Road safety time for Europe to shift gears

Similar documents
Status of the review of the General Safety and Pedestrian Safety Regulations

POLICY POSITION ON THE PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION REGULATION

After years of inaction it s time for progress on vehicle safety

Executive Summary. For a full list of the advanced safety technologies and FIA Region I s stance, please see the annex.

AERODYNAMICS FOR THE FRONT OF TRUCKS WORKING DOCUMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG MOVE. (final draft March 2015)

EU Work priorities for for UNECE activities. 1. Working Group on Automated and connected vehicles (GRVA)

direct vision requirements for lorries

Road Map For Safer Vehicles & Fleet Safety

ITS and connected cars

Evaluation study on Speed Limitation Devices. Scenarios and methodology Stakeholder conference 10 June 2013

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL

ACEA Position Paper. General Safety Regulation Revision

Consultation document

10th Eastern Partnership Transpot Panel

UNECE WP15 November Our Vision. Your Safety

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL. Saving Lives: Boosting Car Safety in the EU

Committee on Transport and Tourism. of the Committee on Transport and Tourism. for the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection

Vehicle: Risks and Measures. Co-funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme of the European Union

Revision of the EU General Safety Regulation and Pedestrian Safety Regulation

OBLIGATION TO FIT ISOFIX ANCHORAGES. (Discussion paper)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No /.. of XXX

Vehicle technologies that mitigate risk

Official Journal of the European Union

CEMA position on draft braking regulation, 4 June 2008 ENTR/F1/ /rev16

The new EU type-approval framework for motor vehicles

MERCEDES-BENZ X-CLASS APRIL ONWARDS ALL VARIANTS

AEBS/LDWS General Safety Regulation. ACEA discussion paper. Paris, June Renzo Cicilloni. Director Safety

Position Paper. Anti-lock Braking for Agricultural Tractors

The right utility parameter mass or footprint (or both)?

Insert the title of your presentation here. Presented by Name Here Job Title - Date

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) / of XXX

Study of Pedestrian s fatal accidents (vs. motor vehicles at low speed) in Japan

RSWGM meeting European Commission DG MOVE 3-4 April 2017

Mercedes-Benz A-Class

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 11 December /3/06 REV 3 ADD 1. Interinstitutional File: 2003/ 0153(COD) ENT 84 CODEC 561

Advanced emergency braking systems for commercial vehicles

Automated Driving: The Technology and Implications for Insurance Brake Webinar 6 th December 2016

Euro NCAP: Saving Lives with Safer Cars

Crossrail Vehicle Safety Equipment Supplementary Guidance. Works Information Ref:

FUTURE EUROPEAN MASSES AND DIMENSIONS REGULATIONS A STUDY INTO THE TECHNICAL AND POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS

Lateral Protection Device

Speed assistance in modern cars and trucks Anders Lie, Swedish Transport Administration and Euro NCAP

FOR SHARING THE ROAD WITH TRUCKS

General Safety Regulation Way Forward for Seat Belt Reminders

Public Works Operations Manual Standard Operating Procedures for Water and Sewer WS - B311 Sanitary Sewer Connection Repair

ANNEXES. to the COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION

Future Vehicle Safety in Australasia and the Role of ANCAP

30 NOVMEBER Safer Trucks. Improving vulnerable road user safety through better vehicle design, training and purchasing decisions

Response of the Road Haulage Association to Transport for London. New proposals to improve Air Quality.

POSITION PAPER Revision of the General Safety Regulation 2009/661

GOVERNMENT STATUS REPORT OF JAPAN

Defining the requirement for a direct vision standard for trucks using a DHM based blind spot analysis

CEMA position on the draft Regulation on braking for tractors & the need for a balanced regulatory approach on ABS. 03 July 2013

Ensuring the safety of automated vehicles

The 3 rd European Road Safety Action Programme

ISA: The Research Evidence

AEBS and LDWS Exemptions Feasibility Study: 2011 Update. MVWG Meeting, Brussels, 6 th July 2011

NISSAN MICRA DECEMBER ONWARDS NEW ZEALAND VARIANTS WITH 0.9 LITRE ENGINE

ALFA ROMEO STELVIO MARCH ONWARDS 2.0L PETROL & 2.2L DIESEL VARIANTS

ROAD SAFETY ANNUAL REPORT 2018 LITHUANIA

VOLKSWAGEN T-ROC OCTOBER ONWARDS NEW ZEALAND VARIANTS

Economic and Social Council

Devices to Assist Drivers to Comply with Speed Limits

Drink Driving and latest developments in Norway. SMART policies, 5th October, Helsinki

VOLKSWAGEN POLO FEBRUARY ONWARDS ALL VARIANTS

VOLVO XC40 APRIL ONWARDS ALL-WHEEL-DRIVE (AWD) VARIANTS

Proposal for UN Regulation on AEBS for M1/N1

AD Table 3.--Goodrich Evacuation Systems Installed on Certain Airbus Model Airplanes

(Text with EEA relevance)

Certificate of Appointment. Eurofins Product Service GmbH

FORD MUSTANG (FN) DECEMBER ONWARDS V8 & ECOBOOST FASTBACK (COUPE) VARIANTS

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE BILL REFERRED TO ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY, FEBRUARY 6, 2017 AN ACT

FORD ENDURA DECEMBER ONWARDS ALL VARIANTS

Subject: ACEA proposal for Euro 6 OBD and Euro 6 PN limit for gasoline direct injection engines.

Public consultation on road infrastructure and tunnel safety

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

BEVAN VEHICLE COMPLIANCE KITS

Respecting the Rules Better Road Safety Enforcement in the European Union. ACEA s Response

Road fatalities in 2012

Response of the Road Haulage Association to Transport for London s Consultation. Changes to the Ultra Low Emission Zone and Low Emission Zone.

FORD FOCUS DECEMBER ONWARDS ALL VARIANTS

RESPONSE TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT S CONSULTATION PAPER

Driving for Work. Managing Risks. Deirdre Sinnott Senior Inspector Work Related Vehicle Safety Program

A safety vision that benefits everyone

FIMCAR. Frontal Impact Assessment Approach FIMCAR. frontal impact and compatibility assessment research

Women In Transportation Seminar The Future of Transportation How Do We Get There. US Department of Transportation NHTSA Julie J Kang

Safety Considerations of Autonomous Vehicles. Darren Divall Head of International Road Safety TRL

Adult Occupant. Pedestrian

REGULATIONS Official Journal of the European Union L 200/1

A factsheet on the safety technology in Volvo s 90 Series cars

Road Safety Country Overview October Austria

Road Safety Country Overview October Greece. Population: 11.3 million inhabitants (2010) 17.1 million (2010 i ) [1,2] Area: km 2 (2010)

Autofore. Study on the Future Options for Roadworthiness Enforcement in the European Union

Nissan LEAF 86% 93% 71% 71% SPECIFICATION SAFETY EQUIPMENT TEST RESULTS. Standard Safety Equipment. Child Occupant. Adult Occupant.

A factsheet on Volvo Cars safety technology in the new Volvo S90

[Insert name] newsletter CALCULATING SAFETY OUTCOMES FOR ROAD PROJECTS. User Manual MONTH YEAR

Figure 15. Yearly Trend in Death Rates for Motor Vehicle Transport: NSW, Year

Strategic Planning Directorate General of Traffic. VI International Conference of European Traffic Policies Barcelona, 16 May 2014

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) / of XXX

The SIPS (Side Impact Protection System) includes side airbags and an Inflatable Curtain (IC) airbag that protects both front and rear occupants.

Transcription:

Road safety time for Europe to shift gears The number of people dying on Europe s roads nearly halved between 2000 and 2010. But this spectacular progress has now grinded to a halt. In 2014 and 2015 fatality numbers remained stable. Progress on reducing deaths amongst vulnerable road users (VRUs) such as cyclists and pedestrians has been particularly disappointing. The total number of cyclist and pedestrian fatalities decreases much slower than compared with other road deaths. Furthermore their share in the total number of road fatalities is increasing. i ii Only the EU can set mandatory safety standards for new cars, vans and trucks. However, the last time it has introduced new vehicle safety requirements was in 2009. This is especially problematic for vans and trucks where market pressure and labelling initiatives such as Euro NCAP are mostly lacking. The Commission has announced it will propose new safety standards for cars, vans and trucks in 2017. A communication outlining its plans is expected in autumn 2016 and a legislative proposal will come the year after. Since the last GSR review in 2009 multiple new safety technologies have emerged or matured. Below we list the ones the Commission should prioritise in its new vehicle safety law.

Safety technologies for cars, trucks, vans and busses ISA (Intelligent Speed Adaptation) Speeding is a major problem that has a significant effect on traffic safety. According to the ETSC, drivers exceed the speed limits on all roads by 10 to 60%. iii It is estimated that for every 1km/h decrease in speed, collisions are reduced by 3%. iv Intelligent Speed Adaptation is an in-vehicle technology that assists drivers in complying with different speed limits. v It communicates that information to drivers but can also be used to actively limit the speed of the vehicle. vi A study that combined research from several European countries estimates that a mandatory ISA for cars where the driver cannot exceed the speed limit would reduce fatal accidents by 37%. A 2013 DG MOVE study predicts that a voluntary ISA could reduce fatal accidents with heavy commercial vehicles by 25%. vii Better speed compliance would also reduce CO 2 and NOx emissions. The cost for this technology is estimated to be around 400 per vehicle but research suggests that the safety and environmental benefits far outweigh the costs. viii Moreover, ISA is a stepping stone and precondition for vehicle automation. In that sense there could be significant industrial benefits in rolling out ISA in the EU at an accelerated pace. Therefore we recommend that: 1. Non-overridable ISA should become compulsory for trucks, busses and vans. 2. Overridable ISA should become compulsory for new passenger cars. Autonomous Emergency Breaking Systems (AEBS) AEBS detect objects to the front of vehicle and automatically brakes to avoid a collision. So far AEBS has mainly been deployed to avoid front-to-rear crashes this type of AEBS is now mandatory for commercial vehicles ix - but second generation technology is more accurate and can also detect pedestrians and cyclists. Mercedes recently presented Side Guard Assist x, a system that can recognise pedestrians and automatically brake. Volvo too is developing a cyclist detection system xi. All available research suggests that mandating AEBS for all vehicles would have a major effect on reducing fatalities. Some studies show that AEBS on cars would have a reduction potential of 13.9% of all accidents and 2.2% of fatal accidents. xiixiii Providing all cars with AEBS with pedestrian detection could reduce serious injury and pedestrian fatalities by around 4% to 16%. xiv AEBS is mostly optional for passenger cars. Costs for AEBS on cars would be between 180 and 650. Pedestrian AEBS is more complex and therefore more costly but Volvo cars already fits pedestrian AEBS on seven of its models. Costs are expected to be comparable for other vehicles such as trucks. xv We therefore recommend that: 1. 2 nd generation, more accurate, AEBS should become mandatory for all vehicles 2. AEBS with pedestrian and cyclist detection should become mandatory for commercial vehicles and in particular larger trucks and construction vehicles. 2

Improved direct vision for trucks The weight, size and design of trucks make them particularly dangerous vehicles with blind spots around the cab remaining a grave concern. In 2013 more than 4,000 Europeans died in truck crashes leaving many more seriously injured. A quarter of truck fatalities were vulnerable road users. xvi Various solutions exist to improve truck vision (mirrors, camera s) but the most effective is to improve direct vision, i.e. what you can see with your own eyes. TRL 2015 estimates up to 550 blind spot deaths could be avoided through better direct vision. Given the high costs per fatality and the big potential of direct vision to reduce truck fatalities, requiring better direct vision is likely to be very cost-beneficial. xvii Low entry, high vision cabs have superior direct vision and are commercially available today. They are ideally suited for urban distribution traffic and have little or no operational limitations. High vision trucks are more expensive but this is likely related to low sales volumes, not production costs. Large distribution and construction vehicles generally have poorer direct vision than small trucks. However, there are big differences between comparable truck types and the new truck dimension rules enable further improvements. Setting a direct vision standard that requires at least best-in-class performance for larger trucks would therefore produce significant benefits at limited cost. In combination with cyclist and pedestrian detection systems improved direct vision could radically improve VRU safety. We therefore recommend: 1. That a direct vision standard should be adopted for urban distribution trucks that effectively mandates high vision, low entry cabs. 2. That at least best-in-class direct vision performance should become mandatory for large distribution vehicles and construction trucks. Improved truck crash performance The frontal design of trucks has a major impact on the outcome of collisions. The current flat front absorbs almost no energy in case of a crash and drags vulnerable road users under the wheels. Thanks to the new Weights and Dimensions Directive (2015/719) the front of trucks can now be redesigned. The brick designed front could be redesigned to have a more rounded front. Instead of being run over, cyclists and pedestrians would be deflected. Energy-absorbing material would also protect the vulnerable road user during the primary impact. xviii In addition, redesign could also have a major impact on car-to-truck crashes. In the EU nearly 2,000 car occupants in 2013 were killed in a crash involving a truck. The current front underrun protection (FUP) has been found to be rather ineffective because of the high speeds of these crashes and the limited deformation space of the current FUPs. xix The new design rules allow a larger deformation zone with a so called crash box. Energy-absorbing frontal underrun protections have the potential to save up to 369 lives per year from car and HGV occupants in the EU27 and is likely to be cost-beneficial. xx In addition, the current rules for the FUP also limit truckmakers design freedom and should be adapted to reflect the new design possibilities enabled by Directive 2015/719. 3

We therefore recommend: 1. A test should be adopted to assess the truck-to-vru crash performance, in particular VRU overrun/roll-over and primary impacts. 2. That regulations UNECE R93 and EU Regulation 661/2009 are amended to: a. Fully enable new designs, e.g. by allowing curved FUP designs. b. Mandate energy absorbing front underrun protection systems for all new heavy goods vehicles. Tyre pressure monitoring systems (TPMS) Under-inflated tyres can lead to unsafe situations where the stability of the vehicle is affected. Furthermore badly inflated tyres increase the drag of the vehicle which leads to less fuel efficiency and more CO 2. TPMS addresses this problem by measuring the tyre pressure and warn the driver when the tyre is under-inflated. xxi This technology is mandatory for cars but not for trucks. TPMS has the potential to reduce the number of speed and tyre related accidents of HDVs and LCVs by 4 to 20% and the total number of accidents by 0.8 to 4%. It is also proven to be technically feasible and costeffective, costing 136 for long haul tractor-trailers while at the same time saving ca. 250 per year of fuel. xxii Therefore we recommend that TPMS should become mandatory for all new heavy duty vehicles. Truck side guard systems and improved rear underrun protection Collisions between trucks and vulnerable road users lead to cyclists, pedestrians or motorcyclists being overrun or ending up between the axles of the tractor or trailer. In principle trucks and trailers are currently required to be fitted with structures to reduce the open space ahead of the rear axle(s) to provide protection to pedestrians and cyclists in collision with the side of such vehicles. However, a large number of vehicles was exempted from the side-guard standard. Exempted types include construction vehicles, special purpose vehicles, certain trailers and tank vehicles. 2014 research in London shows that between 10 and 26% of vehicles are not equipped with adequate lateral protection. Removing most of the exemptions and generalising side guards could reduce cyclist fatalities involved in truck collisions by ca. 5%. Retrofit side guards are estimated to cost 500-1800 but standard fitting at the time of production brings costs down very significantly and likely make this measure cost beneficial. We therefore recommend that side guard exemptions should be reduced to an absolute minimum. Several studies demonstrate rear underrun protection of trucks could be improved. Rear underrun protection (RUP) devices are fitted to the back of trucks and trailers to avoid cars ending up under the truck in case of a rear crash. The current RUP could be improved to provide better compatibility between the RUP and other vehicles, in particular cars. The Commission s consultants estimate that better rear underrun protection could save 43-94 lives every year. Because of the limited cost of improved RUP this measures is likely to be costeffective. i http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_memo-16-864_en.htm ii CARE European Commission Database: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/specialist/statistics/index_en.htm iii ETSC, Revision of the General Safety Regulation 2009/661, 2015, p 1 iv and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, 2015, p. 104 v http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/specialist/knowledge/speed/new_technologies_new_opportunities/intelligent_speed_a daptation_isa_en.htm vi and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, 2015, p. 104 4

vii DG MOVE (2013), Ex-post evaluation of Directive 92/6/EEC on the installation and use of speed limitation devices for certain categories of motor vehicles in the Community, as amended by Directive 2002/85/EC, p. 101. viii and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, 2015, p. 107 ix and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, 2015, p. 93-94 x http://media.daimler.com/marsmediasite/en/instance/ko/mercedes-benz-trucks-safety-new-assistance-systems-active- Br.xhtml?oid=12367326 xi http://www.bigwheels.my/2016/10/volvo-pedestrian-and-cyclist-detection-system-for-bus-and-trucks/ xii FIA, Policy Position on the General Safety Regulation, 2015, p. 5 xiii and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, 2015, p. 96 xiv Edwards, M. et al. (2014). Benefit estimate and assessment methodologies for pre-crash braking part of forward looking integrated pedestrian safety systems. xv and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, 2015, p. 97 xvi http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/pdf/statistics/dacota/bfs2015_hgvs.pdf xvii and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, 2015, p 347 xviii TRL (2015), Benefit and Feasibility of a Range of New Technologies and Unregulated Measures in the fields of Vehicle Occupant Safety and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, p 322 xixknight I (2016), Energy Absorbing Front Underrun Protection for Trucks: Developing a test procedure, p 3 xx TRL (2015), Benefit and Feasibility of a Range of New Technologies and Unregulated Measures in the fields of Vehicle Occupant Safety and Protection of Vulnerable Road Users, p 345-347 xxi TNO (2014), Study on some safety-related aspects of tyre use, p 78 xxii TNO (2013), Study on Tyre Pressure Monitoring Systems (TPMS) as a means to reduce Light Commercial and Heavy-Duty Vehicles fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, p 31 5