A recent article from Transport Topics caught my eye. It’s all about this & that concerning side skirts on trailers (for fuel savings). Lots for a trailer buyer to consider when making a decision.
Installing the complete system takes 2.5 man-hours, he said.
Wikipedia has to say this about cost: As of 2009, a set of trailer skirts cost between C$1500 and C$3000 (US$1300 to $2700). Standard trailer skirts have an estimated payback period of ten to eighteen months, while “advanced” skirts (those that improve fuel efficiency by over 7%) are estimated to pay for themselves in seven to fourteen months.
Seriously?! An AngelWing side guard can be installed in close to that amount of time. And if side guards were socially acceptable and widely embraced so that they readily available to purchase (you know how supply and demand works, right?), the price could quite likely be comparable. Plus side guards may enhance fuel savings when used with side skirts.
So why the fuss from the industry about the cost of LIFE-SAVING side guards!?
Read the whole article for yourself and tell me why there is such resistance to installing comprehensive and effective underride protection and outright opposition toward a mandate which would require it.
. . . the tractor-trailer was backing into a residential driveway on Route 460. The tractor-trailer was blocking the road and the 95-year-old, Rufus Murry Wilson, struck the tractor-trailer on the side with his Chevrolet Silverado.
See more underride tragedies at Underride Crash Memorials.To add more information on this story or to add other underride crashes to be remembered, send an email to underridemap@gmail.com. Please use this Interactive Underride Crash Map Crash Location Input Form to provide us with accurate information . (Note: the map is currently not online; but we would keep the information for future updating.)
Note: In order to raise awareness and preserve the memories of underride victims — precious ones gone too soon — I have been writing memorial posts on what appear to me to be underride crashes. I am not a crash reconstructionist, and I do not have all the facts on these crashes; but underride should be investigated as a potential factor in truck crash injuries and deaths.
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 wouldconvince 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”?
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.
Engineers have long recognized the problem of truck underride (passenger vehicles going under trucks). They have also spent a considerable amount of time trying to figure out engineering solutions to this deadly problem.
This post will attempt to record many of the patents issued in connection with these noble efforts. It will likely not be exhaustive, so I would welcome information on patents which I might have missed.
1896 This patent for a side underride protective device for street cars was issued on July 14 1896 and cited by numerous more recent underride patents: http://www.google.com.pg/patents/US564027.
1913 A patent was issued in 1913 for a “Safety Device for Motor Vehicles” to provide underride protection for the sides of large trucks. https://www.google.com/patents/US1127241
Since that time, numerous patents have been published which refer to this 1913 patent (with the patent information organized in these columns: Citing Patent, Filing date, Publication date, Applicant, Title):
Side impact guard device for industrial vehicles, particularly trailers or semi-trailers
2012 Sapa Extrusions (inventor/engineer Malcolm Deighton) filed for a patent in 2012 for a “Semi trailer under-run protection device” which they later developed into a rear underride guard which was successfully crash tested on a trailer in April 2017. https://www.google.com/patents/USD703106
2015 Aaron Kiefer, crash reconstructionist and forensic engineer, was issued a patent for an innovative combination side & rear trailer underride protection system: https://www.google.com/patents/US9463759 Please see the numerous underride patents referred to in this patent.
The current underride rulemaking was issued as a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on December 16, 2015. Over four years ago. It’s time to take care of business. People continue to die horrific, violent, unimaginable underride deaths.
Is it time to move forward with negotiated rulemaking to hammer out practical, effective solutions for the deadly underride problem? Is it doable? Would this process enable us to overcome the stalemate between industry and safety advocates — to get the current underride rulemaking out of limbo?
NOTES ON NEGOTIATED RULEMAKING:
Declares that any agency may consult with the Administrative Conference of the United States and other individuals and organizations for information and assistance in forming a negotiated rulemaking committee and conducting negotiations.
Authorizes the Chairman of the Conference to pay, upon request of an agency head, all or part of the expenses of convening and conducting a negotiated rulemaking proceeding.
{NOTE: Apparently, this ability was later taken away from the ACUS and they are no longer able to assist in this way with negotiated rulemaking. Oh, well. Back to SQUARE ONE!}
The negotiated rulemaking process is unique in several ways from both listening sessions and advisory committees. . . a negotiated rulemaking committee’s goal is to make binding, enduring decisions that will resolve the underlying issues and, if present, disputes.
Compared to participation in hearings/meetings and advisory committees, the role of non-Agency participants in interacting with the Agency through the negotiated rulemaking process is often far more robust, expansive, and issue-focused.
An SNPRM may be issued if a proposed rule has been substantially changed from the original notice of proposed rulemaking. The supplemental notice advises the public of the revised proposal and provides an opportunity for additional comment. To give the public a reasonable opportunity to become reacquainted with a rulemaking, a supplemental notice may also be issued if considerable time has elapsed since publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking. An SNPRM contains the same type of information generally included in an NPRM. § 1.05-40 Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM).
What are we waiting for?
The AnnaLeah & Mary Stand Up For Truck Safety Petition was delivered to DOT on May 5, 2014 — one year after our crash. It called for comprehensive underride rulemaking. We’ve uncovered a lot more information since then; we’re well-equipped to participate in this process. Let’s get on with it.
A New Mexico jury found a trailer manufacturer “negligent” yesterday in a side underride fatality. “The family hopes the verdict ‘sends a message’ to the truck-trailer industry to take measures to prevent underride crashes.” Read more here.
Everyone, please call Congress at this D.C. phone no. and ask for your U.S. Senators and Representatives. When you get transferred to their office, simply tell the staffer that you want their boss to cosponsor the STOP Underrides Bill (S.665 and HR.1511): (202) 224-3121.
Thank you, Eric Hein and family. Thinking of you and all underride victims. Precious ones gone too soon. Never forgotten.
I was reflecting tonight on the three crash tests which I viewed in less than seven days in three different states with underride prevention technology designed by three different engineering teams. All of a sudden, the question popped into my head, “How much faster would we be able to get effective underride solutions available to install on trucks if everybody that is working on the problem — or even thinking about it — would truly be collaborating?”
It is totally ridiculous that we allow marketplace competition to inhibit communication and slow down the process. How many more lives could be saved if we more effectively put our heads together?
That was the original idea when we conceived of the Underride Roundtable. Are we willing to do it like it’s never been done before and make this a joint effort?
When a stronger more effective rear underride guard has been designed by a manufacturer, why would they offer it as optional rather than standard on their new trailers?! And we’re talking about an insignificant increase in cost for the improved guard, according to one guard engineer.
For that matter, why do we offer any proven safety equipment as optional on vehicles?
Some might be hesitant about the comprehensive underride protection legislation mainly out of concern over the Retrofitting Requirement of the STOP Underrides! Bill.
Ask me if I would be willing to compromise and take out the retrofit requirement! How many people might die as a result? The trailer which we crashed into is probably still on the road with a weak rear underride guard. Along with millions of others.
Why is it that they are being allowed to “get away with murder” just because it will cost the industry some money to strengthen these rear guards?
Just imagine for a moment that somebody had done something in 2008 to introduce a Comprehensive Underride Protection Bill. But let’s say that they decided not to require retrofitting; so only new trailers would be improved starting in perhaps 2012.
So the Great Dane trailer built in 2007, which we crashed into on May 4, 2013, would not have been required to be retrofitted. It would have been left with its original rear underride guard which was designed to meet the 1998 federal (current) standard and, therefore, would have been weak and ineffective.
My daughters still would have been killed! They would not have been protected from Death by Underride — despite the fact that a solution would have existed which might have prevented their untimely deaths.
So, ask me again. . . “Do you want to compromise and take the retrofit requirement out of the STOP Underrides! Bill?” What do you think?
After all, we have decades of deaths and neglect to make up.
Progress is being made on the prevention of truck underride tragedies. But we have a long way to go before comprehensive underride protection is on every truck on the road. That is why we are working hard on every front to raise awareness of the century-old underride problem — along with proven and promising solutions.
But not everyone seems to get the sense of urgency which drives us to insistently call for resolution of this issue via the STOP Underrides! Bill posthaste. That’s why I decided to create this simple graphic to drive home the point that the price we pay, as a result of our delay in taking meaningful action, is too costly to accept any further meaningless excuses:
Based on analysis by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety of NHTSA’s truck crash fatality statistics (FARS), this graphic reflects the 600 truck/car collisions which annually occur, on average, at the sides and rear of large trucks — leaving out front collisions: potential underride tragedies which we want to prevent with the STOP Underrides! Bill.
Some years ago, I noticed the way that the prophet Daniel, in Daniel 9, got on his knees and repented on behalf of his people. . . God’s people, for wrongdoing that he was not directly responsible for — appealing to God to act mercifully.
This week, I thought of that again and determined to stand in the stead of all those who have turned their backs to the underride problem — unknowingly or not. Perhaps we all play some part in not getting to the bottom of those terrible tragedies.
In any case, on behalf of all those who have not been held accountable, I repent of our country’s indifference to this preventable highway carnage. I ask the Lord to forgive our callous attitude, misplaced priorities, and neglect. May He stir up a sense of urgency that we might all take appropriate action and work together more creatively and effectively.
What are we waiting for?! Let’s get on with it! We’ve got people counting on us — whether they know it or not.
