Tag Archives: VRU

Industry Response to ACUP Report; Enough of the Bellyaching Already!

There’s no shortage of industry complaints about the definition of consensus adopted by the NHTSA Advisory Committee on Underride Protection (ACUP) — a simple majority. There’s no mention, however, of the fact that NHTSA itself directed the committee to define it for themselves. Instead, ACUP minority members bellyache about how the safety advocates supposedly took over the reins of the committee and pushed their own agenda.

It should be no surprise that industry stakeholders supported ACUP research recommendations but opposed outright recommendations to proceed with underride protection rulemaking — a stance which they have clung to for 55+ years. So, when the majority passed motions to recommend underride guard mandates, the minority repeatedly attempted to overturn the consensus decision. In so doing, they invented a fake procedural issue, seemingly to divert attention from the real issue: dangerous trucks are killing hundreds of people every year and the industry is not voluntarily doing anything substantial to prevent the senseless spilling of blood.

The trucking voice also wants you to overlook the fact that there has already been decades of research done by engineers and researchers — sometimes suppressed and often ignored by industry and government. Some members of the trucking industry are also hoping that you won’t realize that they have already spent the last 55 years doing little to solve the underride problem themselves, while at the same time, doing everything that they can to discourage Congress and the federal safety agency from proactively issuing strong underride regulations.

These vocal opponents of commonsense safety measures would like you to think that underride guards aren’t really effective at preventing horrific injuries and unimaginable ways to die, that operational issues are insurmountable hurdles, and that there are not enough people dying from underride compared to the supposedly industry-ruining, economy shutting-down costs to justify moving forward with life-preserving action. In actuality, if they could get over their short-sighted, wrong-headed thinking, they might begin to understand that the industry could realize a Win/Win outcome if only they’d stop being so bull-headed.

Some industry members are calling the ACUP efforts divided and their Report a mess and doomed. I, of course, see it differently and detail my perspective at length in my Concurrence With Exceptions Comments for the ACUP Report.

The minority contingent apparently hopes that NHTSA will not act upon the majority recommendations. That, of course, would be no surprise. But what would be a welcome surprise is for ACUP members and trailer manufacturers to attend an upcoming Underride Crash Test Event in Raleigh, North Carolina, on September 13, 2024.

And beyond that, I’d be suitably gratified to welcome industry stakeholders to a roundtable discussion after observing the demonstration of underride protection at work to protect occupants of passenger vehicles, as well as pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists. In order to increase involvement, we are considering the possibility of organizing this collaborative opportunity as a Zoom meeting.

Save the Date and plan to participate! Double dog dare you!

Waiver of Liability Form

Photo & Video Usage Agreement

Truck SIDE GUARDS: Let’s get the debate out in the open. Somebody’s life is depending on it. #VRU

The question was brought to my attention as to whether truck side guards, if they were strong enough to prevent passenger vehicle underride (i.e., probable death or severe injury), would be more harmful to pedestrians and cyclists (Vulnerable Road Users–VRU).

I didn’t know. So I asked the experts with whom I am acquainted, and this is what I found out:

  • Hi MarianneWell-designed rear, side, front underride protection on trucks, will not make it more dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists, but potentially make it safer for peds and cyclists.

    This is discussed in my truck report of 1993 and PhD,  and our 2014 paper on side underrun barriers. Side Underrun Barriers Rechnitzer & Grzetieta

    Of course, that is the point – to have performance criteria for these systems – front and side –  that include peds and cyclists.

    Regards

     Dr George Rechnitzer, Forensic and Safety Engineering
     Victoria, Australia, Website: http://www.georgerechnitzer.com.au/

    Adjunct Assoc. Professor George Rechnitzer, Transport and Road Safety (TARS) Research, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Web: http://www.tars.unsw.edu.au/

  • The other feedback, which I received from a crash reconstructionist friend who sees the aftermath of lots of crashes firsthand, was more short and to the point: “I think that stronger side skirts will save lives no matter what vehicle is in play. Would you, as a cyclist, rather bump your head on a resilient skirt (or a flexible one like mine for that matter) or slide underneath a trailer and end up looking like a pancake?”

Goodness, I sure hope that we can help shed light on issues such as these at the Underride Roundtable on May 5, 2016. Delays resulting from endless debate and/or stalling on problem-solving has already led to too many needless and preventable deaths.

Underride guard design by Aaron Kiefer 011

Aaron Kiefer’s Innovative Side/Rear Underride Guard

Hopefully, Coming Soon To A Road Near You!