Did OPP Say 800 % Increase in Fatal Truck Collisions?
What are the real facts regarding heavy truck fatalities?
It is an eye-popping number. But there is the headline: There was an 800 percent increase in fatal, heavy truck collisions in the North-East region of Ontario compared to last year. Wow that is frightening, a crisis is at hand. At least that is the number attributed to an OPP media release and picked up my most major news outlets in Ontario. But what does that really mean?
North-eastern Ontario may have a large percentage of heavy trucks travelling through selected highways like the TransCanada route which is not a controlled access freeway such as Highway 401. And it is known that two-lane, or non-controlled highways can experience more complicated collision scenario including higher rates of fatality and injury collisions. But there is more…
What does 800 percent mean? If the north-eastern sector of Ontario experienced 1 fatal collision in 2017 and 2 in 2018 that would meant there was a 100 percent increase. Does that mean everyone should be pulling off the highways for fear of being killed by these massive demons?
Further information from the news release provides some concern over what has been reported. The numbers for 2018 compared to 2017 for the various regions of Ontario were included:
Central region, 2 collisions or no change from 2017.
North-west region, 2 collisions or a decrease of 60 percent from 2017.
East region, 8 collisions or an increase of about 33 percent from 2017.
Highway safety division, 3 collisions or and increase of 50 percent from 2017.
West region, 9 collisions or an increase of 12.5 percent from 2017.
The above numbers are all very small. The fluctuation from year to year could simply be the randomness of everyday life and could have nothing to do with whether there is reason for alarm. But the flashy numbers displayed to the public is creating a message in the mind of the public that is passed on from one person to the next: Something must be done with this tremendous crisis!
No doubt there may actually be increases in truck collisions and fatalities in the last couple of years. There are also likely increases in pedestrian, cyclist and motorcycle collisions. But the purpose of police and news media has to be to report factual information that is not misleading. That is the greater problem. Misleading numbers amplify the need for action, any action, regardless of whether it is mindless and unreasoned.
New Test Data From Veterans Memorial Parkway in London, Ontario
Roads can be the cause or influence of some collisions. Objective evidence is needed to compare the characteristics of a road to what should be expected and accepted. Gorski Consulting has been conducting testing of various road surfaces and road features for the past 10 years. The results have been published on the Road Data webpage of this Gorski Consulting website.
The latest data comes from testing conducted on June 2, 2018 on Veterans Memorial Parkway in London, Ontario. An instrumented test vehicle was driven southbound from Trafalgar Road to Highway 401. As typical, the magnitude of the motion of the test vehicle was captured in terms of the average longitudinal and lateral motion. Some motions can be too extreme and undesirable because they can cause a vehicle’s loss of control or other unintended consequences. These two parameters have been previously selected as a basis for further discussion.
The results of this latest testing are reported in a new Article uploaded to the Articles page of this website. The data will eventually be added to the Road Data datafile.
Humboldt Broncos Truck Driver Charged With Dangerous Driving
The truck driver in the Humboldt Broncos crash in Saskatchewan that killed 16 members of the hockey team has been charged with “dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death”. The driver, Jaskirat Singh Sidhu, had been travelling westbound and failed to stop at a stop sign at an intersection when a collision occurred with the northbound bus carrying the hockey team. Despite comments from many that the charges were warranted there has been no information released from the police investigation.
Evidence that could increase the charge to dangerous driving should not be solely based on the fact that Sidhu mistakenly passed through a stop sign. Any driver can experience a momentary lapse in concentration or attention that could lead to such a result, often with little consequence. Therefore the charges most likely have to be based on additional evidence that has not yet been made public. A heavy truck of modern manufacture would undoubtedly be equipped with some form of event data recorder that would store information such as the truck’s speed for several seconds before impact. Some truck EDRs might store data for much longer times.
There is the possibility that high speed might have been one of the factors leading to the up-graded charges. However, judging by the short, post-impact travel distance from impact to rest it would be highly unlikely that the speed of the truck at impact was anywhere close to the 100 km/h speed limit for the highway. In fact, from a preliminary observation, the impact speed of the truck would be substantially lower that the posted speed. Thus there could have been some pre-impact braking, or other unknown factors may have existed that have still not been released from the police investigation. A common possibility is that the driver could have been distracted by use of some form of electronic technology such as a smart phone and this could be detected by the police. There are many possibilities that remain unknown.
What is known is that a stand of trees was located at the south-east quadrant of the intersection which, from a preliminary viewpoint, may have contributed to the lack of visibility, by both drivers, of each others’ presence. It is for this reason that there are standards set in place for roadway maintenance personnel to cut back any vegetation or other obstructions to visibility at roadway intersections. This fact has not been discussed in any detail in most new coverage. Police have not been asked, nor have they voluntarily commented on the relevance of that factor.
While much news coverage has focused on more truck driver training it has not been explained how additional training could prevent a driver from making simply errors that all drivers make, regardless of their training. Driver training has not been demonstrated as effective in preventing such momentary errors as failing to detect the presence of a stop sign. Indeed, driver training is often a test of one’s “performance” on a particular time of the testing but does not reflect the driver’s attitude or diligence in maintaining safe driving habits once the driver testing has been completed. Changing long-lasting attitudes and habits is much more difficult and requires the participant’s willing involvement in making that change. Official driver testing does not guarantee that the tested driver will be committed to what has been learned.
Testing the Aggressiveness of Speed Bumps
Are some speed bumps too aggressive? Are all speed bumps created equal”? Testing by Gorski Consulting provides some answers.
A new article has been posted by Gorski Consulting that discusses the results of testing of an aggressive section of speed bumps located on Edmonton Street in London ,Ontario, Canada. A test vehicle was driven over the bumps at moderate speeds of about 30 km/h and the resultant longitudinal and lateral rotations of the test vehicle were obtained. This new data adds to the increasing body of data that already exists on the Road Data webpage of the Gorski Consulting website.
Bicyclist And Pedestrian Safety In Jeopardy Along Latest Path In London Ontario
At face value this curve of the new bicycle path appears to travel over a newly constructed bridge in a safe manner – but there is a problem.
It is as if designers of bicycle paths have never ridden a bicycle before. Such appears to be the case at the latest addition to a multi-use path being completed in East London, Ontario.
The extension of the multi-use path system in London has to be hailed as a much-needed improvement. For many years the path system formed a “Y” where the centre of the arms of the letter was positioned at the City’s downtown. The two upper arms of the “Y” are located in the north and south sections of East London. With a recent, short extension of one of those arms toward the other it would appear that the City is attempting to connect them and therefore form a ring around the City. And this approach is commendable. But someone seems to have forgot about bicycle safety.
In the vicinity of Trafalgar St. the new extension of the path was designed to travel beneath Trafalgar at the same location where the pre-existing bridge crossed over Pottersburg Creek. It was not a bad idea to simply run the new path within the same location as the creek. But the implementation of that decision led to a mistake in design which now plagues the safety of both bicyclists and pedestrians.
The photo below shows a view looking north at a newly constructed bridge that carries the new path over to the east side of Pottersburg Creek before abruptly changing direction so that the path will go underneath the pre-existing bridge of Trafalgar Road.
View of the newly-constructed bridge which directs the path over to the east side of Pottersburg Creek while approaching Trafalgar Road.
Below is a northerly view at a point just past the newly-constructed bridge. If bicyclists intend to continue using the path they must make a sudden left turn to travel underneath the pre-existing bridge at Trafalgar Road.
This northward view is just past the newly-constructed bridge where bicyclists wanting to continue on the path must make a sudden left turn underneath the pre-existing bridge at Trafalgar Road.
Another view shown below is from the top of the pre-existing Trafalgar Road bridge and here we can see the new bridge at the extreme right of the view and how cyclists will need to make a sharp left turn to go underneath the pre-existing bridge.
View looking east from the top of the pre-existing Trafalgar Road bridge looking down at the newly constructed path. The new bridge is at the right edge of the view.
What is not obvious in these photos is that there is a persistent downslope in the several hundred metres leading up to the T-intersection. Anyone who is familiar with bicycling will appreciate the very large effect that vertical slopes have on the speed of bicycles. Thus bicyclists crossing the newly constructed bridge will likely be travelling a higher than average speed due to the downslope.
What may also not be readily apparent is that there is a washout of loose gravel and dirt in the above photo that has deposited loose material onto the path precisely where there is a steep down grade and cyclists must make a sharp turn to go under the pre-existing bridge. The extent of the loose material is more visible in the additional photo below.
The photo below shows another view of the new path as it travels underneath the pre-existing bridge. A sharp right turn is required to travel underneath the bridge precisely at a point where the loose gravel and earth have slid down onto the path surface. Even though this debris may be cleared from time to time it will undoubtedly become a continual problem.
View showing the new path as it travels underneath the pre-existing bridge at Trafalgar Road.
If this location was only for one-way travel the problem would not be as great. But as can be seen in the southward view below, various pedestrians and other cyclists will be travelling toward this blind spot and will undoubtedly crash with the northbound cyclists because there is not a sufficient line of sight provided.
View looking south showing how pedestrians and cyclists travelling southward may encounter a northward-travelling cyclist at this blind location.
The designers of paths for pedestrians and cyclists seem to not understand that the various safety systems of design that exist on roadways must also apply to multi-use paths. Lines of sight, stopping distances, controls of vertical and horizontal alignment, signage, and surface conditions are just as important on these paths. Even at a speed of 25 km/h a cyclist colliding with a frail pedestrian or child can cause significant injury. Similarly a cyclist travelling at that seemingly slow speed can sustain serious injury when impacting an forgiving roadside object or from simply falling onto a hard surface.
Unfortunately, it has been our experience that the courts in Ontario have demonstrated a propensity to protect those responsible for creating unsafe path and road conditions for cyclists resulting in many unsafe scenarios that need not exist.
You must be logged in to post a comment.