Accident prevention in psv operation
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by T. J. Hunt, D Phil, PhD, Medical Research Council, Applied Psychology Unit
LEGISLATION was introduced in the 1968 Transport Act to secure the observance of new working and driving hours by drivers in the road transport industry. Because little evidence was available on the hours of driving and involvement in road traffic accidents, it was decided to investigate this with respect to coaches.
The Passenger Vehicle Operators Association assisted in obtaining accident data from two groups of operators—one based in London and the other in the north of England. The data collected covered a period of one year, July 1967 to June 1968, and was for 904 accidents; 381 being for coaches of the London operators. Supplementary information was obtained by an observer travelling on a number of coaches operated from London.
This report is a summary of the results obtained from the study which are related to the operational aspects of passenger coach services. Because of the complex semantics associated with the word "accident" (which is defined as an unforeseen effect that is related to chance or fortune) the generic term "incident" has been adopted in this study to denote an event which resulted in reported damage or loss of property, animal or human life.
The initial examination of the reports showed that most incidents belonged to one of three categories, depending on the manoeuvre or motion of the coach immediately preceding the incident. The categories were driving incidents, road manoeuvres and parking manoeuvres, responsible for 66.5 per cent, 21.2 per cent and 12.3 per cent of the incidents. respectively.
The first category could be defined as incidents involving another moving vehicle, person or animal, and could nearly all be placed in one of five groups. In order of greatest frequency they are: O Private vehicles attempting to overtake the coach on the nearside, the majority relating to a left-turning manoeuvre by the coach, which often has to move to the offside to make a neat turn.
1=1 Collision incidents at roundabouts associated with a similar manoeuvre as above.
O Collisions resulting from cars or vans overtaking on the offside and pullingin abruptly in front of the coach.
0 Collision of the coach with the rear of another vehicle—this was associated with road junctions with traffic lights at green in the direction of travel of the coach.
0 Incidents related to the skidding of the coach during icy or adverse weather.
Incidents in the second category—road manoeuvres—involved the collision of the coach with another static vehicle or object. These frequently occurred on narrow roads in urban areas and were associated with parked cars.
Incidents during parking manoeuvres related to entering, leaving or manoeuvring inside a garage or parking area and resulting in collision with another vehicle, object or person. Nearly three-quarters of these incidents involved reversing the coach, often while the driver was being directed by another person. Some reports indicated the inability of the driver to obtain adequate rearward vision in the rearview mirrors.
Nearly one third of all incidents occurred on urban contract work, which is similar to the pattern seen in national accident statistics; only a small number of personal injuries are associated with this type of work, however. Coastal and short tour work accounted for 18 per cent of all accidents and for 60 per cent of all personal injuries. The tour work, which often extended over a number of days, had a very low association with incidents.
There is a relationship between the number of incidents and the time of their occurrence. The largest peak is between 8.30 and 9.30 am and the second peak coincides with the evening peak period-6.0 to 7.30 pm. This relationship is found with all four categories of coach work.
Reviewing the ages of the drivers employed by both groups of operators does suggest, that the coach driver population is relatively young. For example, of the 459 drivers employed by the London operators, half were in the 21-31 age group and about two-thirds in the 21-36 age group.
Examination of the available records for all drivers does not show any clear relationship between age and frequency of incidents. But if the ages of drivers involved in incidents is expressed against the total drivers in that age group, a higher involvement for the 21-31 age group, with a second peak for the 52-54 age group, is suggested. There are two categories of drivers— casual and regular. The former, also known as "seasonal" drivers, form the larger driver population during the summer months. Initial examination of the data showed that the total number of incidents involving regular drivers was greater than for casual drivers. But this fails to consider the difference in the exposure or mileage driven between the casual and regular drivers.
If the hours of work for the two groups employed by the London operators are compared, it would seem that the casual drivers are involved in about 18 per cent more incidents than regular drivers for each 100 hours of work.
Again, if regular and casual drivers are considered together, no clear relationship is established between the time a driver has held a psv licence and the frequency of incident involvement, as the actual exposure (mileage) of the driver is not indicated. If only regular drivers are considered, some relationship would seem to exist which does suggest that the longer he has held a psv licence the lower were the number of known incidents.
If the frequency of all reported accidents is considered with the number of hours elapsed since the driver signed on for work, this does show that the highest frequency of incidents is during the first two to three hours. It is judicious to consider two factors which probably influence this trend—first the picking up of passengers at certain points in the early stages of a journey, and, secondly, the involvement in heavy densities of traffic during the early part of most outward journeys from large cities.
Personal injury Between five and eight per cent of all the reported coach incidents resulted in personal injury; just over one-third of these involved pedestrians. This number was about equally divided between children involved with the coach moving in a forward direction and reversing manoeuvres in coach parks and garages resulting in injury to adults.
A further one-third of personal injury incidents involved the occupants of the coaches. Abrupt braking was the principal reason, which caused either dislodgement of luggage that injured passengers, or the sudden forward movement of passengers resulting in knee and low limb injuries.
It is important to consider only the more feasible recommendations to an industry with problems of acute competition and manpower. Nevertheless the available results do indicate some association of incidents with certain circumstances and it may be possible to consider some of these in an attempt to reduce the numbers of incidents.
The evidence does indicate that casual drivers are associated with a greater number of incidents. It may be of some value to select casuals who are drivers in some other trade; casual drivers could be allocated duties with a lower rate of incident involvement. Because it is the regular drivers over the age of 31 who have the lowest incident rate, this indicates the value of operators encouraging and securing the long-term permanent employment of drivers.
Operators should reappraise the actual duties of the driver; with the larger operator it may be possible to use less skilled staff for duties ancillary to driving. This might provide enhanced working conditions for the driver and reduce his actual number of working hours.
Coastal runs and similar journeys would seem to have a pronounced association with incident and personal injury. This may be ameliorated by using regular and more mature drivers on these duties; allowing a greater time for the return journey; and investigating suitable methods for the resting of drivers before the return trip.
Operators should consider reallocating drivers who have been involved in two or more incidents in any one year to a duty with a lower association with incidents.
The vehicle Recommendations for -reducing the number of incidents involving the coach itself include the improvement of a driver's rearward view, some of the possible remedies entailing increased cost.
More progressive design should reduce the vibration of mirrors at certain speeds; reappraise the positioning of mirrors; allow easy adjustment. It is the last criterion which is of considerable importance, and ideas to allow the adjustment of mirrors by the driver while he is seated could be one aim of progressive design.
More effective reversing lights, for both warning and illumination of the area into which a coach is being reversed may help to reduce incidents.
The use of more effective positions and designs of direction indicators than is found on many coaches may reduce incidents involving turning manoeuvres by improving the awareness of other drivers. Repeater indicators, mounted at a lower height than is customary on coaches, may be of particular value.
Improved design of luggage racks could reduce, the risk of personal injury to passengers by preventing luggage from becoming dislodged; better design and lighting of entrance steps should also receive attention.
Drivers of other vehicles might have greater awareness of the risks of overtaking long coaches if some warning device to indicate the length of the coach were fitted.
About seven per cent of all reported incidents and eight per cent of personal injuries occur in garages. The design of the garages surveyed did not cater for the size of the coaches.
Future garage construction and redesign should consider future evolution in the size and form of public vehicles, as, for example, the use of trailers. Floor kerbs or barriers should be provided where materials and other items are stored along the side or end walls of the garage, to prevent close contact between slow moving vehicles and persons.
In nearly one half of the incidents associated with parking manoeuvres the driver was being directed by some other person. This suggests either poor guidance, or poor communication between the person directing and the driver. Drivers and workers in garages and coach parks should be made aware of these problems.
Finally, a better design of forms for reporting accidents would minimize the problems of bias and opinion which influence objective reporting. These forms would also allow the larger operators to extract information more easily and indentify any trends in accidents.