9.
2000-01 19,266 Pursuit/follow fatalities 25, other RTI fatalities 6.
2001-02 16,826 Included 44 fatalities and 24 serious injuries in 44 incidents.
Four were pedestrians and in 3 cases the police were responding to an emergency call.
Five were in another vehicle, not involved in the pursuit.
Eight people died and nine were seriously injured in 15 incidents unrelated to
pursuit by a police vehicle.
2002-03 Pursuit/follow fatalities 31.
2003-04 Pursuit/follow fatalities 27. (To Date @ 3.03.2004)
See also:
www.psni.police.uk/stats/rtas972.shtml
www.lincs.police.uk/stats/annualreport1999/accidentfigures.shtml
www.pca.gov.uk/pdfs/R%2032-54.pdf
www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199596/cmhansrd/vo960717/text/60717w10.htm
-------------------------
From Hansard?:
Police Vehicle Accidents
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many accidents police vehicles have been involved in, in each year since 1997. [116920]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: The total number of police vehicle accidents in England and Wales since 1997 are as follows:
Number
1997–98 16,946
1998–99 17,338
1999–00 18,068
2000–01 19,266
2001–02 16,826
Notes:
1. The information is provided by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, to which forces submit statistical returns.
2. All figures are for financial years.
3. Figures for 2002–03 are not yet available.
4. The figures include all incidents in which a police vehicle sustains damage, including those where no other vehicle is involved. They encompass a very wide range of incidents from the very serious to the trivial, such as a scratched vehicle in a police yard.
----------------------
Police Relatated Road Traffic Incidents
[And Other Deaths Caused By The Police]
...In 2001-2002, there were 44 such fatalities and
24 serious injuries resulting from 44 incidents.
.... four were pedestrians and in three cases the police
were responding to an emergency call.....
.....five were in another vehicle, not involved in
the pursuit.......
......eight people died and nine
were seriously injured in 15 incidents unrelated to
pursuit by a police vehicle....
1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002
Pursuit/follow fatalities 22 25 44
Other RTI fatalities 9 6 8
Total RTI fatalities 31 31 52
Table 5: Supervised investigations into RTIs
.......The police are now involved in more than
1 per cent of all road fatalities in the UK....
Interestingly:
........The number of people who died in police care
or custody rose from 32 last year to 36 this year.....
So that would be the equivalent of another 1%.
5% are down to mechanical failure.
From:
www.pca.gov.uk/pdfs/R%2032-54.pdf
----------------------
A Summary:
1994 - 95 17,948 Included 5,388 arising from pursuits and emergency calls
Two were Police fatal injury, 53 Police serious injury, 19 Civilian fatal injury, 56 Civilian serious injury.
1997-98 16,946 Pursuit/follow fatalities 8.
1998-99 17,338
1999-00 18,068 Pursuit/follow fatalities 22, other RTI fatalities 9.
2000-01 19,266 Pursuit/follow fatalities 25, other RTI fatalities 6.
2001-02 16,826 Included 44 fatalities and 24 serious injuries in 44 incidents.
Four were pedestrians and in 3 cases the police were responding to an emergency call.
Five were in another vehicle, not involved in the pursuit.
Eight people died and nine were seriously injured in 15 incidents unrelated to
pursuit by a police vehicle.
2002-03 Pursuit/follow fatalities 31.
2003-04 Pursuit/follow fatalities 27. (To Date @ 3.03.2004)
See also:
www.psni.police.uk/stats/rtas972.shtml
www.lincs.police.uk/stats/annualreport1999/accidentfigures.shtml
www.pca.gov.uk/pdfs/R%2032-54.pdf
bogush said:
However, the consultants who prepared the report give this summary, and I quote:
"It is clear from these figures that the most dominant problem has been the errors by the pedestrians themselves."
Now there's a surprise!
Interesting stats. though.
A lot to wade through and, I suspect, more useful if someone could filter them down into bite-sized chunks so that they could be "soundbited" - just like Transport 2000 etc do - only these figures are not "made up".
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff