Safety with a Twang: NTSB Holds Truck/Bus Safety Hearing in Nashville
IV Quarterly
October 1999

The latest results from an ongoing series of public-private discussions on the future of heavy vehicle safety.

Under the colorful leadership of chairman Jim Hall, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) held the second in a series of four hearings this year on truck and bus safety.  This hearing, focused on collision avoidance systems, received testimony from a broad spectrum of truck and bus organizations, including the American Trucking Association, the American Motorcoach Assocation, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Mack Trucks, Freightliner, Eaton Corporation, and Detroit Diesel.  Insurance interests were represented by Lancer Insurance, with additional perspectives offered by Virginia Tech, Carnegie Mellon University, and the University of Pennsylvania.  Government activities within USDOT and the US Army were also reviewed.

NTSB’s overall intent in this series of hearings is to produce recommendations to industry, the FHWA Office of Motor Carriers, and NHTSA, and to guide legislation in Congress.  As an independent federal agency, NTSB has no power to make regulations; rather, it generates recommendations and uses its public profile to influence Congress and USDOT.  The hearing was observed by about 70 people and was covered by the local and national media (including CNN).  NTSB plans to publish a full transcript of the proceedings.

Government Role Scrutinized

NTSB members were highly critical of USDOT’s failure thus far to conduct an operational test of forward collision warning (FCW) systems for trucks, given the presence of such systems in the marketplace.  National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) representatives responded that an FCW test was currently under negotiation within their IVI program.

What functions will have the biggest impact?  Dr. Christine Johnson, Director of the ITS Joint Program Office, deferred as to a specific answer; but noted that particularly promising systems are run-off-road countermeasures; fatigue countermeasures (which affect fatalities); improved braking with EBS; and rear-end collision warning.

25% of insurance payouts for trucks are for rear-end crashes.

The possibility of a government mandate to require active safety systems was repeatedly raised by NTSB.  In response, Johnson said, “we seek to work with industry and utilize market pull; we are not in favor of  mandates.”  Industry reps generally felt that the goverment should set the direction and allow industry to implement.  August Burgett of NHTSA felt that some devices should be mandated, and some left voluntary, an opinion echoed by Max Fuller of US Xpress trucking company.

Chris Royan, President of Eaton VORAD, while against mandates, advocated a tax incentive for safety equipment.  “It’s a win-win for everyone,” he said.  A chorus of support came from Eugene Conti, USDOT Assistant Secretary, as well as John Collins of ITS America and Gary Rossow of Freightliner.  Attention then focused on removal of the 12% federal excise tax now charged on the total value of new trucks; Freightliner is actively working with Congress (esp. Senator John McCain) to eliminate the excise tax for safety systems on trucks.  NTSB Chairman Hall is in support of this initiative and offered to help.

Product Liability Simply a Part of Doing Business

How much has the spectre of litigation affected OEM product decisions?  Mark Kachmarsky of Mack Trucks replied that this is a standard part of product planning — “we sometimes offer items as a ‘delete’ option, so that customer can choose to delete it when ordering trucks, yet Mack is protected legally by having offered it.”  Gary Rossow of Freightliner said, “we do not shy away from litigation.  Our policy is to ‘build it right,’ doing plenty of failure mode effects analysis and engineering to ensure fail-soft systems.  We know we’ll be sued, [so] we defend ourselves aggressively, and we are successful.”

Insurance Industry Watching

Jack Burkert of Lancer Insurance noted that, even with the advent of truck safety systems, “there is not much change in the loss picture so far.”  The insurance industry doesn’t typically offer discount incentives, he said;  if demonstrated safety goes up, premiums go down, but typically over a period of several years.  Burkert noted that 25% of insurance payouts are for rear-end crashes.  “Handle this, and you have a 25% reduction in costs to the industry,” he noted.

Burkert stated that insurance industry accident data is better than the government’s and believes that USDOT does not have a good sense of the safety problem.  They have offered to open their files to the FHWA Office of Motor Carriers, but with no response thus far, he said.

Drowsy Driver Countermeasures Examined

Dr. David Dinges of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicinie and Bill Rogers, of the American Trucking Association Research Foundation, reviewed the latest in drowsy driver countermeasures.  Dinges said that over 70 devices are known to address this problem; these are often proprietary and no validation data exists.  His research, sponsored by USDOT, has concluded that only the PERCLOS measure -- which visually monitors the “percent closure” of the driver’s eyelids -- is valid.

Rogers described a pilot test to validate PERCLOS devices beginning this fall, which will incorporate an automatic PERCLOS camera, a wrist actigraph, and on-board data recorder, with the Assistware lane tracker in a support role.  The project was to begin with a Beta test with Pitt Ohio trucking company in September.  The 30 month study is funded primarily by FHWA and Transport Canada. 

What to do with drowsiness warnings?  “The driver is ultimate decisionmaker,” said Rogers.  Regarding the data collected by drowsiness monitors, Dr. Dinges said, “For now, throw away the data, so that drivers can accept the system without someone watching them.”  In response to Chairman Hall’s indication that there was too much research and not enough implementation, Dr. Dinges replied, “We have to go on-road with this technology and get out of the lab....  It is just like cancer research: eventually one goes beyond lab research to situations that put real humans at risk -- an essential step in finding the solution.”

Strong Interest in Electronic Braking Systems

Having seen Electronic Braking Systems (EBS) demonstrated by Wabco in Europe, Chairman Hall is a strong supporter of EBS and made it clear he wants to accelerate its deployment in the U.S.  According to Luc Werring of the European Commission, 30-60 % of vehicles in Europe have EBS; and next year all European OEMs will have it in production.  The Electronic Stability Program (ESP), an enhancement to EBS which can prevent rollovers, is expected to be available within Europe within 12-24 months, said Werring.  Rick Youngblood of Eaton Corporation noted that EBS has been slow to enter the U.S. market, as it is 2 to 3 times the cost of the current anti-lock braking systems.  He estimated that ESP is yet another 3-5 years out for the US market.

Several industry representatives said that the ideal near-term product is the combination of disc brakes with EBS.  In response to Chairman Hall’s charge to  “get on with it,” Bill Leasure of the Truck Manufacturing Association (TMA) said that  his organization has joined with EBS suppliers to propose a project addressing these issues to USDOT, which they expect to be funded.

Another approach to rollover countermeasures was described by Dr. Phil Spelt of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL).  They are working with Volvo Trucks to gather data on as-loaded roll stability on in-service trucks, measuring such parameters as torque on trailer axles and real-time weight on individual wheels.  With the data collected, they plan to develop an algorithm to warn of impending rollovers.  They are also developing an infrastructure-based approach, in which a warning is sent to the truck if speed and weight could create a rollover at specific trouble spots, using roadside beacons and/or a GPS / map data base combination.  Their data gathering test will involve three US Xpress tractors and six trailers on a regular Dayton - Orlando route, with beacons installed on I-75 in Tennessee.  Data will be collected for 3-4 months with no driver warning, then 6-8 months with driver warning to compare results.

In foggy weather, other truckers know to fall behind the bright red, Eaton VORAD FCW-equipped US Express trucks, dubbing the bright red rigs ‘Rudolf the Red Nosed Reindeer’ ... frontal collisions are down 75% among the fleet.

US XPRESS Champions IV Products

Freight carrier US Xpress operates its trucks with the Eaton VORAD forward collision warning product.  Their drivers are enthusiastic about the system, and the word has spread -- in foggy weather, other truckers know the US Xpress trucks have the warning system and fall in behind, dubbing the bright red rigs “Rudolf the Red Nosed Reindeer.”  US Xpress chairman Max Fuller testified that frontal collisions within their fleet are the most costly, and these are down by 75% with the radar system.  Starting in November, Fuller said that 100 Eaton VORAD Smartcruise units with integrated displays will be installed on newly purchased Freightliners.  US Xpress has also tested EBS and they are ready for the next step, “a good, solid controlled test done by government,” in Fuller’s opinion.

Freightliner and Mack Speak Out

“EBS, long stroke brakes, disc brakes, and collision warning systems” are among safety technology items currently in production at Freightliner, according to company spokesman Gary Rossow.  New technologies on the horizon include ACC with Eaton VORAD (as well as a proprietary approach still in development), advanced ABS and EBS to improve stability, lane departure warning (a video-based lane monitoring system which warns driver through a simulated rumble-strip sound), and drowsy driver detection using steering inputs.  Rossow noted that these subsystems can support each other; that is, the ACC radar can support lane-keeping and vice versa.

Longer term, the company’s goal is to produce a “fail-safe truck,” which intervenes when necessary to operate the vehicle, bringing it to a safe stop or steering to prevent a lane departure.

Mark Kachmarsky of Mack Trucks described new products currently under consideration, including route guidance, traffic alerts, heads up displays, night vision, voice activation, and on-board internet.  “Information overload is a concern,” he said.  “We want to ensure different warnings are integrated in a common sense way.”  Mack is also working closely with Eaton-VORAD to integrate their software with engine controller software for their ACC product.

Hall Challenges USDOT, Industry

In his closing remarks, showing overall skepticism for excessive research, Chairman Hall pointed out that research never produces a 100% solution.  “It’s important to be aggressive as we can be, to get promising safety technologies in place as soon as possible.  Government hasn’t been as responsive as industry regarding highway safety; industry is willing to innovate and test new ideas.”

[Top]

For More Information ...

... on NTSB’s activities in truck safety, contact Jennifer Hopkins at hopkinj@ntsb.gov.

[Top]