'ap i
Page 76
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Safer in a lorry
by Janus
UNCONGEN1AL though the subject may be, road operators should not hesitate to emphasize the significance of the latest road accident survey issued by the Department ofthe Environment. The profusion of statistics in RoadAceidents 1969 may obscure some of the issues important to commercial vehicle users, but no better balanced picture is likely to be made available.
Among the many people hostile to the lorry, there is a tendency to seize upon surveys such as those by the Road Research Laboratory, covering one particular facet of the road accident problem. If the results seem to be to the disadvantage of the commercial vehicle, they are eagerly hailed as new proof that it is a menace to all other road users and should be abolished.
ACCEPTANCE of this kind of indictment is often uncritical. The heavy lorry cannot escape observation. It makes a much greater visual impression than a car when it is involved in an accident. It makes a better subject for a press or television picture. Small wonder, therefore, that so many people believe the lorry to be the principal villain in the road accident tragedy.
The facts for 1969 are now available. There were 416,136 vehicles of all kinds (including pedal cycles) involved in injury accidents. Of this total, 246,230 were cars and taxis, 33,892 small goods vehicles, 7,341 goods vehicles with an unladen weight between and 3 tons, 22,700 goods vehicles over 3 tons unladen and 20,675 passenger service vehicles. The involvement of the heavy lorry, therefore, was only just over 5 per cent; and, in view of the careless language so often used on the subject, it has to be emphasized that involvement does not necessarily mean responsibility.
ANOTHER table in the publication seeks to provide an even more precise picture. There are many times more cars than there are commercial vehicles, and it is only to be expected that they would be involved in more accidents. On the other hand, goods vehicles of all kinds have an average annual mileage per vehicle of 13,700, passenger service vehicles 29,400, and cars and taxis only 8,200. This comparison is taken into account by giving details of vehicle involvement per 100m miles travelled.
The average (this time excluding pedal cycles) is 322, but the range is wide. The best record in 1969 was that of the heavy goods vehicle, with an average 259 injury accidents in the course ofjourneys which would add up to 200 trips to the moon and back. Close behind came cars and taxis with 262, followed by small goods vehicles with 303 and passenger service vehicles with 869.
The tragic record is still not complete with these statistics, since it takes no account of the severity of the accident. The report fills in the details with separate tables for fatal and serious accidents. As may be expected, cars and taxis show up rather more favourably on this reckoning, with six fatal and 71 serious accidents in every 100m miles travelled in 1969. The figures for the small goods vehicle were seven and 83; fir the heavy goods vehicle 15 and 78; and for the passenger service vehicle 22 and 161.
HAT must inevitably be a somewhat grisly calculation attempts to assess the economic cost of accidents of various degrees of severity. Calculations have been made in the Department to produce a new figure for 1969. The average economic cost of a fatal accident is put at £10,000; of a serious injury accident at £700; and of a slight injury accident at £220. Where there is only damage to vehicles and property—and there are thought to be six times as many accidents of this kind—the estimated cost is £90. On the basis of these figures, the following table shows how the total is reached of 320m.
The proportion attributable to various categories of vehicle is not given, and might be hard to assess. However, the total provides a financial target which can be set against the cost of preventive measures. These are classified in the report in three broad categories: vehicles, roads and people. It is pointed out that improvements in vehicle standards have been accompanied by legislation enforcing those standards and demanding better vehicle maintenance.
IMPROVED roads," says the report, "unquestionably make a major contribution to a reduction in road accidents." It is pointed out that annual expenditure on road construction and major improvements is running at nearly £400m and is planned to rise to over £450m; that traffic generated by road improvements
might mean that the reduction in casualties is less than expected; and that small improvements often produce good results at low cost. Road users are mainly affected by training and publicity directed towards making them more skilful and more conscious of hazards. The heavy goods vehicle driver's licence was introduced in February 1970, after the year covered by the latest statistics. What effect it has may be seen when the 1970 report is published. The Department should surely be able to improve upon the 15 months' gap between publication and the events which are chronicled. It would even be better to issue the information in two parts rather than to wait until the year under review has almost faded from memory.
OPERATORS should not ignore the economics of road accidents merely because the subject may seem distasteful. The critics do not hesitate to use the figures for their own purpose, and to suggest, for example, that the estimated cost of £320m should be met by taxation on road users. It is clear that, in fact, almost the whole of the cost has to be paid directly or indirectly by the road users concerned.
Another point which may be taken up by the many opponents of the lorry is the correlation between involvement in accidents and the age of the driver. The report has to go back to a survey in 1961, which gave results that still seem astonishing. Car drivers aged between 50 and 70 were involved in only 75 fatal or serious accidents for every 100m miles driven. The figure increased rapidly in inverse proportion to the drivers' ages: it was 204 for the age group between 20 and 24 years, and 410 for drivers up to the age of 19.
Amajor feature of the casualty figures, says the latest Department report, "is the increasing proportion of casualties among all classes of vehicle driver accounted for by young people". This might be taken as an argument against the proposal for a progressive reduction in the age limits for the various categories of hgv licence.
Opposition along these lines cannot be sustained. The lorry driver test, being so much more severe than the test for the ordinary driving licence, should eliminate young applicants whose lack of skill or temperament makes them unsuitable for driving any vehicle. Those who stay the course are valuable recruits whose presence on the roads should be welcomed. It is young drivers such as this who are likely to turn to some other occupation when they learn that they must reach the age of 21 before they are allowed on the road with any vehicle weighing more than 3 tons.
The statistics as a whole expose the hollowness of any attempt to ban the heavy goods vehicle from the roads on the score of road safety. If this were a major consideration for imposing such restrictions, the two-wheeled vehicle with its appalling accident record would be the obvious subject for elimination.