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 »

It won’t happen to me. But what if it did? Road safety in Europe this Easter and the magic number 112

Although nearly two thirds of all European car drivers feel confident to give first aid, only around 18 per cent know exactly what to do if they are the first to arrive at the scene of an accident. This is the result of a survey, EuroTest 2013,  which has been conducted by the German motoring organisation ADAC, its EuroTest partner clubs, and the Red Cross , in 14 European countries.

More than 50% of European road fatalities die within the first few minutes after an accident. This number could be drastically reduced if everyone knew how to provide adequate first aid during those crucial first minutes. So, how good is the first aid knowledge of European car drivers; and how good is yours? Would you know what to do if you came across an accident or were involved in one this holiday?

Just slightly more than one third of the motorists interviewed in the ADAC survey knew that they should ensure their own safety first, whilst less than 50% knew that the accident scene had to be made safe for others – for example, by placing warning triangles and getting those who can be moved safely off the carriageway. Again, just under half, remembered to determine the condition of the casualties or to provide first aid right away. Just over two thirds thought to make an emergency call. This is encouraging, but not good enough considering that only just over half knew the correct European emergency number: 112. Some 40% of the participants indicated another national emergency number, and around 11%  weren’t able to remember any emergency numbers at all.

The survey involved interviews with car drivers: 200 from each of the following countries: Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Finland, France, Italy, Croatia, Austria, Portugal, Switzerland, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, and the Czech Republic. The interviewees were divided into three age groups (18 to 25; 26 to 59; 60 years and older), with approximately equal proportions of men and women. They had to answer a total of ten questions, including two with practical exercises. There were no pre-defined answers, as in a multiple choice method, and most questions required more than just one answer.

Of all Europeans surveyed, the Germans had the best knowledge of the process of dealing with an emergency: more than 50% would have ensured their own safety, while about 75% would have made the accident scene safe. However, the Finns took the ‘European First Aid Crown’ because they had the confidence to give adequate first aid. About 2% of the interviewees in Finland had attended a first aid course as part of their driving licence training, with a further 75% attending a course for professional reasons. The Finns were also far more sure of themselves than their fellow Europeans with 85% feeling ‘confident to administer first aid’. Moreover, nearly all of them would have called the 112 emergency number for help. Results varied amongst other participant countries with the Czechs excelling at CPR whilst the Spanish performed poorly when trying to mitigate the effects of severe bleeding. In Italy only around 14% of participants said it was essential to try to prevent further accidents at the scene, and just 17% mentioned first aid. Amongst the Austrians there was a worrying lack of knowledge of emergency numbers with only 7% correctly identifying 112 as the correct emergency number.

This survey did not include participants from the UK so if you want to look up the answers before the next one is organised contact the Red Cross or the St John Ambulance. Both organisations regularly run short first aid courses. Guidelines for first aid and what do if an accident occurs on a European road can be found here http://eurotestmobility.com/images/filelib/First%20Aid%20Guidelines%20and%20Response%20chain_3019.pdf

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 »

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 road hogs killing off hedgehogs ? Why fewer dead animals on the roads might not be a good sign

The sight of dead hedgehogs used to be a regrettable feature of driving on rural roads in the early morning. The animals were often highlighted from a distance by foraging magpies and crows and were a common enough phenomenon that a road safety campaign for children was designed around a hedgehog family. But in recent years, the sighting of a dead hedgehog has become a more rare event .

 

According to a report, Living with Mammals, published last week by the PTES (People’s Trust for Endangered Species) the numbers of hedgehogs killed on our roads has been dropping since 2001 –  and not because motorists are exercising more care when driving on rural roads.  The reduction in the percentage of hedgehogs in overall road kill figures probably means that the hedgehog population is being affected by other factors too.

 

The State of Britain’s Hedgehogs ,published last year, drew together the findings of several surveys by PTES and others to build a picture of how hedgehog populations are changing. And this year’s report from the PTES, Living with Mammals, says nothing to allay concerns about a declining hedgehog population in the UK.  

Hedgehogs like a number of other British mammals are having a tough time. In April last year, across the UK as a whole, 80 per cent more rain fell in April than the average for the month, and areas in eastern and southern England and Wales, and eastern Scotland, were flooded. Extraordinary weather events like this, as well as general trends in climate change are having a noticeable effect on animal populations. The use of insecticides and slug pellets in suburban gardens may have contributed to the fall in hedgehog numbers, according to Living with Mammals. The use of these substances means that there is less food available for hedgehogs and it is important that they feed well before winter in order to build up their body fat to enable them to hibernate through the cold winter period. Further, the ongoing use of once natural countryside for housing and other development, the tidiness of the urban garden, and the reduction in hedges across rural land may all be driving numbers down.

Those hedgehogs that do manage to survive in an increasingly difficult environment are still threatened when they are on or near roads. The hedgehog’s natural reaction to roll into a ball when threatened is no defence against an oncoming car and significant numbers are killed on the roads. Only rabbit road kill exceeds that of the hedgehog.

So what can drivers do, if anything?

It turns out that rural roads are not only a life threatening place to be for hedgehogs but they rank amongst our most dangerous roads for humans too. Government statistics show that in 2011 (latest figures) more than 50% of road deaths on British roads occurred on rural roads. 

The Highway Code advises motorists to take extra care on country roads and reduce speed at approaches to bends, which can be sharper than they appear, and at junctions and turnings, which may be partially hidden; to be prepared for pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists, slow-moving farm vehicles or mud on the road surface and to make sure you can stop within the distance you can see to be clear. It also states that motorists should reduce speed where country roads enter villages.

It doesn’t specifically mention hedgehogs but perhaps it is time all road users thought more about the outcome of inappropriate speed in the countryside and the effect it can have on soft-bodied creatures.

Read Full Post »

Happy birthday to seat belts. Wearing of belts became compulsory 30 years ago today.

Few of us (actually, about 1 in 20 according to DfT figures) would even consider driving without wearing a seat belt, yet even though it became mandatory for cars to be fitted with seat belts back in 1965 it would be a further 18 years before we were compelled to use them (the penalty for not doing so is now a £60 fine).

So why was the process so drawn out? Part of the issue was civil liberties. The law was effectively looking to protect drivers from themselves and many believed that to force the wearing of seat belts was a state infringement of basic civil liberties. Today there are still around 1 in twenty of us refuses to belt up and those who flout the law are more likely to be killed in an accident. According to the DfT: “In 2009, of the 1,059 car occupants killed in crashes, 21% were not wearing a seat belt.”

In 2009, of the 1,059 car occupants killed in crashes, 21% were not wearing a seatbelt

Below is a brief timeline on how the seat belt law finally came about.

1970s – Various bills calling for the introduction of the wearing of seat belts were defeated in the Houses of Parliament.

1978-79 – Labour MP William Rodgers saw his private members bill get through two readings, but it had to be dropped after his party lost the 1979 general election.

1979-80 – A similar bill introduced by Neil Carmichael also failed.

1980 – Lord Nugent of Guildford, President of RoSPA, introduced a bill via the upper house. But even though it had a majority at second reading it failed for ‘procedural reasons’.

1981 – Lord Nugent tried again, this time with an amendment to the Transport Bill which would lead to a three-year trial of seat belts. This bill became law… with the amendment.

1983, 31st January – The wearing of seat belts in the front of cars came into force.

1986 – At the end of the three-year trial both MPs and Lords voted overwhelmingly to make the requirement permanent.

1989 – It became mandatory for children sitting in the rear of cars to wear a seat belt.

1991 – Wearing a seat belt in the back of a car became compulsory for all.

Source: RoSPA

Read Full Post »

#Snow and ice bring hope of road death reduction. #roadsafety

The recent bleak winter weather is likely to have reduced the number of people being killed and seriously injured on Britain’s roads.

Evidence from previous years suggests that periods of snow and ice actually lead to lower levels of traffic, lower speeds amongst those drivers who do venture out and hence less serious accidents when they do occur.

In 2010, 1,850 people were killed on Britain’s roads. The Department for Transport believes that “… sustained periods of snow and ice… in the first and fourth quarters of 2010 contributed to the highest ever fall (17 per cent) in a single year in fatalities.”

The severe weather was not repeated in 2011 and that is likely to be one of the reasons why the number of fatalities in that year rose slightly to 1,901 (which is the equivalent of roughly 5 deaths every day).

But the fluctuations in the statistics caused by the weather risk obscuring the underlying road safety picture. Although Britain currently has one of the best road safety records in Europe it is also ranked in the bottom 25 per cent of 29 European countries in terms of its vision for cutting death and injury on the road network in the future.

Data from the European Transport Safety Council suggests that Britain languishes alongside countries like Portugal, Malta, Lithuania and Belgium when it comes to an ongoing road safety strategy.

At the other end of the scale Austria, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Norway are recognised as having the best approaches to road safety.

The analysis is contained in a new RAC Foundation publication, Road Safety: A review of UK and European data.

Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation, said:

“Contrary to what we might expect, in terms of road safety the recent freezing conditions are likely to have been somewhat of a blessing. If motorists continue to drive carefully with one eye on the weather then the presence of the snow and ice could result in dozens fewer people being killed or seriously injured.”

“But ministers cannot rely on the weather to make up for shortcomings in a long term safety strategy.

“Even though we should be rightly proud to have one of the safest road networks in Europe, continent-wide research suggests we do not have in place the vision, casualty reduction targets or enforcement regime to maintain our position.

“Britain is a signatory to the UN Decade of Action for Road Safety which has the aim of stabilising then reducing global road deaths by 2020. We must lead by example, yet the government’s Strategic Framework for Road Safety published in 2011 does not go far enough.

“We would urge the government to swiftly establish robust and challenging targets to which road safety officials can work. The setting of targets focuses minds and also demonstrates to cash-strapped councils that they should make spending on road safety a priority.”

 

Read Full Post »

DfT issues new speed limit guidance & argues case for more average #speedcameras on rural roads #roadsafety

For drivers continuing to struggle with the winter conditions the speed limit of the road they are trying to travel on will be of little importance – many will be battling to move at all in the snow.

But on Friday the Department for Transport chose to publish new guidance for local authorities on the setting of speed limits. As it stands there are only three national limits:

• 30 mph speed limit on roads with street lighting (sometimes referred to as Restricted Roads)
• 60 mph on single carriageway roads
• 70 mph on dual carriageways and motorways.

But the DfT recognises that these might not be appropriate for all roads of these tpes and they allow leeway for councils to set alternative limits based on local circumstances.

Particularly the Department wants councils to:

“… consider the introduction of more 20 mph limits and zones, over time, in urban areas and built-up village streets that are primarily residential, to ensure greater safety for pedestrians and cyclists, using the criteria in Section 6.”

It also highlights the dangers of rural roads:

“In 2011, 66% of road deaths in Britain occurred on rural roads, and 51% of road deaths occurred on single rural carriageway roads subject to the National Speed Limit of 60 mph limit.”

While the document says that changing speed limits to tackle this problem is only one part of the solution, Table 2 explains where the Department envisages limits below the national standard, for example:

“50 mph should be considered for lower quality A and B roads that may have a relatively high number of bends, junctions or accesses. Can also be considered where mean speeds are below 50 mph, so lower limit does not interfere with traffic flow.”

It also has views on how these limits might be enforced on rural roads:

“While routine enforcement should normally only be considered after other speed management measures have been considered, there may be occasions where the use of average speed cameras may offer a solution through calming traffic speed over a stretch of road. The Department has received a small sample of evaluation data of average speed cameras at non-roadworks sites from some local partnerships, and this data suggests a reduction in the percentage of motorists exceeding the speed limit from 55% before installation of cameras, to 18% afterwards, and an average reduction of killed and seriously injured casualties (KSI) per km of around 69%, and of personal injury collisions (PIC) of around 38%, (not adjusted for national trends and regression to mean effect).”

A lot of ‘mays’ in this paragraph but the door is clearly being left open for councils to roll out more and more of these cameras, assuming of course they have the money.

Read Full Post »

More than 90,000 ‘drink drivers’ involved in accidents each year. #roadsafety

These figures offer a limited insight into the extent of ‘drinking and driving’ below the current legal limit of 80 mg/100ml.

Of the tens of thousands of people who do have a trace of alcohol in their blood (though bear in mind that this is anything above zero) and are involved in an accident, just over 1% are above the 50 mg/100ml limit seen across much of continental Europe.

What this data doesn’t tell us is the severity of the accidents they are involved in.

Parliamentary Q & A from Friday 9th November 2012.

Nic Dakin:To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many drivers involved in accidents in the UK were found to have a blood alcohol content of between 0 mg/100 ml and 80 mg/100 ml in each of the last 10 years. [126109]

Stephen Hammond: The estimated number and proportion of drivers and riders under the legal alcohol limit (0 to 80 mg/100 ml of blood) involved in a road traffic accident in Great Britain 2001-10 was:

	Proportion of drivers/riders below the alcohol limit (0-80 mg/100 ml of blood) ( % )	Number of drivers/riders below the alcohol limit (0-80 mg/100 ml of blood) (1)
2001	82	135,700
2002	81	130,700
2003	81	127,500
2004	79	119,700
2005	79	118,200
2006	78	111,700
2007	82	111,200
2008	81	102,300
2009	80	96,100
2010	83	92,800
(1) Figures rounded to nearest 100, since these are estimates Note: We do not hold figures for Northern Ireland.

Nic Dakin: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information his Department holds on how many drivers involved in accidents registered a blood alcohol content of between 50 and 80 mg in the latest period for which figures are available. [126110]

Stephen Hammond: The number of drivers and riders involved in an accident in Great Britain for 2010 that were between 50-80 mg/100 ml of blood-alcohol level was approximately 1,100 (rounded to the nearest 100).

Read Full Post »