Tag Archives: side guards

Save the Date (April 17): Side Guard Task Force Meeting

Safety Advocacy, ,

The Purpose of this meeting will be to collaboratively discuss Strategies to Solve the Side Underride Problem

UPDATE: Due to the coronavirus pandemic, we are changing the format of this to a Zoom meeting. Let us know if you would like to join us!

1. Opening Remarks

2. Setting the Stage for our Consensus Task: Systems Thinking Group Exercise to identify systemic factors impacting resolution of the underride problem, Kristin Hassmiller Lich & Becky Naumann, UNC SPH

3. Collaborative Discussion of Specifications for Side Guards, Andy Young, Facilitator

4. Lunch

5. Collaborative Discussion of a Plan for Implementation of Industry-wide Installation of Side Guard Solutions, Andy Young, Facilitator

6. Wrapping up: Next Steps in This Process

Side Guard Task Force SAVE THE DATE 2

OOIDA supports stronger rear guards but not adding side guards. What more do they need to know?

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , , ,

WUSA9 interviewed OOIDA (Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association) about the STOP Underrides Bill. Watch the latest segment of their truck underride investigative series in which OOIDA publicly committed themselves to supporting strengthening rear underride guard standards.

That’s great news. They’ve apparently seen the value of making truck crashes more survivable when cars rear-end trucks. However, it is puzzling to hear them, at the same time, oppose side guard technology which can also prevent people from dying under trucks — in this case, at the sides.

OOIDA said all the research – and crash tests like the one staged last year, just blocks from Capitol Hill, to draw attention to the fight for new underride safety requirements – doesn’t convince their organization side guards will be worth the investment.

“My last semi-trailer was $42,000 just with that trailer,” Pugh said. “So now we’re looking at upping the price another $2,000 to $3,000. That’s hard for a little guy to eat. That’s hard for a big guy to eat. There’s not that much profit in this business and if you want me to buy this technology and buy into this technology, you’re going to need to show me it works.” Lewie Pugh, executive vice president of the Owner-Operated Independent Truck Driver Association or OOIDA, which represents more than 160,000 members nationwide.

Pugh wants more government (read that taxpayer) funded side guard research:

Pugh says that means real-world testing. Prototypes, paid for by the government, studied by a federal agency like the Department of Transportation for effectiveness.

Perhaps he’s unaware of the side guard study conducted by Texas A&M on a contract from NHTSA (with taxpayer money) published in April 2018.

Is he aware of the untold number of hours put in by researchers and engineers to study and solve the underride problem over the past five decades? Here it is in a nutshell: History of Underride Research & Reports: 1896 to 2019

Maybe he doesn’t realize that the AngelWing side guard — successfully tested by the IIHS at 35 and 40 mph and by its inventor at 47.2 mph — has been installed on multiple trucks for several years and traveled thousands of miles without operational issues.

What exactly would convince him that underride protection on the sides of large trucks — promised by DOT on March 19, 1969 — can truly mean the difference between life and death? Or that they are not “too costly”?

Back-of-the-Envelope Math for Underride Protection Retrofit Cost/Trailer Equation

There are major developments in the fight to require lifesaving equipment on big rigs driving next to you on the road. Safety advocates say it could help prevent devastating crashes known as underride accidents.

One of the nation’s largest trucking groups now says it is open to some of the proposed requirements. But the question remains if the industry’s concessions will go far enough for the families of accident victims.

Read more of the story here: https://bit.ly/3awIaxU #Underrides#BigRigs#TruckUnderrides#TruckCrash#TruckDrivers

Super Single Tires Could Offset Cost of Side Guards: Save Weight/Cost/Lives!

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , , ,

Super single tires (in place of the more common dual tire set-up) on semi-trailers could actually save weight, cost, and — when combined with side guards — lives! Sounds like a Win/Win scenario to me! But don’t take my word for it, read about the potential benefits in this truck driver blogpost:

Essentially, instead of having eighteen tires to support the trailer and truck, only ten will be needed because of the improved design of the tire itself. The super single truck tires can withstand the weight of the trailer and vehicle over the same time period as their dual counterparts. A study performed by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory showed that trucks could save an average of almost 3% on gas or diesel fuel. While 3% may not sound like much, over 125,000 miles and averaging five miles per gallon that results in a savings of 728 gallons per year.

In addition, the new tires actually offer more stability with a wider truck frame. However, the most interesting advantages are that these tires can hold up for about 200,000 miles as opposed to the standard 160,000 miles for the conventional tires. This means that money is saved on replacement as well since the fewer number of super singles which actually last 40,000 miles longer.

However, the main advantage that super singles offer is that they are stronger, yet lighter in weight than their standard counterparts by roughly 1,000 pounds in total. While this weight savings may translate to better fuel mileage, trucking companies see this as being able to add 1,000 more pounds to the cargo. This means that more can be hauled on a single trip which can earn the company even more money than before.

Read more here: http://truck-driver-blog.blogspot.com/2014/10/advantages-of-super-single-truck-tires.html?m=1

Possible Drawback (as mentioned in the video below) is what could happen when there is a tire blow-out.

Additional Citations To Check Out:

Motor carriers consider many factors — and come to different conclusions — as they evaluate wide-base tires versus standard duals for their tractors and trailers Fleets Weigh Benefits, Drawbacks of Wide-Base Tires Versus Duals Transport Topics, April 13, 2020

www.eurekalert.org › pub_releases › drnl-stf080117
Story tips from the Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National …Aug 1, 2017 – Credit: Oak Ridge National Laboratory/Dept. of Energy … derived from old rubber tires, an Oak Ridge National Laboratory-led research team … Scientists found that single gallium cations are the key to increasing production of …Missing: super ‎| Must include: super

www.greencarcongress.com › 2006/06 › single_widebase
ORNL: Single Wide-Base Truck Tires Improve Fuel Economy …Jun 30, 2006 – Replacing the standard two thinner tires per wheel with a single wide-base tire improves the fuel … Interstate tests by ORNL’s National Transportation Research Center show… … We drive a new truck with super singles.books.google.com › books

Review of the 21st Century Truck Partnership, Second ReportNational Research Council, ‎Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, ‎Board on Energy and Environmental Systems – 2012 – ‎Technology & EngineeringNational Research Council, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, Board on Energy and … ORNL. 2009. Effect of Wide-Based Single Tire on Class-8 Combination Fuel Efficiency. … High Efficiency Clean Combustion for Super Truck.

www.greencarcongress.com › 2006/10 › ornl_launches_n
ORNL Launches Nationwide Heavy-Duty Truck Efficiency Test …Oct 23, 2006 – Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has launched a nationwide test of … Heavy-Duty Truck Efficiency Test; Single Wide Tires a Prime Focus … Earlier interstate tests by ORNL’s National Transportation Research Center … I have seen a few of these trucks pass me, recently, with the super single wheels.

SafetySkirt Inventor Developing Rear Reinforcement Attachment to Strengthen Rear Underride Guards on Trucks

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , , , ,

Eight major trailer manufacturers have designed stronger rear underride guards to withstand a crash test at 35 mph all the way across the back of the trailer — earning them the TOUGHGuard Award from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). This is significant because their previous designs — though meeting the current federal standard for rear guards — have been proven too weak and ineffective by IIHS.

There are about 300,000 new trailers sold every year. Some manufacturers are selling the stronger guard as Standard on all new trailers. Others are selling it as an Option, meaning that trailers may still be sold with guards known to be too weak to stop cars and save lives.

In addition, if we don’t retrofit the existing 11 million+ trailers with stronger guards — which will meet the TOUGHGuard criteria (plus side and rear underride protection) — it will be years before the entire fleet will be safer to drive around.

Fortunately, some of the trailer manufacturers have a retrofit kit for the rear guards, so that a trucking company could theoretically purchase kits to make their trucks safer. However, without a mandate to do so, I don’t imagine that will happen too quickly.

But I am encouraged by the work of Aaron Kiefer, a North Carolina crash reconstructionist who has seen so many underride tragedies that he decided to design some solutions on his own — primarily out of his own pocket and on his own time, with the support of his family who share their husband and dad with his life-saving project.

Just this weekend, Aaron installed the latest version of his Rear Reinforcement Attachment to a 53 foot trailer. Over the last five years, Aaron has been developing a design for two aluminum triangles, which are fastened to both sides of the trailer and then attached to both ends of the existing rear underride guard.

The latest version installed on September 15, 2019.

This reinforces the strength of the rear guard — improving its capability to stop a car and prevent underride. But it, also, serves as the point of attachment for Aaron’s side guard invention, the SafetySkirt — polyester webbing which can be combined with a side skirt to both save fuel and save lives.

A previous version of the Rear Reinforcement Attachment and SafetySkirt system.

You can see the SafetySkirt being tested at the D.C. Underride Crash Test Event on March 26, 2019:

We are looking forward to the day when Aaron’s SafetySkirt System can be tested at IIHS to prove its usefulness as an affordable, lightweight solution, which could theoretically be available as an option to retrofit any truck on the road with effective side and rear underride protection.

Aaron, like Perry Ponder who invented the AngelWing side guard, and countless other engineers, who should be given a green light to solve the underride problem, are amazing members of my Underride Hero Hall of Fame — along with my husband Jerry who has contributed a wealth of ideas in this underride advocacy journey.

Underride Retrofit; or, What is an acceptable number of underride deaths?

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , , , , , ,

If there are people dying from an automotive defect, would we want those cars to be fixed or left as is? If there are people dying from a dangerous truck design, would we want those trucks to be fixed or left as is — knowing that if we leave the millions of trucks on the roads as is, we are sentencing countless people to death by underride?

Is there any precedent for issuing a recall on unsafe trucks, in other words, doing a retrofit of safety equipment on an existing truck? I’m glad you asked. Yes, there is.

The first one I’ll mention is conspicuity or reflective tape. NHTSA issued a mandate for retro reflective tape to be installed on trucks and trailers to increase their visibility to nearby motorists. FMCSA issued a mandate for retrofitting of existing trucks and trailers with this safety countermeasure.

These requirements were set up by the FMCSA to help improve visibility in low light conditions and help reduce potentially fatal motor vehicle crashes into the sides or back of stopped or parked trucks and tractor trailers at night or in poor visibility.

On December 10, 1992, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration or NHTSA published a final rule requiring that trailers manufactured on or after December 1, 1993, which have an overall width of 80 inches or more and a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of more than 10,000 pounds, (with the exception of pole trailers and trailers designed exclusively for living or office use) be equipped on the sides and rear with a means for making them more visible on the road. The NHTSA ruling allows trailer manufacturers to install either red and white retro reflective tape or sheeting or reflex reflectors. This tape is commonly referred to as DOT C2 reflective tape and is thus marked for easy identification. https://ifloortape.com/requirements-for-conspicuity-dot-c2-reflective-tape-for-trucks-tractor-trailers-to-meet-federal-dot-fmcsa-nhtsa-regulations/

RETROFIT requirement for retro reflective tape on tractor trailers: Under federal requirements, trailers and semi-trailers manufactured prior to December 1, 1993 must be retrofitted with retroreflective tape or an array of reflex reflectors. The final date for compliance is June 1, 2001. . . Trailers built after the 1993 date are delivered from the factory with reflective tape and do not need to be retrofitted. Bulk Transporter, March 22, 2001, Deadline Approaches for Reflective Tape Retrofit

Another example of a retrofit involving tractor trailers, or in this case a recall, is the Strick Trailers recall of faulty rear impact guards in 2016:

Strick Trailers is recalling certain single-axle 28-foot van trailers for a rear-impact guard issue, according to a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration document. More specifically, 2005-2009 van trailers manufactured July 25, 2004, to Feb. 3, 2009, and equipped with rear-impact guards using gussets 55997 and 55998 are affected. Gussets on affected trailers can increase the chances of injury during a crash, thereby violating Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 223, “Rear Impact Guards.” Owners will be notified by Strick to have reinforcements installed to the rear-impact guards at no cost. For more information, contact Strick’s customer service at 260-692-6121. The recall was set to begin on June 17.

Side by side with the notice of the Strick recall in the Landline Magazine in May 2016 was another notice announcing that the FMCSA had issued a safety advisory for one manufacturer’s tankers due to “inadequate accident damage protection:”

Affected TYTAL tankers are unauthorized, according to the FMCSA, until repairs and testing have been completed. Effective June 1, enforcement and fines will be given to owners and drivers operating any of the above tankers that have not made necessary repairs. TYTAL has notified known customers, and repairs have begun free of charge.

It seems to me that these examples demonstrate the existence of a precedent for recalls and retrofitting rules to correct dangerous designs in Commercial Motor Vehicles which could, if uncorrected, result in death and/or injury in the event of a crash.

Clearly, a truck that does not have effective and comprehensive underride protection is a safety concern. After all, the warning label which is found on the horizontal bar of a rear underride guard specifically says so:

Failure to comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Act Standards FMVSS 223/224 (US) or FMVSS 223 (Canada) could result in injury to occupants of another vehicle in the event of a rear end collision with the trailer which, if not avoided, could result in death or serious injury.

Who will pay for the cost of the retrofitting? The ATA made the assertion, in their Letter of Opposition, that if Congress mandated the STOP Underrides Act — which includes a retrofitting requirement — then the trucking industry would be put out of business and the U.S. economy would be adversely affected:

Equipping the estimated 12 million trailers with a side underride guard, identified in Mr. Young’s testimony as costing approximately $2,900 including shipping, would equate to approximately $34.8 billion spent on underride guards. That staggering figure would result in what is likely the largest unfunded mandate on a private sector industry in U.S. history. Furthermore, when combined with the expected cost of labor in installing these guards, would exceed the industry’s annual net revenue, essentially putting trucking out of business, and grinding our economy to a screeching halt.

ATA Stop Underrides Act Follow Up Opposition Letter 6.19.19

RESPONSE to ATA Stop Underrides Opposition Letter

On what basis (what facts and formula) do they make such an exaggerated claim? The fact is that mass production will bring the costs down from the current price of retrofit kits (now at very low voluntary production). Furthermore, the industry should be well aware that adjustments can be made to spread the cost over multiple parties and multiple years.

Take as an example the increased manufacturing costs of trailers due to the tarriff on aluminum and steel and the ability of the manufacturers to share those costs with their customers.

Besides which, there are numerous other reasons to expect that this mandate provides many benefits to the trucking industry and the U.S. economy, including protecting the livelihood of truck drivers. Side guards will add additional fuel savings to that provided by side skirts. Production and installation of this technology will create jobs. Liability risk will go down. IRS Section 179 allows for tax deduction for equipment.

In the end, if we do not retrofit, there will continue to be many underride deaths for years to come. We then have to face the question, What is the acceptable number of underride deaths? And, who should decide that question? Congress, the ball is in your court.


Underride Legislation Discussed at T&I Hearing on The State of Trucking In America

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , ,

At last, truck underride was brought to the table at the June 12, 2019, Transportation & Infrastructure Hearing entitled, Under Pressure: The State of Trucking in America.

Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, Chair of the Highways & Transit Subcommittee, mentioned underride in her opening remarks (at 6:59 in this video):

Truck safety advocate, Andy Young, also talked about underride in both his written and verbal testimony to the Subcommittee members.

In this video excerpt, Chris Spear (ATA) makes a statement (at 1:09.48) in the hearing about his understanding that side guards have only been tested at 35 mph (not true):

Andy Young corrects that information (at 3:22.15 in the hearing video) and mentions that the AngelWing side guards have been successfully tested at the Second Underride Roundtable on August 29, 2017, at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) at 40 mph:

The AngelWing side guards have also been successfully tested elsewhere at 47.2 mph:

Congressman Steve Cohen, who led the way in the House when he re-introduced the STOP Underrides Act on March 5, 2019, also spoke about underride:


The truth about truck underride should speak for itself. For too many decades, the facts have been hidden; motorists and vulnerable road users have not been adequately protected from becoming underride victims.

Enough is enough! Congress, the ball is in your court. It’s time to act.


NTSB Published a Preliminary Report on the March 2019 Tesla Side Underride Fatal Crash

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , , ,

The National Transportation Safety Board, on May 16, 2019, released a Preliminary Report on the March 1, 2019, Tesla side underride fatal crash. Read it here: Highway Preliminary Report: HWY19FH008

In summary, the report says:

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) continues to gather information on the operation of the Tesla’s ADAS and the Tesla driver’s actions leading up to the crash. The investigation will also examine the driver of the combination vehicle, the motor carrier, highway factors, and survival factors. All aspects of the crash remain under investigation as the NTSB determines the probable cause, with the intent of issuing safety recommendations to prevent similar crashes. The NTSB is working in partnership with the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office during the investigation.

Previous posts on this website related to Tesla side underride crashes:

D.C. Side Underride Crash Tests, March 26, 2019 — with and without side guards:

More D.C. crash test videos can be seen here.

The STOP Underrides! Act mandates comprehensive underride protection on all large trucks. This will make truck crashes more survivable.

As a mom of two daughters, AnnaLeah (17) and Mary (13), who died from a truck underride crash in Georgia on May 4, 2013,  I know the life & death difference that strong underride guards can make (but only if they are installed on the millions of trucks on our roads) — as demonstrated by these crash test videos: The difference a well-designed rear underride guard can make and Benefits of side underride guards for semitrailers and Truck Front Underrun Protection System Crash.

People have died from truck underride for decades and will continue to do so if we do not take decisive action to make trucks safer to be around.

Government Accountability Office (GAO) Truck Underride Report Published After a Year-Long Investigation

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , , , , , , , ,

After the STOP Underrides Bill was first introduced on December 12, 2017, several members of Congress –Senators Thune, Rubio, Burr, and Gillibrand — requested that the Government Accountability Office prepare a report on truck underride guards. That report was published today and can be found here.

The online report is organized into sections, including Fast Facts, Highlights, and Recommendations. The GAO Recommendations are:

  1. Recommendation: The Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration should recommend to the expert panel of the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria to update the Criteria to provide a standardized definition of underride crashes and to include underride as a recommended data field.
  2. Recommendation: The Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration should provide information to state and local police departments on how to identify and record underride crashes.
  3. Recommendation: The Administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration should revise Appendix G of the agency’s regulations to require that rear guards are inspected during commercial vehicle annual inspections.
  4. Recommendation: The Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration should conduct additional research on side underride guards to better understand the overall effectiveness and cost associated with these guards and, if warranted, develop standards for their implementation.

Here is a 46-page pdf of the Full Report.

I’m curious what Members of Congress along with the Department of Transportation and the trucking industry were anticipating to come out of the report. What did they expect to be uncovered that we have not already been talking and writing about and demonstrating for all to see at the D.C. Underride Crash Test on March 26, 2019 — not to mention, more importantly, with the lost lives of countless underride victims?

In a nutshell, the GAO team told the National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) that  Improved Data Collection, Inspections, and Research were needed. In fact, we already knew that, in order to get an accurate count of underride deaths (and injuries), better collection was needed. We have been talking about the need for rear underride guards to be added to the Vehicle Inspection Checklist.  And the STOP Underrides Bill calls for research to find the outer limits of underride protection.

But what the STOP Underrides Bill does not do is say to wait until better data collection has been collected before issuing a mandate to install proven underride protection. That would be like saying: Wait for 14 more years of underride deaths until you have improved collection of how many people are dying and then start using equipment (that was already available) so you know how many people you could have kept alive!

The GAO Report recommends that NHTSA take steps to add underride to the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC) — a guideline to states to use for their crash report forms. However, the next version will not be issued until 2022.

If NHTSA uses this recommendation to justify holding off on underride rulemaking, then they will set us all up for a continuation of same old, same old. NHTSA might sooner or later (in 2022 when the updated MMUCC comes out) START urging states to improve their underride data collection. But then how many years of improved data will they insist that they need before they can proceed with rulemaking (which itself takes 3 or more years before it gets to the implementation phase)?
 
This is what I foresee, if NHTSA is left to their own devices (unless something else intervenes):
2022     New MMUCC
2024     States are ready for better underride data collection
2028     FARS underride data has maybe improved
2029     NHTSA issues an ANPRM to test the waters
2030     NHTSA issues a NPRM side underride rulemaking (what about the rest?)
2033     Implementation of side guard rule begins for new trucks

2043    The whole fleet will have them on (maybe).

Conservative estimate of 300 underride deaths/year x 14 years (2033) = 4,200 more needless deaths (plus catastrophic injuries) if Congress does not mandate that the Department of Transportation move forward with comprehensive underride rulemaking immediately.

What GAO recommends to NHTSA are good actions, but they fall short of an acknowledgement that people have, are, and will continue to die from truck underride unless we act decisively as a nation to mandate that the industry install equipment to prevent it.

The GAO report acknowledges that the trucking industry is waiting for a mandate before it will act. The report also illustrates how NHTSA has been less than diligent to address the underride problem. So, why would we expect that a mere recommendation to NHTSA (when they have received multiple underride safety recommendations from NTSB and multiple petitions from IIHS and others over the years) would cause them to act in a timely and effective manner to fulfill their safety mission and protect the people of this country from deadly underride?

The fourth GAO recommendation is this: The Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration should conduct additional research on side underride guards to better understand the overall effectiveness and cost associated with these guards and, if warranted, develop standards for their implementation.

What more would NHTSA need to know — than what they already know, along with what would come about through the process of issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and what they would learn through working with knowledgeable members of the Committee On Underride Protection (or COUP, as mandated in the STOP Underrides Bill), who could help them identify and understand the effectiveness and costs of underride protection?

It seems clear to me that even the under-reported 219 underride deaths, on average each year documented by NHTSA in the FARS data, do indeed warrant the development of standards for implementation of comprehensive underride protection. The side guard crash testing by IIHS and others have proven that this technology is effective at preventing underride. Therefore, I would interpret the fourth GAO recommendation as supporting the need for Congress to mandate that DOT proceed with the rulemaking outlined in the STOP Underrides! Bill. DOT has demonstrated that they have no intention of issuing rulemaking without a mandate which would force them to do so.

In my mind, the GAO Truck Underride Guards Report only confirms and strengthens my opinion that it is high time for Congress to pass the STOP Underrides Bill and get NHTSA and FMCSA started on a rulemaking process for comprehensive underride protection, which we petitioned them to do on May 5, 2014.  After years of inaction on that petition, on April 4, 2018, we submitted another petition (for supplemental comprehensive underride rulemaking) to Secretary Chao — still with no tangible action taken.

Congress, the ball is in your court.

If you want to go beyond a cursory understanding of the GAO Truck Underride Report, please read this lengthy analysis of the GAO Underride Report: Karth Cliff Notes on the GAO Truck Underride Report.

Video of the Underride Panel Discussion at the D.C. Underride Crash Test Event, March 26, 2019

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , , , ,

Safety engineers and professionals share their knowledge and thoughts in a Panel Discussion on the underride issue at the D.C. Underride Crash Test Event on March 26, 2019:

  • David Friedman, Consumer Reports, VP, Advocacy, formerly the CR Director of Cars and Product Policy and Analysis, former NHTSA Acting Administrator
  • Malcolm Deighton, engineer with Hydro, which supplies aluminum for manufacturing underride protective devices and trailer parts and which produces comprehensive underride protection technology in Europe
  • Glen Berry, Safety Director for Thomas Transport Delivery, AngelWing installed since 2017, truck driver
  • Perry Ponder, inventor of AngelWing, engineer with an accident reconstruction engineering company
  • David Dorrity, worked for Stevens Transport for years and testifies all over the country on safe trucking practices.
  • Aaron Kiefer, forensic engineer & crash reconstructionist, inventor of SafetySkirt

Moderated by Andy Young, truck litigation attorney and CDL holder.

The discussion can be viewed in four consecutive videos below.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Thank you, Perry, David, Malcolm, Aaron, Glen, David, and Andy, for taking the time to share your knowledge and thoughts on the underride problem and solutions to this deadly but preventable traffic tragedy.

Note: Video of the crash tests are available here.

Media Reports & Video Footage Unveil Highlights of the Successful D.C. Underride Crash Test Event

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , , , ,

If you were not able to witness the Underride Crash Tests in D.C. in person on March 26, then the next best thing is to see the media coverage of this important event and to view the video footage of all three tests of a car colliding at approximately 30 mph with the side of a tractor-trailer:

  1. The first crash test was into a trailer with an AngelWing side guard — SUCCESSFUL because it prevented underride and Passenger Compartment Intrusion (PCI).
  2. The second crash test was into a trailer with a SafetySkirt side guard — SUCCESSFUL because it prevented underride and Passenger Compartment Intrusion (PCI).
  3. The third crash test was into a trailer with NO side guard (as is the situation with 99.9% of the trucks on the road today) — SUCCESSFUL in that the devastating underride which occurred clearly showed what it is that the other two tests so importantly prevented.

VIDEO FOOTAGE from MGA Research of all three crash tests can be seen here:

First test into AngelWing:

Second test into SafetySkirt:

Third test with NO side underride protection:

Compilation of all three crash tests, including aerial views & views from inside the car:

Here is some of the media coverage of the D.C. Underride Crash Test Event:

MGA Research brought their high speed cameras to capture this video footage. Links to additional video will be shared when their creative team completes their work. WUSA9 had a GoPro camera inside the crash car.

Video of the Underride Panel discussion at the event can be viewed here.

  • David Friedman, Consumer Reports, VP, Advocacy, formerly the CR Director of Cars and Product Policy and Analysis, former NHTSA Acting Administrator
  • Malcolm Deighton, engineer with Hydro, which supplies aluminum for manufacturing underride protective devices and trailer parts and which produces comprehensive underride protection technology in Europe
  • Glen Berry, Safety Director for Thomas Transport Delivery, AngelWing installed since 2017, truck driver
  • Perry Ponder, inventor of AngelWing, engineer with an accident reconstruction engineering company
  • David Dorrity, worked for Stevens Transport for years and testifies all over the country on safe trucking practices.
  • Aaron Kiefer, forensic engineer & crash reconstructionist, inventor of SafetySkirt

Unsung hero of the event: Last year, on May 15, 2018 (what would have been the day my daughter AnnaLeah turned 24), after a hard day of hitting our heads against the wall in trying to convince legislative staffers to move the STOP Underrides! Act forward, I texted my son and said, “How are we going to get them to move?!” He texted back, “Hold a crash test at a field hearing.” I said, “What?!” It was a brilliant idea to let the leaders of this country, who can take action to end these preventable tragedies, witness crash testing in person!

Well, we couldn’t bring about a Field Hearing, but we quickly began the overwhelming process of organizing an Underride Crash Test Event right there in D.C.  — less than 2 miles from The Hill and 1 mile from the Department of Transportation.

Lois Durso and I, along with our families, friends and other underride victim families, want to thank the multitude of individuals, organizations, and companies (both named & unnamed) who have helped us as we work to pass the STOP Underrides! Act (S.665 & HR.1511) and bring about this amazing and totally volunteer-organized event:

Contributors to the STOP Underrides Initiative

Contributors to STOP Underrides! & DC Underride Crash Test

And I want to especially thank the skilled and dedicated Team Underride Crash Test Crew:

We also want to thank Akridge and ImPark for allowing us to use their D.C. parking lot (not an easy thing to find!), Northern Neck Auto Parts for providing the crash cars, and Sunbelt Rentals for providing safety barriers and equipment helpful in moving around the many vehicles to make the three crash tests go smoothly in such a short space of time. MGA Research captured amazing video footage, Mister Video ran the sound system, Andy Young served seamlessly as MC,  and Aaron Kiefer masterfully orchestrated the crash test crew in order to help us all see the clear-cut life & death difference which underride protection can make.

AngelWing crash car: 

SafetySkirt crash car: 

Unguarded crash car: 

We hope that this event will continue to raise awareness and that our message to Congress will grow stronger as people sign & share this petition: Congress, Act Now To End Deadly Truck Underride!

This event was brought about in memory of countless underride victims and in hopes of helping countless others walk away from truck crashes and live to tell about it. . .