If your eyes are glazing over from my endless posts on truck safety, this one is a little different. Dawn King, president of the Truck Safety Coalition, lost her dad in a truck crash. She talks here about what she saw and experienced at the amazing Underride Roundtable on May 5, 2016. Thanks for sharing, Dawn.
Read it here (include crash test video): Crash dummy survives!
The day after the Underride Roundtable, I feel drained, exhausted. There may have been a few people whom I did not greet, but it is quite possible that I talked with almost all of the 84 participants. That, in itself was very rewarding–touching base in person with so many people with whom I have spoken via phone or corresponded online over the last few years about this underride issue.
The successful crash testing of the Stoughton trailer’s new underride guard design in the 30% offset crash area (and Wabash’s last week) — like the other crash tests which I have observed — was a bittersweet moment. Grateful for the victory! Mourning that it was too late for Mary and AnnaLeah.
Not to mention the emotional challenge of sharing our story in that setting.
And then there were the stimulating discussions and the fact that I raised my hand countless times to ask a question. Push, push, push. . . challenge, question. Surely there are some who think that I am a thorn in their side.
But when it comes right down to it, most of those tasked with the responsibility of doing something about the underride problem (thankfully) do not have that inner voice reminding them that every ounce of patience with the status quo, every moment of pausing to be thankful for that bit of progress which has been made, is torture because it feels like a compromise is being made to stop forward momentum–thus giving up on the Best Possible Protection and sacrificing the life of yet one more underride victim as the Crash Death Clock continues to tick. Tick. Tock. Tick. Tock.
With yesterday’s successful crash test, 4 out of the 8 major trailer manufacturers have passed all of the tests posed by IIHS at 100%, 50%, and 30% overlap. That means, when a passenger vehicle collides with the rear of 50% of new tractor-trailers at a speed of up to 35 mph, passengers have a better chance of survival. That is good news.
What is next? Where do we go from here?
Looks like we need to get back to the drawing board come Monday morning. We’ve still got our work cut out for us. But, now that such a diverse and large group has voluntarily gathered together for an informative and challenging time at the Underride Roundtable, it is my hope that communication and collaboration will continue and good things will come out of our day at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in Ruckersville, Virginia, on May 5, 2016.
Thank you to each one who went out of their way to participate in this memorable event. In memory of those who died too early, AnnaLeah & Mary and thousands of others. . .
U.S. can do better than simply adopt Canada’s standard on underride guards
You will find multiple links below reporting on the Underride Roundtable, which took place on May 5, 2016 at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s Vehicle Research Center in Ruckersville Center, co-hosted by them with the Truck Safety Coalition, and our family (AnnaLeah & Mary for Truck Safety).
Please note: If you are visiting this site for the first time, please be aware that the reason this Underride Roundtable was organized was because the CURRENT DOT/NHTSA underride standards are TOO WEAK. In way too many cases, even new trucks with underride guards meeting current rules (not just corroded ones) fail and allow underride by a passenger vehicle colliding with them. People die from these kinds of crashes and it has been proven that stronger guards (if required and manufactured) could stop this deadly underride!
I know about this because my two youngest daughters, AnnaLeah (17) and Mary (13), died because of this kind of crash on May 4, 2013. I was driving. A truck hit us–spinning us around so that we went backwards into the tractor-trailer ahead of us. AnnaLeah and Mary were in the back seat which went under the truck. They died. I did not.
Video and information on our underride crash
Underride Victim Information Table at the Underride Roundtable
View the entire Underride Roundtable here in two archived webcast sessions, https://event.webcasts.com/starthere.jsp?ei=1100569, including:
Underride Research, Studies, and Reports: Underride Roundtable To Consider Underride Research From Around the Globe
Media Reports on the First Truck Underride Roundtable:
Here is a brief look at the event from the law firm of Andy Young, who was the moderator of the panel discussion in the afternoon:
Like this facebook page during May and Nurenberg, Paris, Heller, & McCarthy will donate $2 to AnnaLeah & Mary for Truck Safety toward research & advocacy efforts.
Volunteers who have lost loved ones to #undderide crashes @MaryandAnnaLeah #trucksafety #underrideinitiative https://t.co/aH2L5zAHKW
— Rebekah Chojnacki (@RebekahJKarth) May 5, 2016
A glimpse of AnnaLeah (17) & Mary (13) and the crash which took their lives. . .
Around 90 people attended the Underride Roundtable today. The discussions were lively and interactions were fruitful. More reports will be upcoming in the days ahead.
View the entire event here: https://event.webcasts.com/starthere.jsp?ei=1100569
Reports on the event:
Volunteers who have lost loved ones to #undderide crashes @MaryandAnnaLeah #trucksafety #underrideinitiative https://t.co/aH2L5zAHKW
— Rebekah Chojnacki (@RebekahJKarth) May 5, 2016
I am here in Virginia waiting to go tomorrow morning to the IIHS’s Vehicle Research Center in Ruckersville for the Underride Roundtable. I wish that I was not here–not because I’m not looking forward to it, because I am. I am expecting it to help move us forward as a country to improving underride protection.
The reason, of course, is that I’m here because we lost AnnaLeah and Mary. And in the aftermath, we discovered that they might not have died if the underride guard had been stronger–more effective. But the federal standard did not require it to be so.
And that is why we are here: to change that. For somebody else.
We stopped at IIHS before going to our motel so that we could set up a table filled with handouts on the history of failed underride protection, as well as photos and mementos of Mary and AnnaLeah. Let no one forget the point of the gathering: to create survivable crashes in order to save lives.
Participants will see this reminder at our table:
|
|
|
On June 25, 2014, after a tour of the research & design center of a truck trailer manufacturer in Georgia, I wrote down these perplexing thoughts about the too-long unresolved underride problem:
Now, it is understandable, amid the multitude of demands and the tyranny of the urgent, that—without a ready solution, in fact, one which would require time and money to develop—this problem has not been given much attention. But, if those who bear responsibility for making sure that this problem gets solved (one way or another) had lost two of their beloved children—or any other loved one—I can guarantee you that they would have moved heaven and earth to find a way to prevent underride.
What makes it even more distressing is that there are many individuals and organizations, who truly seem concerned about safety, including the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), and the trailer manufacturers. Yet, from what I can see, very little communication has taken place to move this problem forward from point A (guards that fail and result in death and/or horrific injuries) to Point B (coming up with a better design that will provide the best protection possible). Underride Guards: Can we “sit down at the table together” and work this out?
From where I stood, there seemed to be no light at the end of the tunnel for this life-ending/changing problem. I had lots of ideas about what needed to be done but no sense that any thing was going to get done about it any time in the near future.
So, in trying to process what we learned at the meeting, I kept thinking over and over: Could an independent work group of qualified individuals, such as an engineering school, take on the challenge of creating such a design—which could then be tested by IHHS, proposed to NHTSA to aid in defining improved rear impact guard specifications, and provided to all trailer manufacturers? Could we do some kind of crowd funding or grant proposal to obtain the necessary funds to support such an endeavor? Could we perhaps even approach the Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association (TTMA) and ask them to seek contributions from their members for such a project?
Is cost truly not a factor? Is safety really a priority and not a competitive matter? Is it possible to improve the communication necessary to prevent more unnecessary deaths? Can we “sit down at the table together” and work this out?
I am so happy to be able to say that at the Underride Roundtable, one week from now on May 5, 2016, over 65 representatives from the trucking industry, government, safety advocates, engineers, crash reconstructionists, attorneys, and media will be on hand at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s Vehicle Research Center to”sit down at the table together” and discuss and demonstrate truck underride crashes.
This group will include representatives from:
It is unfortunate that, over the decades in which no adequate solution to this tragic problem has come about, there has been much miscommunication, misunderstanding, misinformation, and mistakes made. I, for one, am ready to encourage things to move forward with positive momentum–aiming for the best possible underride protection.
In my morning reading, I was reflecting on some verses in Mark 11, which reminded me that the outcome is not totally dependent on me or any of the others who will be gathering in Ruckersville, Virginia, next Thursday. Instead, we are to. . .
“Have faith in God. Truly I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and cast into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says is going go happen; it shall be granted him. Therefore I say to you, all things for which you pray and ask, believe that you have received them, and they shall be granted you.” Mark 11:22-24
And one more key thing, no matter what has and has not been done during the decades following the discovery of the horror of underride, we all need to forgive, put the past behind us, and find ways to work together to overcome this challenge.
“And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone; so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your transgressions.” Mark 11:25
And though we may forgive, we will never forget those we have lost and the reason we are here. . .
I just received the webcast link for the upcoming Truck Underride Roundtable at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS):
Webcast Link for Truck Underride Roundtable at IIHS on May 5, 2016
On May 5, 2016, over 65 representatives from the trucking industry, government, safety advocates, engineers, crash reconstructionists, attorneys, and media will be on hand at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s Vehicle Research Center to discuss and demonstrate truck underride crashes.
In addition, the Underride Roundtable, which will be taking place from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., will be available to watch via livestreaming–with viewer interaction anticipated. The webcast link will be provided here when it is available.
Webcast Link to the Underride Roundtable is now ready for registration for this upcoming event! Webcast Link for Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Underride Roundtable
Underride Roundtable Agenda May 5, 2016
Vision Zero Petition Book 3rd Edition
Truck Underride Roundtable is one week away! May it be sehr gut!
In order to prepare for that, I am going to highlight some past and current underride research papers and efforts here. It will, of course, not cover everything and others are welcome to send additional information my way, which I would be more than happy to add to the list.
Although most of the research below will not appear as a presentation on the agenda, I am hopeful that the information will be considered by all as recommendations for underride protection are discussed and proposed.
I had actually wanted to put together a packet of this kind of information to hand out to participants. Then I thought that it might be more useful to provide it to a wider audience by posting it on our website. So here it is.
In addition, I have prepared a feedback form to enable you to let me know what you think should be done about truck underride protection. I am hoping to get a good response and will compile any results which I receive before the Underride Roundtable, as well as after the event.
Please print my Dragon Underride Protector Wish List, fill in your answers, scan it, and email it to me at marianne@annaleahmary.com.
Although I don’t know all the names and details, I imagine that there are countless individuals and organizations who have contributed, over a span of many years, to the discussion and development of underride protection. I am thankful that we can build upon that foundation.
Here is some of the research which I have come across in my search for the best possible protection.
Update, May 21, 2016: Other Research Not Listed Below: See this post, Other Research Which Should Not Be Ignored in Current Underride Rulemaking
Australian Underride Research:
Virginia Tech Senior Underride Design Team:
Aaron Kiefer (North Carolina) Innovative Side/Rear Underride Research:
German Researchers:
34 Public Comments on the current NHTSA Rear Underride Rulemaking can be found here: NPRM Upgrade Underide.
73 Public Comments on the current ANPRM for Single Unit Trucks: ANPRM Underride Protection of Single Unit Trucks
Please note this comment in particular: Perry Ponder, Seven Hills Engineering, Comment from Seven Hills Engineering, LLC with reference to a 1969 DOT document indicating their intention to extend underride protection to the sides of large vehicles: Regulators, manufacturers, & advocates need to read this engineer’s comment on truck underride
Also, note that Seven Hills sponsored a Senior Capstone Project at FSU College of Engineering in 2010/11 to design a side guard: Side Underride Guard w/ Aerodynamic Fairing – Senior Design Fall 2010—Spring 2011
Other:
And last, but not least, out of the mouths of babes. . .
NOTE: I will likely be updating this post as we get closer to the Underride Roundtable on May 5, 2016! And, of course, I can hardly wait to post the results of the Roundtable itself!
In memory of AnnaLeah & Mary, Precious Ones whose lives were cut far too short.
Our particular crash was, of course, due to the failure (for whatever reason) of a truck driver to maintain lane and hitting our car so that we went backwards under another truck. I, and my son in the front seat with me, survived that crash. But, because the underride guard failed to do its intended job, Mary and AnnaLeah (in the backseat) experienced an untimely and unnatural end to their lives.
My question is: Should someone be held accountable for the failure of that federally-required piece of equipment which resulted in two deaths? Is the manufacturer liable to prevent someone from being killed when they collide with a truck? And, mind you, expecting them to do so would not be some pie-in-the-sky kind of expectation. It has been proven that protection is possible from much worse circumstances than are currently required.
Every time another layer of apparent deception is peeled away, I am incensed anew at what seems like betrayal. How many times have decisions been made over a span of decades that have deliberately blocked a strengthening of protection against truck underride? How many people have looked the other way? Surely this is not just a case of ignorance on the part of all persons involved.
The Judicial third branch of the government has provided little hope for ensuring that the truck/trailer manufacturer will be held responsible for the failure of their product, upon collision with it, to prevent horrible, unnecessary death. I was reminded of that unfortunate reality again, when we were in Washington to deliver the Vision Zero Petition, as the topic came up again related to our crash.
In fact, upon a simple search of the internet, I found this example of the difficulty of pinning liability upon the manufacturer:
Defendant . . . avers that despite the truth of these facts, it owed no duty to persons such as plaintiff’s decedent who crash into the rear of its trailers. . . . maintains that there is no duty to design, manufacture and sell a trailer which is “accident-proof” that is, able to protect “invaders” or “trespassers” who run into the trailer and later seek legal redress U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama – 816 F. Supp. 1525 (M.D. Ala. 1993) March 26, 1993.
What?! So there you have it. At least some manufacturers are willing to fight for their right to avoid ethical responsibility for designing their product to be safe to travel around.
Few have been able to bring about a successful judgment against manufacturers, although some have tried: See Beattie v. Lindelof, 633 N.E.2d 1227 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994); Mieher v. Brown, 301 N.E.2d 307 (Ill. 1973), but cf. Harris v. Great Dane Trailers, Inc., 234 F.3d 398 (8th Cir. 2000) (Arkansas law); Buzzard v. Roadrunner Trucking, Inc., 966 F.2d 777 (3d Cir. 1992) (Pennsylvania law); Rivers v. Great Dane Trailers, Inc., 816 F. Supp. 1525 (M.D. Ala. 1993);Worldwide Equipment, Inc., v. Mullins, 11 S.W.3d 50 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999); Detillier v. Sullivan, 714 So.2d 244 (La. Ct. App. 1998); Quay v. Crawford, 788 So.2d 76 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001);Garcia v. Rivera, 553 N.Y.S.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990); Hagan v. Gemstate Mfg., Inc., 982 P.2d 1108 (Or. 1999); Great Dane Trailers, Inc. v. Wells, 52 S.W.3d 77 (Tex. 2001).
In one case, a court reasoned that:
the manufacturer is obliged to secure the occupants of only its vehicle from that foreseeable harm: the manufacturer does not owe a duty to protect those who collide with its vehicle. See Mieher, 301 N.E.2d at 308-10; but see id. at 310-11 (Goldenhersh, J. dissenting) (arguing that the duty of care should extend to prevent unreasonable risk to occupants, other drivers, and pedestrians).
In my mind, the question remains: Does the manufacturer owe travelers on the road the duty to exercise reasonable care in designing its motor vehicle?
One author takes a look at this question:
Does a vehicle manufacturer owe a duty to design a vehicle with which it is safe to collide? The Illinois Supreme Court said no in the case of an underride accident, where one vehicle rear-ended a truck and proceeded unimpeded under its bed. The decision unleashed an ongoing debate over the concept of “enhanced injury,” where a manufacturer can be liable for defects in its vehicle that cause injuries over and above those that would have occurred from the accident but for a defective design. Illinois vehicle manufacturers have no duty to protect non-occupants who collide with their vehicles
As it stands, it appears to me that, in general, the manufacturing community is prone to protect themselves from legal impunity rather than protect travelers on the road. I would welcome the opportunity to hear differently.
So, how then do we bring about a more responsible solution to this solvable underride problem? In addition to considering how we might impact each of the three branches of our government, we have also sought for, and encouraged, voluntary action on the part of truck/trailer manufacturers–which has met with some limited success. For the most part, the manufacturers tend to take a wait-and-see attitude–particularly when NHTSA is in the midst of rulemaking–rather than take the initiative to simply go ahead and design a guard which is capable of preventing deadly underride in real life crashes.
I am thankful for the upcoming Underride Roundtable because these questions need to be addressed, once and for all. And I, for one, am unwilling to sit by and watch another underride rule be compromised so that travelers on the road continue to unwittingly play a game wherein too many people will inevitably be dealt a card with a Death by Underride sentence written all over it.
I hope that, this time around, the truth of the matter will be fully revealed and all will agree upon a comprehensive solution which offers the best possible protection. I don’t want any more people to needlessly lose their lives or suffer the unrelenting grief (complicated by anger and helpless frustration) which families like mine undergo.
