Vehicle Fires – 5 Fatalities & No Concerns
Three collisions involving vehicle fires and five fatalities occurred in less than a week in southern Ontario – yet there has been no expression of official concern.
In a pole impact on King Street in Toronto on March 17, 2019, this Nissan Altima caught fire and the driver sustained critical injuries while trapped in the vehicle.
Late Wednesday, May 1st, a vehicle exited Oil Heritage Road in Lambton County and burst into flames after striking a wooded area. The driver died. No photos were made publicly available of the collision site or vehicle.
On Friday night, May 3rd, a vehicle was travelling near Charles and Gaukel Streets in Kitchener when it struck a concrete planter, bursting into flames. Two persons in vehicle died. No photos were made available to show the extent of frontal crush on the vehicle and thereby enabling an assessment whether the collision severity was of sufficient magnitude that a fire could be reasonably expected.
On Saturday, May 4th, a vehicle travelling through a construction site along the QEW in Oakville struck some construction equipment and burst into flames. Two persons perished. Although photos were available showing the site, a tarp had been placed over the burned vehicle so that no one could evaluate the collision severity and thereby determine whether the eruption of the fire was reasonable.
In all three collisions there was no mention of the influence of the fires with respect to the occupants’ deaths. Equally, there was no opportunity for anyone to examine the damaged vehicles and question whether the eruption of the fires were reasonable in the circumstances. It is this kind of functioning of the public systems of news reporting that hides safety problems and prevents action from being taken.
In this realm there is a police culture that their sole responsibility is the purpose of controlling actions of drivers rather than understanding that they have a wider responsibility of protecting the public from all forms of harm, including vehicle fires.
It is important to take impaired, speeding or distracted drivers off the road because their actions may kill an innocent party, or themselves. But surely it should be just as important to document vehicle or road safety problems that might lead to equally deadly consequences. For society’s overall welfare it should be of minimal difference whether an innocent person has been killed by an intentional shooting, a speeding driver, or vehicle defect resulting in a fire. Yet these same events are treated very differently in terms of the resources applied mitigate them.
Much of the problem is that there is no official agency in Canada that is mandated to take on a road safety investigation for the specific purpose of illuminating a road transportation safety problem. In the United States such a function is taken up by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), In Canada the Transportation Safety Board (TSB) cannot be involved in a road safety investigation unless it involves an incident involving a railway train or airliner. If a collision involves the explosion of fuel tanker truck or something like the infamous Humboldt Broncos multi-fatal bus crash, the TSB cannot be involved. This lack of independent and unbiased safety investigation allows for incidents such as vehicle fires to exist without recognition that a wider safety concern may exist.
Hiding of Out-Dated Guardrail Terminus In Multi-Fatal Crash
The hiding of the fact that a guardrail terminus where four teenagers drowned in Miramichi New Brunswick on April 20, 2019 was outdated and inadequate is irresponsible. Future tragedies might be avoided through recognition and replacement of such installations. But when those who are aware of the problem attempt to hide its existence the impetus for change is lost.
The CBC posted another news article on April 26th, 2019 generally describing the anguish of the friends and families of the four young teenagers who perished when their Nissan Rogue was vaulted over the end of the outdated guardrail and into an adjacent pond. The guist of the article was to demonstrate the heroics of those who tried to pull the teenagers out of their upside down vehicle, to no avail. And similar heroics were discussed with respect to the hospital staff who also tried to save the teens. All this wording was for the benefit of making readers admire the actions of all those involved in the process. How could anyone be critical of this process in the environment of such anguish and sadness. And so no criticism has evolved, not even about the obvious inadequacy of the guardrail installation that was likely a factor in the teens deaths.
The Miramichi site is not a unique circumstance as aged and inadequate roadside barriers continue to exist for years in other provinces, including Ontario. Below we can examine a set of photos taken in April 2012, of such a dangerous installation that continues to exist, even to this day, without any action taken.
This view looking east along Egremont Drive north-west of London, Ontario was taken in April, 2012. It shows the installation of a guardrail with a buried end treatment similar to one at the Miramichi accident site.
By burying the end of the guardrail a striking vehicle is vaulted into the roadside. At this Egremont site a bridge crosses over the Oxbow Creek thus a vehicle could be vaulted into the creek just like at the Miramichi site. (Photo from April 2012)
This photo from April, 2012 shows that the guardrail has lost its anchorage bolts that connect it to the concrete bridge abutment. Thus a striking vehicle would likely impact the immovable concrete abutment or drive through the guardrail and into the water.
View in April, 2012, of the Oxbow Creek at the Egremont site. A vehicle vaulting over the aged guardrail could land in the creek and the vehicle occupants could drown just like at the Miramichi incident.
View of the same guardrail at the Egremont site five years later (April, 2017) showing that nothing has changed except that the system has become older and more dangerous.
With respect to the Miramichi site no one has said anything about the end of the guardrail through which the Nissan passed and was vaulted, thereby carrying the vehicle further into the roadside and giving the opportunity for the vehicle to reach the water where the drownings occurred. No one has said whether the end treatment met the current acceptable standards of design as spelled out in documents such as the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) or even its aged predecessor, NCHRP-350. In fact these U.S. technical documents are kept away from the general public’s view. There is no easy way to obtain copies of either of these documents. Furthermore, there is nothing available in Canada with respect to what standards are appropriate in each province. This essentially gives provincial governments “carde blanche” to keep whatever outdated roadside installations they wish. Even more tragic to the general public is that some provincial governments, such as Doug Ford’s Conservatives in Ontario, are bringing in legislation that would prevent civil suits from being launched against the provincial government when its failures to provide a safe roadway environment leading to needless deaths and injuries. Such legal penalties do not even slap the specific hand that “stole the cookie”, they only penalize the general public which pays the provincial taxes and from which the legal penalties are withdrawn.
Pedestrian and Pole Impact in 40 km/h School Zone
It may be of little interest to the general public that a car reportedly struck a pedestrian in a school zone and then struck a utility pole. But to an accident reconstructionist the facts are intriguing.
It has been reported that yesterday afternoon a Nissan Altima was travelling westbound on Central Street in Waterloo, Ontario and it was passing the area of the MacGregor Public School. In this zone Central Street is governed by posted 40 km/h maximum speed signs. It is also interesting that the Nissan driver would likely have made a turn onto Central Street from King Street, less than 200 metres away from the location where the Nissan struck a utility pole located in front of the school. One would think that, along with the posted speed, and the required turn, the Nissan should have been travelling rather slowly.
The Google Maps views of the site (shown below) also show that parking is allowed on the opposite side from where the school drop off zone thus narrowing the passage between parked cars and vehicles, such as school buses, that drop off or pick-up students. So this narrowing of the available road width would also tend to slow the speed of through traffic.
View looking west along the travel direction of the Nissan Altima which struck a utility pole just past the stopped school bus shown in the background. It was reported that a pedestrian was struck before the pole impact.
View showing the gap between a stopped school bus and a parked vehicle in the school drop off zone where the Nissan collision occurred.
In this view the Nissan was travelling toward the camera. It struck the utility pole shown at the left edge of the photo.
A quick measurement, using Google Maps, of the lateral location of the struck pole, indicates a distance of about 6.5 metres from the roadway curb. In terms of roadway design that 6.5 metres is sufficient to conclude that a vehicle would not be expected to travel such a lateral distance, especially in such a low-speed zone. Yet the impact to the pole was not minimal, as shown in a photo taken by David Bebee of the Waterloo Region Record Newspaper, and the driver’s side airbag had deployed.
The frontal impact to the Nissan is also interesting. Due to the installment of electronic stability control (ESC) the likelihood of pre-impact yaw (or “fish-tailing”) has been greatly reduced. Yet ESC does not guarantee avoidance of an off-road collision, it only means that if the collision occurs the vehicle will likely be pointing in the direction it is travelling rather than sliding sideways. And so this result is exemplified in the above photo. Where, prior to ESC, we would expect to see such a vehicle struck the pole with its right side, now the impact is to the front end. In many instances an impact by the front end of a vehicle is better than impacts to the side, but that topic is for another day.
We may assume that the Nissan was travelling along Central Street, encountered a pedestrian, and then veered off the road and struck the pole. But many complicated things can happen other than what is initially believed. For instance the Nissan could have been stopped on the Central Street and an unintended acceleration could have occurred, either due to driver error or due to a problem with the vehicle. Limited visibility could have been an issue due to a school bus such as the one shown in the Google Maps views of the site. Maybe something else caused the driver to veer off and strike the pedestrian walking on the sidewalk. In reconstructing the circumstances we can look at the angle of the path of the Nissan. Vehicles travelling at high speeds are not capable of changing their travel direction or pointing as much, in a given distance, as vehicles travelling at slow speeds. And, given a number of previous investigations, an experienced reconstructionist can use such past cases to consider what angle would be common and expected. When physical evidence of tire marks, scrapes and damage to grass is available more detailed opinions can be expressed. But even without that physical evidence, the pointing angle at impact, or the rest angle of the vehicle, can be of some assistance. The quality and detail of the conclusions is dependent of many details, some of which can be obtained directly, while in other instances the details have to be derived from further analysis and testing. In many instances the details that are only available to the police need to be obtained in order to consider what matters were relevant.
It was reported that the struck pedestrian was a 43-year-old female so, at least we know that the collision did not involve a school age child. But did it involve a school crossing guard or a parent or teacher? Given the location of the collision in front of a elementary school there is more concern about the potential safety of children regardless of who was struck because this result may provide some clues about unexpected safety problems that have not been detected.
These are many interesting questions to persons such as myself who conduct detailed assessments of motor vehicle collisions. Rarely are there sufficient facts reported in official news media for me to be capable of providing a full and conclusive opinion about what factors may be involved. But in many cases some suspicions are always present that may not be recognized by the general public.
UPDATE: April 26, 2019; 2340 Hours
Additional information has been made available through local news outlets in the Kitchener-Waterloo area. Regrettably, the female pedestrian who sustained fatal injuries in the crash was identified as Leanne Holland Brown, a Dean of Students at the nearby Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo. She leaves behind a husband and two sons. Details like these demonstrate the tragedy that exists behind the cold hard facts that I often work with.
The news media quoted police in saying that the Nissan “went out of control” and then struck Brown who was reportedly located on the sidewalk at the time of impact. This leaves some further questions in my mind.
Even if the Nissan was travelling 50 km/h, which is 10 km/h above the speed limit, at the time that the loss-of-control occurred, one would normally expect some speed loss in travelling from the road to the sidewalk, such that it is not fully explainable why the fatal injuries occurred. In the normal scenario of an upright, adult pedestrian struck at a speed of less than 50 km/h fatal injuries are not common unless there are special circumstances. One special circumstance would be if there was a head impact to a stiff portion of the vehicle such as an A-pillar. The A-pillar is a stiff, metal pillar that is located at the side of the windshield and essentially holds up the roof of the vehicle. There can be a large difference in the severity of a head injury if a pedestrian is fortunate enough to make head contact with the windshield or the centre of the hood which are generally more forgiving. Researchers know these facts and attempt to develop vehicle designs to lessen the chance of a head impact with a stiff portion of a vehicle’s perimeter.
Even when an A-pillar is struck it often occurs after there has been an initial contact with a frontal portion of the vehicle such as the bumper, hood or fender. In such a situation the body of the pedestrian has already been accelerated, from that initial contact, such that the severity of head impact with the pillar is not as severe as a situation where there is only head contact.
Whatever the precise mechanism of contact and source of injury, the bottom line is that a fatal consequence should be not be expected and further inquiry would be necessary to understand what transpired.
It is not clear what is meant by the term “loss-of-control”. Such a description most often means a loss of directional control. But it may mean something different that has not been explained. One possibility it that the comment refers to a loss-of-control of the speed of the vehicle.
If there had been a sudden, unintended acceleration one would expect that the vehicle would be travelling faster at the pole impact than at the pedestrian impact. Although the single photo of the damaged Nissan hides the extent of frontal damage it is my suspicion that this vehicle did not sustain a speed loss greater than 50 km/h from the pole impact. Thus the Nissan would have to be travelling slower than that speed if the pedestrian was struck earlier in time when the acceleration should not be reached its maximum. Furthermore, there would have been clear evidence on the sidewalk and grass of spinning tires which would clearly confirm the acceleration. Depending on the year of the vehicle an event data recorder (often called a “black box”), may have recorded the several seconds of impact and this would also confirm whether an unintended acceleration occurred. Police would normally use a specialized Crash Data Retrieval kit to download the data except that many Nissan vehicles are not compatible with that equipment and contact of the manufacturer might be required.
Overall the reported events represent an intriguing scenario that would not be satisfactorily resolved without additional detailed information such as on-site photos, measurements, witness and driver statements and a full examination of the vehicle that would normally be obtained in a police investigation.
The best that can be hoped for is that the official investigators can perform their duties in a way that provides the proper unbiased answers to these many unresolved questions.
Miramichi 4-Drownings – How Did They Get Past The Guardrail?
A CBC photo showing an undamaged guardrail does not explain how a vehicle carrying four young victims got past a guardrail and into a pond where they drowned. Surely we should require an explanation. The photo below was posted on the CBC website reportedly showing the location where the drownings occurred.
This photo provided by the CBC showing the site where four teenagers drowned is not helpful in explaining how their vehicle passed by this undamaged guardrail.
A photo in a previous CBC article showed the end of the guardrail located behind the camera of the photo above. In that previous photo it could be seen that the guardrail ended, or began, as a buried end treatment such that the guardrail would create a ramp upon which a vehicle could be vaulted into the roadside. Such end treatments are old and known for causing such vaulting such that more current designs do not possess such end treatments. The point is that the matter is not being raised by the CBC nor is anyone else discussing its relevance. Clearly there is no information about where the vehicle exited the road and that should be made known.
While the reported heroic efforts engaged by emergency personnel to try to save the teenagers are commendable, those efforts may not have been required if an inspection of the collision site was made at some earlier point to evaluate the potential of a vehicle entering the roadside water. There in no heroism in allowing dangerous roadside conditions to exist and then hiding their relevance when a tragedy occurs.
UPDATE: April 22, 2019, 0920 hours
A CTV news video have been located discussing the collision and a video segment was shown indicating that damage existed near the end (beginning) of the guardrail which had a buried end treatment. The damage appears consistent with what would have occurred if the Nissan Rogue in which the four teenages were in vaulted over top of the barrier. Thus the CBC photo above was misleading as it showed a portion of the guardrail that was undamaged and not where the Nissan left the roadway. It is questionable why police attended a news conference without discussing the issue of the performance of the guardrail and why an inspection of the site was not conducted to assess whether it was possible for a vehicle to pass through it and enter the water. Clearly, anyone interested in the public’s safety would raise the issue.
Drowning of 4 In Upside Down Vehicle Is Not An Isolated Occurrence
Four teenagers drowned last night when their vehicle came to rest upside down in water on the side of Nelson Street in Miramichi, New Brunswick. This is not an isolated event. We try to highlight these tragic events where possible because many are preventable through inspection of roadways where bodies of water exist nearby. Inappropriate roadside barriers often allow vehicles to pass through them. But often there are no barriers at all. At the Nelson Street site there was a guardrail with an old design whereby the rail was buried in the ground and created a ramp as it rose to full height.
Google Maps view of the collision site identified in the CBC News article about the drownings. It was not spelled out whether the characteristics of the guardrail in the foreground was related to the crash.
Unfortunately the CBC news article showing the site did not make it clear whether the vehicle rode over the barrier.In south-western Ontario there are numerous locations where such tragic events could exist. And many tragedies have occurred in the past without much official concern. It is of relevance that official news agencies and police speak about the sadness of families and how it is important to keep their privacy. Yet a lack of discussion is often the reason why public momentum is not generated to cause those responsible for roadside safety to conduct proper inspections and make changes to roadside conditions. It is highly likely that in this coming summer season at least one person will drown at a roadside in southern Ontario where inadequate safety features cause a vehicle to leave the road, rollover and come to rest upside down in a body of water. If public concern were to cause an inspection of these roadsides a life could be saved.
A quick review of 21 incidents in just over a year indicates that there were 14 confirmed fatalities while there was no further information on the outcome of several others. The incidents are noted below.
- On January 17, 2019 two persons drowned when their vehicle drove into the Colchester Harbour near Windsor, Ontario.
- On January 27, 2019 a person drowned when their vehicle drove into the water near Billy Bishop Airport in downtown Toronto.
- On January 25 ,2019 a vehicle travelled off the road and fell into a swimming pool at the Courtice Community Complex near Toronto, although no harm was caused to the female driver.
- On April 17, 2018, a minivan drove into a flooded ditch at the intersection of Lighthouse and Tecumseh Road near Windsor. Although the van was partially submerged no one was injured.
- On April 22, 2018 a teenager died when a vehicle became partially submerged in a water-filled ditch off Border Road in Wallaceburg, Ontario.
- On April 22, 2018 driver was drowned when a vehicle became submerged in Big Creek off County Road 42 near Windsor, Ontario.
- On August 3, 2018, a Toyota Yaris drove in Lake Ontario near Lake Shore Boulevard and Parliament Street in Toronto. A single person was later found, deceased, in the submerged vehicle.
- On Christmas Day, 2018, two persons drowned when their vehicle plunged into a creek south-east of Goderich, Ontario.
- On December 4, 2018, a driver drowned when his vehicle drove into the water of Lake Erie near Port Bruce pier.
- On December 28, 2018, a stolen vehicle was found upside down in the Speed River in Cambridge. No information was ever provided with respect to the what happened to the occupants of the vehicle.
- On December 30, 2018, one person drowned when his vehicle became submerged in the South Saugeen River near Hanover, Ontario.
- On February 21, 2018 a mother and her toddler were swept into the Grand River near Belwood, Ontario. The toddler drowned.
- On February 19, 2018, a man died when his vehicle became submerged in a creek in Jarvis, Ontario.
- On February 10, 2018 a car was found partially submerged off of Niagara Parkway in Chippawa, Ontario. A lone occupant was found and transported to hospital but his condition was never revealed.
- On June 30, 2018 a vehicle was found submerged in the St. Clair River in Sombra, Ontario. One person was found deceased in the vehicle.
- On June 23, 2018 a vehicle drove into Lake Ontario at Ashbridges Bay near Toronto. Two occupants were able to escape without injury before the vehicle sank.
- On March 25, 2018 a vehicle plunged into Little Bear Creek northwest of Chatham however the driver was able to escape successfully.
- On November 5, 2018 a vehicle plunged into Lake Ontario in Oakville after it struck and drove through a guardrail. One occupant died.
- On October 15, 2018 a woman was able to swim to the shore after her vehicle travelled into the Thames River on Town Line Road near Chatham, Ontario.
- On October 30, 2018 a Toronto Transit Commissioner supervisor was able to escape his submerging vehicle as it became engulfed in a sink hole near Logan Ave and Commissioners Street in Toronto. The sinkhole was so large that the vehicle became fully submerged and only the glow of its lights could be seen under the water.
- On October 30, 2018, a submerged vehicle was located near a public boat launch in Bluffer’s Park in Toronto. No body was found in the vehicle.
This list is probably incomplete as it only represents what news articles have been published by a select group of news media in south-western and south-central Ontario.
The danger of roadside ditches that contain somewhat shallow levels of water is greatly under appreciated. Because of the narrowness of a ditch it does not take much rain or other water sources to bring the water level higher versus a large ditch that can hold more water at a shallower depth. When narrow ditches exist a vehicle is more likely to end up parallel to the length of the ditch and this is a crucial factor in fatality causation. By coming to rest upside down and parallel to a water-filled ditch vehicle occupants have difficulty opening their doors because the steep sides of the ditch prevent that opening. Adding cold weather makes matters worse. And if the event occurs at night it is often difficult to detect the vehicle in a deep and narrow ditch therefore rescue may be greatly delayed.
This photo provided on the OPP twitter account shows what typically happens in relatively small ditches that are filled with water. When temperatures are low it does not take long for a vehicle occupant to die from exposure even if drowning does not occur.
Every year the Ontario Ministry of Transportation is supposed to provide a Road Safety Annual Report which reviews all the collision facts for the particular year. However their delivery of these reports is several years behind. The most recent report showing the full data is for the year 2014. In that year the Ministry reported vehicle “Submersion” based only on whether it was the first harmful event. This data (shown on Page 48) indicated that there were only five submersions and all were property damage incidents. In other words there were no fatalities or injuries resulting from these submersions. That data becomes difficult to reconcile when we have shown in this article that there were at least 14 fatalities associated with vehicle submersions in 2018-19.Thus there can be many ways in which official statistics can provide a very misleading indication of the existence of various road safety problems. The extent of the loss-of-control, sliding into a ditch and rolling over into shallow water does not appear to be documented in any publicly available sources.
You must be logged in to post a comment.