In recent years there has been a massive improvement in passive safety in cars (ABS, airbags, side impact etc etc) yet the death rate has not changed significantly (although I guess there are more and more cars, so the rate per car / mile must have gone down). Does anybody know, or know where to find, if the figures are compiled in such a way as to see if these 'safety' devices are actually reducing the number of accidents, or, indeed, INCREASING them as people feel cocooned and drive accordingly? Or are they just reducing the severity from an increasing number of accidents? As I drive a car that's half plastic (Citroen BX) and would probably fold up if it encountered a modern 'safe' tank, I driver VERY defensively....
This question was really brought about by the thread abuot the Welsh figures - mis quoting of stats by the press is one of my particular bug bears (aling with the mis use of apostrophes - pedant, who, me?). The recent one about "25% of cars are so dangerous they should be taken of the road" really annoyed me - what they meant was 25% of a very small sample (4000 - 0.02% of cars on the road - hardly statistically significant) of cars that were chosen becuase they LOOKED like they might be poorly maintained were not roadworthy......
Rant over
Richard
|
Not really an answer for your question but I do know that recently there have been many more severe leg injurys following crashes since the introduction of airbags to the point wher eth NHS struggled to cope.
This is because crashes that were not previously survivable now are and instead of a corpse with mangled legs they get a live person to work on.
Fantastic invention.
--
Parp, Parp!
Note: All Toad posts come with an implied smiley.
|
Why not design an airbag for the front footwells ?
Chad.R
Not all BMW owners are bad drivers - just the majority.
|
|
|
|
I think it was Jasper Carrot or Billy Connley (sorry if miss spelt) who said that if you had a steel spike on the steering wheel pointing at your heart, rather than an inflatable cushion, drivers would be a lot more careful in their driving habits.
I tend to agree with this view because as an (ex) motorcyclist I know how much it actually hurts when colliding either other road users or road furniture.
Regards
John R
|
Agree on the steel spike thing.
A sense of vulnerability is a great antidote to risk-taking.
|
RW
Try browsing through the various sites featuring the work of
Road Transport Research Laboratory (use as Keyword search).
You may find information therein.
DVD
|
It's been privatised and is now just Transport Research Laboratory or TRL.
Regards
John S
|
|
|
|
Re Jasper or Big Yin I think both have cracked that gag. But why oh why hasn't anyone used one of Billy's more sensible suggestions.
In that in answer to the question "Do you want to be a politician?" anyone answering Yes should be automatically excluded from ever being so.
|
|
But if you asked El Presidente this or any other question his reply would be 'what do you want the reply to be?'
|
|
|
|
|
The quick answer is YES. These devices do save lives and cut injury levels. Most of these things become law in the USA first and NHTSA conduct cost benefit analysis to make sure such devices are worthwhile before they become a legal requirement. NHTSA also monitor the effectiveness of such devices once in use. Have a look at
www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/
in particular the fact sheet about occupant protection. You'll need Adobe Acrobat.
The most recent "big thing" in the US was FMVSS201 - interior head impact, my area of expertise. This has yet to make it to Europe. This is a shame because many manufacturers who sell the same cars here and in USA put different trim solutions into place for the two markets.
The next "big thing" for the US is mandatory tyre pressure monitors.
www.nhtsa.dot.gov
|
Hi Cyd,
"Interior head restraint". What does this mean, curtain airbags or helmets?
I'm curious to know.
regards
Vercin
|
The regulation covers impact of the head with any part of the interior above the waist of the car. The interior must be able to absorb the energy of impact and limit the decelerations and energy input to the head. This is expressed as a dimensionless number known as HIC (Head Impact Criteria). The criteria is set at 1000 for impact speeds of 12 or 15mph (that's head speed, not vehicle speed). This legislation is aimed at reducing the number of fatal and serious head injuries suffered during a crash.
Manufacturers have to design their cars to meet this for the USA because it's a legal requirement. But those same manufacturers often put a cheaper trim solution in place for European versions because there is no legal requirement here. So, as well as asking the dealer about the ncap performance you could also ask them about whether the car you are considering conforms to FMVSS201. If you really like the car but it does not meet FMVSS201 in Europe you could ask the dealer to retro fit the US version trim to your car at the point of sale.
Footwell airbags are under development to meet FMVSS208 for 2005MY (not entirely sure if this is the correct MY - it might be 2007).
|
|
![2016 BMW 4 Series 420I Sport 2Dr Auto [Business Media]](http://images.honestjohn.co.uk/imagecache/url/crop/90x60/https/assets.heycar.co.uk/t_default-export/f_auto/application_assets/vehicles/pictures/49845ef44f8d947675d4b371f3f7c204/d0d6c37a810f1ea7cb04e16709730f6e.jpg)
