For further information please contact me at:
[email protected]
1
I would like to endorse the CAF guidelines (Methodologia para planes de seguridad vial para motociclistas) as a very useful and practical resource. These are the principles of best practice that we too have discovered through our own work over the past decade in Australia. In this presentation, I would like to highlight some methods that we have found useful in identifying the issues and setting priorities for action. Perhaps most important is to involve the motorcyclist community and other stakeholders through out the planning process. As road safety practitioners, it is easy to forget that the road users we are targeting may not be aware of the risks they face. We have found that establishing a working group at the beginning of the process is highly effective and ensures shared ownership of the process and final product. Different stakeholders will provide information from different perspectives, and this will improve your ability to reliably identify crash causes and effective countermeasures. Such information cannot be obtained from administrative data bases. Those most involved in using, building and managing the road system will be best able to suggest countermeasures that are likely to be effective and acceptable to those affected. This will also reduce the cost and effort of promoting and enforcing the measures. Effective consultation relies on those consulted being able to make informed decisions. This requires an open process, sharing the data and involvement in all stages of the decision making process. If the strategy is to be successful, it must have the road users’ understanding and support.
2
Understanding of the dynamics of motorcycles is essential to determine crash causes and effective countermeasures. Without this specialist knowledge it is too easy to assume it was the motorcyclists’ behaviour that caused the crash. If we fail to understand when other factors contributed such as the design of the road or condition of the road surface, then we miss the opportunity of preventing further crashes. Active motorcyclists are essential to the planning process. For example: We have found that specialist crash investigators with motorcycle crash experience, can contribute a level of understanding of the highly specific kinematics in motorcycle crashes. Road engineers who are also active motorcyclists may be the best investment that you can make, because they will bring invaluable practical and professional experience to the process. Motorcycle motorcyclist trainers, will understand rider behaviour and the types of errors from motorcyclists inexperience. This may inform changes to the training required for motorcycle licensing programs. These types of stakeholders are more likely to understand what goes wrong and to develop remedies that will work best.
3
The crash data required for analysis of motorcycle risk factors includes many factors not used for car crash analysis. These factors include details about road alignment, type of intersection and road surface conditions. This slide illustrates the basic types of data most useful to identify crash factors and potential countermeasures. If this level of detail is not available from the police crash data currently collected, it would be useful to conduct surveys of motorcyclists to ask them about their crash experience and the types of hazards they face. Perhaps set up on-line hazard reporting systems. We have found these useful to provide local authorities with information about particularly hazardous sites in the road system. It is recommended that all crash data – including both fatal and injury crashes – be used for data analysis. This is because the volume of information and the richness of the data will be greater, but more importantly because it will identify the factors resulting in the majority of crashes. Data on fatal crashes is often more easily accessible, but it tends to divert attention to cases where more extreme behaviour or bad luck resulted in death.
4
This slide shows the different patterns of crashes on a section of road in Australia over a 5 year period. The yellow circles are car crashes, the green are motorcycle crashes. They cluster in different sections due to the geometry or condition of the road. It is often difficult for non-motorcyclists to appreciate the risks that are presented by uneven, broken or slippery surfaces. Loss of traction with the road is a common cause of motorcycle crashes, and often there is nothing the motorcyclist could do to avoid or control such situations. This slide illustrates how important road design and maintenance are for motorcycles. It also illustrates how road authorities can use GPS coordinates of crashes to identify black spots1 for targeted remediation, without having to upgrade an entire road. 1. Black spots are road sites or stretches with a high crash rate. Treatment of these sites has been highly cost effective in Australia. More detailed information on the role of road surface hazards is also available in de Rome et al (2007), Positioned for Safety: 2010, listed in the references for this paper and in a website that I write for Australia n motorcyclists– www.roadsafety.mccofnsw.org.au I have distributed copies of Making Roads Motorcycle Friendly to the country representatives at the Forum. It is a DVD training program designed to be used in seminars to educate road design, traffic management and maintenance engineers about making roads motorcycle friendly. The program was produced by Vicroads, the road authority in the State of Victoria, Australia. A similar product to be used in training here would be invaluable in improving the safety of for motorcyclists on existing and new roads.
5
In Australia we classify crashes by the movement of the vehicles involved. Road User Movement (RUM) Codes are standard crash configuration used to determine the Key Vehicle in a crash. The codes describe the movement of the vehicles involved, and consists of 98 diagrams representing common crash movements. The Key Vehicle (darker arrow) is the one whose movement was most responsible for causing the crash. However there will be cases where the Key Vehicle was not the one at legally fault. The RUM code is used to identify the risk of particular traffic movements, but is not used to determine legal responsibility. Take as an example, a case where Vehicle (A) has a green light to turn across traffic but an oncoming vehicle (B) comes through their red light and crashes into Vehicle (A). Vehicle B is at fault, but Vehicle A is still the Key Vehicle because they were crossing the path of Vehicle B.
6
Motorcycles differ from cars in the types and causes of their crashes. There are different road conditions and error patterns associated with different types of motorcycle crash. SINGLE VEHICLE CRASHES (41%) In Australia, approximately 40% of motorcycle crashes do not involve other road users. Known as single vehicle crashes, they involve the motorcycle running out of control - usually on rural roads. The next slide discusses factors associated with single vehicle crashes. (Slide 8) MULTI-VEHICLE CRASHES (59%) When another vehicle is involved, the crash is more likely to be due to the action of the other driver (35%) than the motorcyclist (23%). As might be expected, multivehicle crashes are most likely to occur in urban areas. Multi-vehicle crashes between motorcycles and other vehicles also show distinct patterns of location type and motorcyclist/driver error. (See slide 9)
7
Single vehicle motorcycle crashes may be due to excessive speed or motorcyclists’ errors in reading the road ahead. For example they may misjudge the angle of a curve and enter the corner too fast or at the wrong angle of lean. A substantial proportion of single vehicle crashes (22%) involve road surface hazards, particularly on corners (26%) such as pot holes, uneven surfaces or loose material (e.g. sand or gravel), slippery material (e.g. diesel spills, cattle dung or water ) and even road paint on pedestrian crossings and other painted signs on road surface. Animals on the road can also be a cause of motorcyclists’ crashing. (de Rome & Senserrick, 2011). Road repairs often result in increasing hazards for motorcycles when slippery tar jointing compound is used, or when the repaired section is at a slightly different height to the rest of the road, creating a lip which can change the direction of the tyre, if the motorcyclist is braking or leaning into a corner at that time. This is particularly a problem on the approach to intersections. This is a greater problem when the road surface is wet because water reduces traction, uneven surface that are wet are also more difficult for the motorcyclist to detect. The slide shows the types of surface irregularities that were identified at over 50% of crash sites in rural and urban road environments. (Haworth, 1997)
8
This graph shows the different types of crashes according to whether the motorcyclist or other driver were the Key Vehicles. OTHER DRIVER ERRORS The other driver was the Key Vehicle in 61% of all multi-vehicle crashes and 71% of intersection crashes, although younger motorcyclists (17-25 years) are more likely than older motorcyclists to be involved and at fault in intersection crashes. The most common errors by car/truck drivers are at intersections, when turning across the path of an oncoming motorcyclists at a cross street (24%) or T-intersection 10% or at cross roads (12%). (Please note in Australia we drive on the left hand side of the road). Lane changing and turning sideswipes are also common as are emerging from parking or driveways or making a U-turn into the path of a motorcycle. After such crashes, the driver will commonly say that they did not see the motorcycle. Motorcycles are smaller objects to notice in traffic and we recommend that they always have their headlights on in daylight to increase their visibility (conspicuity). However, the burden of being noticed should not be placed solely on the motorcyclists. There is evidence that drivers tend to look for other large vehicles, rather than motorcycles, bicycles or pedestrians. Campaigns to increase drivers’ awareness of looking for motorcyclists and having a responsibility to give way to vulnerable road users are important measures to consider. MOTORCYCLIST’S ERRORS Motorcyclists are less likely to be the Key Vehicle in intersection crashes, but they are most likely to be the Key Vehicle in head-on and rear end crashes. The head-on crashes generally occur when cornering, and are less likely to occur when overtaking a vehicle. Head-on crashes while cornering occur when the motorcyclist misjudges their position and unintentionally leans over the centre line into the path of an on-coming vehicle. Remember, once a motorcyclist has leaned into a corner, they cannot change their position due to the dynamics of cornering on two wheels.
9
To set priorities for interventions, we recommend using population data – such as the age and number of registered owners of motorcycles as a baseline for interpreting the crash data. For example: First look at the graph on the left at the age distribution of motorcyclists who crash. The majority are older – suggesting we should be targeting older motorcyclists. Then we add the population data, based on the age of registered owners of motorcycles. Now we see that young motorcyclists are over represented in crashes, they are involved in 27% of all motorcycle crashes but own only 8% of motorcycles. So we calculate the crash risk rate, (see graph on right) and find that young motorcyclists have over 5 times the crash risk of older motorcyclists. This type of analysis can be used with any type of crash or contributing factor. For example what is the risk rate by age group for alcohol related crashes, for speeding, for multi-vehicle versus single vehicle crashes etc. What are the crash risk rates for urban versus rural crashes, multi-lane versus single lane roads, one-way versus two way roads. Etc. These types of analysis will inform decisions about priorities for targeted programs.
10
The Haddon Matrix was developed as a way of taking a comprehensive approach to injury prevention. For each crash or crash type, try to look at the crash from all perspectives. This approach ensures that we examine, human factors, road environment, vehicle and equipment factors and the socio-economic (including legislative) environment at three phases of the crash incident. Pre-crash Pre-crash we ask what were the features that increased the risk of a crash? In this example the motorcyclist was a learner, the road was hazardous for a motorcycle due loose material on the sealed surface which was particularly dangerous on a corner. The motorcycle’s brakes were not in good condition. The motorcycle licensing system does not require that learners undertake compulsory training before being allowed to ride on public roads. Crash During the crash we ask what were the features that increased the severity of the crash? The motorcyclist was not wearing a helmet, the bike skidded on the loose gravel and ran into a tree. The motorcyclist tried to control the bike but the brakes locked. Trees and other fixed objects such as power poles are a serious hazard and should not be placed in likely run off zones on corners, or should be screened by guard rail that is more forgiving to the vehicle and human body in an impact. This indicates lack of engineering standards or lack of enforcement of road design for safety. Post crash After the crash we ask what were the features that increased the severity of crash outcomes. The motorcyclist was riding alone in a rural area, so there was no one to call for emergency services. The rural road was out of mobile phone range and did not have emergency telephones along that route, nor was his motorcycle fitted with automatic crash alert systems. His transfer to hospital was therefore delayed and even once in care, the health system did not have specialist head injury rehabilitation programs, so he was permanently disabled. This approach enables stakeholders to work together to identify contributing factors from the whole system, and to devise countermeasures.
11
When thinking about countermeasures, think widely across the whole road and transport system. This diagram shows some examples of the range of areas to be considered. For example, in terms of infrastructure – road design and maintenance is a critically important factor, but do not forget to look at longer term and systemic factors such as land use and transport planning and management. Land use refers to how changes in land usage can impact on traffic type, volume and safety. If a new development is to be approved, what are the traffic and road safety implications. How should they be managed and how can the costs be integrated into the costs of the development? In Australia, developers are required to pay a fee for the infrastructure development impacts of their project. Government planning includes Development Control Plans (DCPs), which set out the rules and regulations for what types of development will be permitted and under what conditions. Improved public transport is also an important injury reduction measure but must be devised in consultation with the community and particularly with the target road user group. Public transport systems are expensive, but will not be effective unless they provide the services that people want.
12
Benefit cost analysis is the means for assessing the relative benefits of different strategies. Once the crash factors are identified, and priorities determined against population data – there will be a range of alternative strategy options to consider. The relative cost effectiveness of each will inform these decisions. The calculation is to measure the Road safety gains (serious injury & fatality prevented) by the Cost $ (Cost of intervention – Savings in emergency, health & administrative services). e.g. Traffic calming (e.g. speed humps) are more cost effective than speed cameras, but not always appropriate for traffic conditions. (Ghislanzoni et al, 2013) This slide is an example of data that could be used to assess the relative benefits of promoting motorcyclist usage of protective clothing. This graph shows the proportion of injured motorcyclists according to the clothing worn in their crash (see references: de Rome et al, 2011). The benefits of protective clothing are widely underestimated, but our research indicates that increased usage has substantial implications for reducing the burden of injury on the health system. It is now one of the key objectives of the Australian national road safety strategy.
13
These references include a guide to writing road safety strategic plans. 1. de Rome, L. (2006). A Guide to Developing Council Road Safety Strategic Plans, Second Edition. Sydney, Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (NSW Division). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Liz_De_Rome/publications A number of examples of motorcycle safety plans produced in Australia and UK. 2.
de Rome, L., et al. (2007). Positioned for Safety 2010: A Motorcycle Safety Strategic Plan 2007-2010. Sydney, Motorcycle Council of NSW, Inc. www.roadsafety.mccofnsw.org.au. 3. Transport for NSW (2012). NSW Motorcycle Safety Strategy 2012–2021, http://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/downloads/motorcycle_strategy2012.pdf. 4. UK Department For Transport (2005). The Government's motorcycling strategy, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http:/www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/vehicles/motorcycling/thegovernm entsmotorcyclingst4550. 5. Victoria's Road Safety and Transport Strategic Action Plan for Powered Two Wheelers 2009-2013. VicRoads. Melbourne. http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/NR /rdonlyres/C89EBE2B-7E5D-4099-9DDE-EC978C44DA44/0/WebPoweredTwo Research into the factors associated with motorcycle crashes and injury reduction: 6.
de Rome, L. and T. Senserrick (2012). "Factors associated with motorcycle crashes in New South Wales, 20042008." Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies 2265: 54-61. 7. de Rome, L., et al. (2011). "Motorcycle protective clothing: Protection from injury or just the weather?" Accident Analysis and Prevention 43(6): 1893-1900. 8. de Rome, L. (2009). The Good Gear Guide for Motorcycle & Scooter motorcyclists. http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/publications/2009/good_gear_guide.aspx. Canberra. Other useful resources: 9.
Holder et al. 2001 Injury Surveillance Guidelines, WHO http://whqlibdoc.who.int/ publications/2001/9241591331.pdfWheelersacitonplanDecember2011.pdf
10. Giancarlo Ghislanzoni, Gilad Myerson, and Alessandro Faure Ragani, 2013, A cost-effective path to road safety, McKinsey & Company,
