Road trip to the 4 corners of Britain: by bike not car. In aid of @brakecharity @gbextremetour

So here’s a road trip and a half. Travelling to the four corners of the British Isles and some. It would be a long enough venture by car, but Graham Brain, isn’t on four wheels but two. He will cover some 1,500 miles over the next 35 days to raise money for the charity Brake.

According to Graham’s JustGiving page these are the points of particular geographical interest that his trip will take him to:

[1] John O’Groats – Lands End (the furthest distance between two settlements).

[2] Dunnet Head – The most Northerly point.

[3] Ardnamurchan Lighthouse – The most Westerly point.

[4] Ben Nevis (climb) – The highest point.

[5] Whalley – The most central point.

[6] Church Flatts – The furthest point from the sea in any direction.

[7] Holme Fen – The lowest point.

[8] Lowestoft Ness – The most Easterly point.

[9] Lavernock Point – The highest tidal flow.

[10] The Lizard – The most Southerly point.

Good luck on the expedition.

PS Though a car was once taken to the top of Ben Nevis – a Model T Ford in 1911 – Brian will be relying on his feet rather than his wheels to ascend the 4,409 feet high mountain.

Read Full Post »

Drivers distracted more by mobile phone use than drugs and alcohol

92% of all adults in the UK own and use a mobile phone. For the first time ever in the UK, mobile phone usage has outstripped land line use, with over half of all calls being made by mobile phones. The average Briton now sends 50 texts per week. The younger generation significantly more.

In recent years there has been a great deal of interest in the extent of texting whilst driving. Despite the dangers, 48% of UK drivers aged 18 – 24 admit to using short message services (SMS) whilst driving – a group already at much higher risk of being involved in a crash. This fact led the Foundation to commission a simulator study on ‘The Effect of Text Messaging on Driver Behaviour’, which concluded that texting behind the wheel impairs driving skills more than being drunk or on drugs.

Texting whilst driving – impairment to reaction times in comparison to previous studies:

Source: Reed, N. and Robbins, R. (2008) The Effect of Text Messaging On Driver Behaviour. A Simulator Study. Published Project Report PPR367. TRL

This was the first study in the UK of its kind. In all the key measures of driving performance assessed, young people who were texting were badly affected:

• reaction times deteriorated by over one-third (35%). This was worse than alcohol at the legal limit (12% slower) and driving under the influence of cannabis (21% slower);
• drivers drifted out of their lane more often. Steering control was 91% worse, compared to 35% worse when under the influence of cannabis;
• the ability to maintain a safe following distance fell; and
• TRL’s experts concluded that ‘In real world traffic situations, it is suggested that poorer control of vehicle speed, lateral position, and increased reaction times in this situation would increase the likelihood of collision dramatically.’

The best estimates are that around 1% of the total fatalities on the roads each year are related to mobile phone use. This data is not without its limitations, in particular under reporting, but it gives some indication of the consequences associated with this type of distracted driving. The use of mobile phones is not the biggest killer on the roads but today’s news that ministers are considering stiffening the penalties for the offence show that it is one being taken seriously in Whitehall.

Read Full Post »

Catching them young. Child pedestrians & road deaths. What to teach & when #roadsafety

This is, in case you have missed, is the UN Road Safety Week. Of all the worthy causes highlighted in this, that or the other, day/week the annual toll of death and injury must be one of the most important. Annually 1.24 million people are killed on the world’s roads. Of these, 22% – 270,000 or so – are pedestrians, which is why this year the UN is focussing on this group of casualties.

According to the UN:

“Pedestrians are among the most vulnerable road users. Studies indicate that males, both children and adults, make up a high proportion of pedestrian deaths and injuries. In developed countries, older pedestrians are more at risk, while in low-income and middle-income countries, children and young adults are often affected. Both children and adults with disabilities suffer higher rates of injury as pedestrians compared to their non-disabled peers.”

Today the RAC Foundation was one of those organisations which signed an open letter, published in The Times, calling on ministers to do more to encourage safe walking. It coincided with the launch by the Parliamentary Advisory Council on Transport Safety of Stepping Out (authored by Road Safety Analysis) which provides a framework of action.

Amongst the report’s messages is the need to protect children from the dangers of the road. This is something we have done our own work into. Of the points worth considering are:

• 4 and 5 year olds do not have the cognitive ability for safe road crossing. This only starts to develop at age 7/8. (Barton and Schwebel, 2007).
• Children display less safe road crossing behaviours when they are with their parents (i.e. they rely on their parents), however when unaccompanied they show more vigilant behaviour, though depending on age this might not be enough to protect them (Barton and Schwebel, 2007).
• Age 12 is a particularly pertinent age because it is when the transition from primary to secondary school is made (Platt et al, 2003). This is characterised by children gaining more independence which can expose them to greater risk (Frank McKenna, 2009).
• From age 11 it is more difficult to influence the attitudes and behaviours of young people (Deighton and Luther, 2007). From this point onwards peer influences are more relevant and important. This is why early years education is important
• School-based ‘tuffty clubs’ have been found to be less effective than parent based teaching. Here in particular it looks like parent rather than school interventions are most effective. For parents to do the best job it is important that information is available to help them know what age-appropriate information (linked to development stages) should be used. There is also a ‘modelling good behaviour’ role for parents (Towner et al, 2005).

The research done into this topic is not purely an ‘academic’ exercise. With road traffic accidents the eighth leading cause of death globally, and the leading cause of death for young people aged 15–29 years, it is potentially a lifesaver.

Read Full Post »

Older drivers…taking on the issues, driving forward the debate

Two months on from the publication of ‘Driving Choices for the Older Motorist: The role of self-assessment tools’ and one expert seminar later, what have we learnt? Where next for this important subject?

A recent RAC Foundation seminar attended by 30 delegates from Industry, Government, Academia and NGOS as well as consumer service and advice groups discussed how policy and/or research could be developed to the advantage of older drivers. The discussions from this seminar are summarised both in the info graphic above and the bullet points below.

Consensus was largely for the following:

•  Adopting a positive view of driving in older age. Enabling people to drive safely for longer was considered important, despite the frequency of public debates on restrictions and licence removal. Older drivers often fear being told that they can no longer drive and it was thought that the language of the debate needs to be more user- friendly, focusing on enabling comfortable driving and its associated practicalities. Voluntary adaptations to vehicles and training to improve driver confidence could well help with this re-orientation. Helping older drivers seek out information and other options before giving up driving looks to be an important area for further work, especially given the large and real cost to society of people stopping driving too soon.

• Encouraging medical professionals in their important role: GPs and medical professionals were thought to have a vital role in this area which needs support and encouragement. It is essential that GPs are up to speed with notifiable conditions through better knowledge of the DVLA ‘At a Glance Guide’, although balancing the delicate and important nature of doctor patient relationships was recognised. Self-assessment tools are likely to be something that GPs would feel comfortable recommending given they go with the grain of doctor, patient and family relationships. This provides an additional reason for validating self-assessment tools as discussed in the ‘Driving Choices’ report. Opticians are another important medical practitioner group who act as a trusted source of advice and information for drivers, who need to be fully engaged in the discussions.
• Keeping licence renewal at 70, with some minor alterations: Numerous changes have been suggested for the driving licence renewal system from age 70 onwards. Introducing the requirement to submit an optical certificate alongside driving licence renewals has been discussed for many years. This would have administrative implications, but some benefits also. The overall cost benefit of such a policy change would need to be fully scrutinised.
• Supporting driving licence notification system(s): A significant number older driver licence queries from family members, doctors and the police are received by DVLA every year. The UK Forum of Mobility Centres also receives many referrals and provides support for clients who undergo health checks; formalised assessment(s) and driver training. Today’s licensing rules were considered effective in helping to identify a proportion of unsafe drivers on the road network, although more could undoubtedly be done.
• Providing information and support on alternatives to the car: When driving is no longer desirable or appropriate, it is important that older motorists are confident in their ability to access alternatives. Alternatives were thought to encompass liftsharing and traditional alternative transport mode provision, but there is also scope for innovative schemes, such as trading cars for mobility credits as is seen in the US.
• Developing self-assessment tools to support driving decisions: Driving fitness amongst the country’s ageing population is a growing issue. Self-assessment tools could assist in the future. If this were to happen, further tool refinement and validation would be needed. Change blindness, hazard perception and situational awareness are important missing elements within existing tools, which would need to be further researched and incorporated. If robust self-assessment tools were developed the problem remains that self-assessment tools on their own do not do the complete job needed for keeping people safe and mobile. Questions remain around the delivery of future tools. In particular, issues around consistency, standardisation, deliverability and funding either by local authorities or other commercial ventures.

 Given that of all UK citizens alive today, it is predicted that around ten million will reach their 100th birthday, older drivers will remain an important discussion point and topic. The RAC Foundation is currently working with PACTS, the DfT and Ricability to develop an information booklet which will provide further support and advice to older drivers. We hope this will be one of many forthcoming initiatives, developed by both ourselves and others, to help support safe mobility in older age.

For further information on RAC Foundation research on older drivers please visit www.racfoundation.org

Read Full Post »

Challenging data (@PACTS #liesdamnedlies)

“Big data” may be one of the most popular buzzwords of the day, but the ready availability of masses of numbers won’t be the cure-all many people imply.

That was the conclusion I came to after a fascinating set of presentations at the PACTS conference on “Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics” at the Royal College of Surgeons.

Our abilities to measure, collect, store, geo-locate and visualise data may have improved in leaps and bounds over the years, along with the government’s interest and willingness to make such information publically available, but challenges for analysis still remain.

Presentations from experts from a range of organisations – including trade bodies, research organisations, hospitals, universities and motoring groups – showed exactly how complex making our roads safer with these numbers can be.  Downloading this stuff and viewing it in Excel is only just the start.

How do you analyse a surprising trend in accident statistics when the numbers aren’t large enough to make conclusions from them? What can you learn from crime statistics when the aggregate values don’t tally and the anonymized geo-location places a crime in a reservoir or exactly on a local boundary?  How do we reconcile what we assume to be the case with young driver road safety and mobility with the matter of growing massive claims for the insurance industry?  We can easily use data to prepare metrics for local road safety, but can we insure those metrics are actually meaningful?  And how do we keep the concerns of the motorist and the public in mind, rather than those of the stereotype?

While facilities like the Road Safety Observatory, the DfT’s English Road Safety Comparison site, the Home Office police statistics and all the good things you can find on data.gov.uk are all usefully contributions, it is good to be reminded of the care required when using these data.

Read Full Post »

Worked to death? 73,000 people injured each year whilst driving for their jobs. #roadsafety

Two hundred people are injured in road crashes each day while driving for work.

Previously unpublished data from the annual Labour Force Survey carried out by the Office for National Statistics shows that in 2011 an estimated 73,000 people were seriously or slightly hurt in accidents while travelling on company business (excluding commuting).

This is 36% of the total number of 202,000 people recorded injured (but not killed) in all road accidents for that year.

Of those hurt whilst driving in the course of their employment, more than a third (36%) are subsequently off work for more than a week.

The data was analysed for the RAC Foundation and RoadSafe by David Leibling.

According to RoadSafe – which runs the Driving for Better Business campaign – there are approximately three million company cars on the road and some 1 in 3 of these is involved in an accident each year.

In most cases people are a company’s most valuable assets. As well as having a moral and legal duty to look after employees, it makes economic sense for firms to protect the wellbeing of staff. Road accidents are the biggest cause of accidental death in the work-place.”

Read Full Post »

Taking the driver out of driving. What future for ‘autonomous’ cars like that of #Google? http://on.wsj.com/12aiodm

By Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation.

Like many people, I have watched the news clips of Google’s self-driving car in the US with amazement that it can be done to a standard that allows it onto a public road. But also with scepticism that it would be sufficiently safe in the real world and that it will ever be cheap enough to become a sensible proposition for the ordinary car buyer.

Recently the BBC’s Richard Wescott has reported on a less sophisticated but cheaper system at the University of Oxford. It is still far too expensive to justify replacing tasks that we actually find reasonably undemanding to do for ourselves—like driving to our regular place of work. But if, and when, it becomes cheap enough people will start to buy something of this kind.

It is easy to dismiss these ideas on the grounds that they will never be safe enough in the rough and tumble of the typical, busy high street. Of course, safety will have to be properly proven. But we must not forget that human drivers are not entirely safe. They – we – make mistakes. Official Department for Transport figures show that ‘driver/rider error or reaction’ was a contributory factor in 67% of fatal accidents in 2011.

Even highly-trained commercial airline pilots make errors and modern aircraft are full of electronic devices to detect and prevent or correct pilot error—or to take the human out of the system altogether.  Planes can now navigate themselves and land fully automatically even at airstrips that are not equipped with instrument landing systems. The general public driving in the chaos that is the high street can benefit as much or more from electronic assistance.

We tend to forget the extent to which electronics have already become commonplace in our cars. We take for granted engine management systems, satellite navigation and parking aids. Then there are anti-lock braking systems (ABS) and electronic stability control (ESC) which do a far better job of keeping a car under control in extreme circumstances than the ordinary driver could do.  These have already saved many lives.  Now we are getting continuous tyre pressure sensing, detection of threatening approaching vehicles at junctions and systems to implement emergency braking when a crash is inevitable. Automatic speed control is already fitted to some vehicles.

A family car just launched at an ordinary sort of price offers the following as standard: Active Cylinder Technology to improve fuel consumption, electronic parking brake, navigation systems, automatic distance control including Front Assist with City Emergency Braking, XDS electronic differential lock, electronic tyre pressure monitoring system, a lane assist camera, energy recovery to a battery during braking, front and rear parking sensors, multiple impact brake activation to reduce the chance of a second impact.

So much has changed in the last few years: people do buy all this electronic assistance if it is perceived to be good value for money. They accept it as safe—they know the liabilities the manufacturers would face if it were to transpire that they were at fault. With electronics much of the cost is in the research and development of hardware and software. Once that is done manufacturing costs can be low. So it seems that the self-driving car at an acceptable price may not be so far away after all. It will probably creep up on us before we have noticed.

 

Read Full Post »

Declining Road Casualty Rates: Testosterone, transporters or temperature? New @trllib research investigates

Casualty trends and their causes have been long discussed and are notoriously hard to explain. Understanding cause and effect is particularly tricky, a fact recognised by a new TRL report which is helping to shed new light on this complex area.

The report reiterates the often repeated fact that the number of people killed and seriously injured on Britain’s roads has fallen steadily since the 1980s. Deaths and serious injuries have largely fallen in tandem, with a divergence from 2000 onwards (See graph below). Only in 2009 did deaths and serious injuries start to converge.

But the question remains – why are death rates continuing to fall? The fall in road deaths since 2007 is clearly “good news”, but the reasons for this are poorly understood. The TRL work provides some answers indicating that death reductions are largely due to:

• A decrease in overall traffic, especially a large reduction in HGV traffic, and
• A fall in the number of young male drivers, who are typically high risk takers

The report concludes that substantial increases in pedal cycling have tended to lessen the overall reduction. Statistical models developed to look at casualty trends and the effects of secondary safety improvements within cars found that vehicle safety improvements have made a vital contribution to increasing safety throughout the decade, but the reduction of overall fatalities between 2007 and 2010 was not directly related these improvements. The economic downturn from 2007 appears to have had a beneficial effect on driver behaviour, with less speeding and drink driving seen over this time. The effect of weather on the fatality trend as recently proposed by the DfT is less certain, but it was thought possible that people may have driven more cautiously in the progressively colder winters since 2007.

These findings, particularly those relating to young male drivers, chime with those in the RAC Foundation’s recently published ‘On the Move’ report. Questions still remain about data accuracy, due to under-reporting of STATS19. But given that fatality data is thought to be largely accurate, this report is clearly telling us something new.

Read Full Post »

The use of mobile phones at the wheel. Just how big a threat is it to #roadsafety?

There is news today that by 2014 ‘every new car’ will be connected to the web. But at what cost in terms of road safety? What does experience tell us about how many road accidents are in some way related to the use of mobile phones?

For the UK, the official answer can be found in the DfT’s annual publication Reported Road Casualties GB. The latest edition of this exhaustive study of statistics concludes that in 2011 22 fatal accidents (1% of the total) the use of a mobile by a driver was a contributory factor. It was also a factor in 55 accidents where someone was seriously injured and 374 where there was a slight injury. These last two numbers are significant in absolute terms – in both cases someone was hurt, often badly – but when viewed as a percentage of these types of accidents they have been rounded down to zero.

Compare this with the situation in the US where the National Safety Council believes there is significant under-reporting of mobile-phone related incidents because police find it so hard to identify or prove use. The NSC estimates that the true picture is that some 24% of all crashes (involving injury and damage only) are related to talking on phones (21%) or texting (3%).

Is there a similar problem in the UK?

The contributory factor data comes from the completion by police officers of the so-called Stats19 form on which they are invited to give a cause (or partial cause) for an accident where they can find one.  Perhaps the police in the UK face the same problems as their American counterparts.

It is worth noting that a 2009 observational study by the DfT showed that 1.4% of car drivers and 2.6% of van and lorry drivers were using hand-held mobiles at the wheel.

Of course, accidents might not just be the result of a driver using a mobile phone, pedestrians and cyclists also use phones.

There seems little dispute that the use of mobile phones at the wheel is dangerous – RAC Foundation research has demonstrated that texting at the wheel impairs drivers’ reaction times by over one-third (35 per cent), more than being at the legal drink-drive limit and driving under the influence of cannabis – and it has been illegal since 2003. The dangers however they are measured are real. The question remains – even though it will be possible for every new car to be connected to the Internet, is it really desirable. The road safety consequences our connected society will need to be carefully monitored

Read Full Post »

Are travel plans worth the paper they are written on?

They’re been around for an age, but the latest child pedestrian casualty figures have helped put the effectiveness of travel plans – school based in particular- into sharp relief.

Travel plans can be developed for schools, companies, individuals or areas. They are essentially tools to reduce the dependency on cars and by consequence can help reduce congestion, relieve parking problems, allow for home working and minimise the impact of travel on the environment.

But the question is: are they worth the paper they are written on? A published international systematic review raises serious concerns about their validity, or at least they way their effectiveness is analysed.

A Cochrane Review looked at 17 studies into travel plans all of which analysed modal shift and one specifically assessed health impacts. The Review’s conclusion was not encouraging:

“Despite widespread implementation, there is insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of organisational travel plans for improving health or changing travel mode.”

Although not an uncommon conclusion for systematic reviews, this finding provides cause for concern. So what is the situation in this country?

Almost ten years on from the publication of the influential DfT report Smarter Choices: Changing the Way We Travel we find that travel planning is used across much of the country. Government White Papers continue to promote ‘enabling good transport choices through ‘nudge’ interventions’ such as travel plans, and in 2010 the Local Sustainable Transport Fund made £560 million available over four years to support travel plans and other sustainable transport initiatives. An analysis of the Sustainable Travel Towns project found that ‘smarter choices’ activities, of which travel planning is one, helped to reduce car driver trips by 9% and car driver mileage by 5-7% in the towns and their surrounding areas.

The Cochrane Review also touched on the impact of travel plans on accidents amongst children, saying that programmes:

“…should be implemented in the context of robustly-designed research studies, accounting for potential adverse effects such as child pedestrian injury.”

This is particularly pertinent given the road casualty stats which came out this week revealed the number of child pedestrians killed or seriously injured in quarter 3 of 2012 was up 8 per cent on the previous year (of course, school holidays would have taken up half of this period).

A 2010 evaluation of school travel plans concluded they had not had a significant effect on the mode share figures for the school run and it was difficult to assess the health benefits in terms of reduced child obesity.

None of this means that travel plans do not work, but does suggest that when we put public money into projects we need to have a better handle on what they achieve. If travel plans are truly delivering transport and sustainability goals, scheme promoters simply must find a better way of expressing the benefits. Taking another decade to do so, would be too long!

Read Full Post »