Humboldt Broncos Accident Site – Report Confirms Original Opinion of Gorski Consulting
The line of sight at the Humboldt Broncos accident site in Saskatchewan was immediately brought into question by Gorski Consulting shortly after the collision in April of 2018. This opinion was provided even though we did not attend the site nor did we have any scale diagram from which to conduct our assessment. The only information we could rely upon was the mapping of the site in Google Maps. Now, after eight months, it has been revealed that a report authored by McElhanney Consulting Services to the Saskatchewan government has confirmed what we had indicated.
Standard guidelines exist for the creation of a “visibility triangle” at rural intersections such that, even though someone might disobey a traffic signal or stop sign, a collision can still be avoided. This triangle is based on the assumed speeds of the two vehicles approaching the intersection along with a perception-reaction delay that is also assumed. The figure below was presented in the news item that we uploaded to this site in April of 2018 explaining the visibility triangle issue. The pink diagonal line in the figure indicates that no trees or other obstructions to visibility should exist from that line toward the intersection. It can be seen that trees exist and therefore this intersection was not in conformity with the safety guidelines.
Approximate line of sight at the collision site clearly indicates an unacceptable blockage by the trees.
This would not have been a difficult matter to realize for someone who is familiar with roadway design and safety standards. Such persons should have been employed by the Saskatchewan government and they should have corrected the problem before this crash occurred. This important safety problem was never revealed to the public expect in this Gorski Consulting news item. Yet only now it has been confirmed by the noted report.
Truck Median Cross-over Collision on Highway 401 at Merlin Road West of Chatham Ontario
A median cross-over collision occurred this morning on Highway 401 just west of Merlin Road, west of Chatham, Ontario. An eastbound truck passed through the new High Tension Cable Median Barrier (HTCMB) and struck two other westbound trucks just west of the Merlin Road overpass. Early reports indicate there were no serious injuries. However the extent of damage visible on the trucks suggests this was more due to luck than engineering design.
Overall view of the crash scene in the westbound lanes of Highway 401 just west of the Merlin Road overpass.
Views of the damaged cable barrier suggests its interaction with the striking vehicle was not ideal. The photo below shows that only four posts of the barrier were collapsed and then only 3 or 4 more were slightly displaced.
View of the damaged cable barrier.
Typical longitudinal barriers gain their strength from their length. Thus while the cable and its posts may be displaced in the area of direct contact we should expect to see additional deformation in the anchor posts on both sides of the area of direct contact. Such induced damage is indicative that the barrier absorbed additional energy beyond the zone of direct contact. What is visible in the above photo is a lack of damage to the anchor posts beyond the immediate zone of contact. This suggests that not much energy was dissipated by the barrier system. The fact that the cables are still intact means that the truck either had to pass under or over those cables. Submarining under the cables in not likely given the height of the truck. Therefore it suggests the truck rode over top of the cables.
Damage to the impacting trucks suggests that at least one of them sustained a separation of the front axle and this could be related to the barrier contact.
Overall, this incident does provide confidence that the new HTCMB will perform adequately in terms of preventing the cross-over of heavy trucks. While it may turn out to be an isolated and unusual incident there is no way of knowing for sure until further experience is obtained with the barrier’s performance. Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation officials have supported the safety of the barrier based on previous studies. However concern has to be expressed with the result of the present collision.
Highway 401 Safety Issues – Traffic Volumes
Gorski Consulting has documented the Highway 401 traffic volume in its continuing series on safety along the South-western Ontario segment of the highway. A series of videotaping sessions was conducted at four sites along the highway. The video is being analysed and findings will be reported in future postings to this website.
The current discussion will review the traffic volumes that were documented during our videotaping sessions. It can be recalled from previous posts that multiple video cameras were set up at four sites as shown below.
Location of testing sites along Highway 401 where traffic observations were made.
The Elgin Road site was documented in November of 016. At that time procedures were not fully developed and camera positions were such that traffic volume was not easy to determine.
The three remaining sites were documented this fall (2018). Videotaping was conducted for approximately 2 hours at the three sites. Procedures were altered such that cameras were positioned on an overpass which provided a view along the length of the highway. This made it easy to count vehicles and obtain a total traffic volume. The site at Westminster Drive was videotaped a second time on December 2, 2018 because of the interesting observations that were made in the original study on October 30th.
The table below summarizes the observed traffic volumes at the three sites.
It can be observed that there are differences in the traffic depending on the day in the week. For example a weekend such as Sunday produces substantially less heavy truck traffic as indicated in the December 2nd data.
The data for Dillon Road was obtained on the day after the U.S. Thanksgiving Day holiday and, being a Friday, a low amount of heavy truck traffic would be expected because most drivers would be at home for the holidays. This is demonstrated in the very low truck counts for November 23rd (318) even though the videotaping occurred on a weekday.
We can also see the difference in non-truck traffic. A very large number of non-trucks were observed on the Sunday of December 2nd.
These differences in the volume and characteristics of the traffic on Highway 401 need to be considered when we are discussing the safety of the highway. The presence of heavy trucks is likely to be one of the major factors in the highway’s collision history. As noted previously, truck traffic is limited to travel at a maximum of 105 km/h whereas the light vehicles travel much faster, about 116 to 118 km/h. This difference occurs even though the heavy trucks are slowing the other vehicles by “interfering” in their travel. While slowing these speeders may be a good thing it is also creating traffic conflicts that we need to consider.
Further details from the video data will be revealed as it becomes available and will be posted to the Gorski Consulting website.
Driver Drowning at Port Bruce, Ontario
This is the controlled beach at Port Bruce where large, closely-spaced, concrete blocks prevent any traffic from entering the water. It is a difficult location for someone wanting to drive into the water…
Why would a driver arrive at a traffic controlled beach in order to drive into the water and drown?
On December 4, 2018 a 66-year-old male driver reportedly drove through a private driveway and into Lake Erie in Port Bruce, Ontario. The official facts reported to the public is that the vehicle was found in the water at approximately 0800 hours by a local volunteer firefighter. The firefighter was also an employee of the local road works crew.
It was stated that the time when the vehicle entered the water was not known but that police did not believe there was any foul play involved. Several days have passed yet no further information has been provided about how this incident transpired.
It is peculiar that this drowning occurred where it did. It is a location where the road traffic along the beach is well guarded by a number of large, closely-spaced, concrete blocks. Any driver who was intent on committing suicide would find it difficult to find a location where they could enter the water.
Officially it was claimed that the vehicle entered the water through a residential driveway located right next to the end of the beach. The photos below provide an explanation of the site details.
It is peculiar that the deceased driver would have selected the residential driveway in order to enter the water. In one was wanting to commit suicide it could have been much easier to simply step out of the vehicle and jump in the water at any point along the beach. So why go this somewhat elaborate procedure of searching for a driveway in order to enter the water?
Looking into the driveway one could see some tire marks on the grass and it was explained that these marks were caused by the vehicle that entered the water.
Views of the white SUV as it was removed from the water showed that it appeared to sustain substantial damage to its front end. The local fire chief explained that such damage would not be unusual. It is not clear how this damage could be caused from simply striking the water. The drop of the vehicle from the top of the wall at the water’s edge would be minor and the vehicle’s fall would be cushioned by striking that water.
Looking at the grass in the driveway there is no evidence of upheaval that would suggest that the vehicle was accelerated to a higher speed. The tire marks on the grass are indicative of rolling tires. If there was hard acceleration there should have been evidence of the grass being torn up by the spinning tires. The very short length of the residential driveway would also provide minimal opportunity for the vehicle to accelerate to a high speed.
In totality the evidence would suggest some peculiar happenings that are not readily explained by the official version of what took place. Suicide does not appear to be an obvious explanation. Yet no one has provided an explanation of why this tragedy occurred.
School Buses & Seat-Belts – Continued Confusion and Misunderstanding
The CBC has ignited a controversy regarding seat-belt use on school buses that has resulted in confusion and misunderstanding.
We all understand that keeping children safe on school buses is of great importance. However what may appear to be an obvious solution is not. This issue is complicated and a quick fix may lead to more danger than is realized.
In the most recent news, the CBC has reported that certain Micro Bird minibuses contain a safety detect with respect to insufficient padding at the back face of seat-backs. This lack of padding could cause injury to children during heavy braking or other longitudinal deceleration such as a frontal impact. The requirement for padding evolves from the fact that school buses are not equipped with seat-belts and the padding is needed as the partial substitute.
It needs to be understood that minibuses are far different from full size buses with respect to the type and severity of injuries that could be generated. Minibuses, as the name implies, are much smaller and weight much less than full size school buses. These are important facts. Mass (weight) is a critical factor in determining whether an occupant will be injured and what type or severity of injury will be sustained. Because of their lower mass and volume minibuses may generate different types and severities of injuries than full size school buses. This point has never been made in discussions about school bus seat-belts.
Unfortunately many persons are jumping on the bandwagon and declaring their support for installation of seat-belts on school buses without really understanding why Transport Canada decided not to mandate their installation. Seat-belt installation and usage may help prevent some injuries and reduce the severity of others but on the flip side, other injuries will occur through usage of seat-belts, some of which could be life-threatening. The discussion so far is short on examining the full complexity of the issue and this could adversely affect the safety of innocent children.
You must be logged in to post a comment.