Accident Reconstruction Network
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up to receive the Accident Reconstruction Newsletter
enter email:
For Email Delivery you can trust

Last Updated:


ARC Network NHTSA C.S.I.

FEATURES

COMMUNITY

DIRECTORIES

PRODUCTS

EDUCATION

MEMBERSHIP

Membership Services

Membership Information

ADVERTISING

SERVICES

Collision Magazine
CollisionPublishing.com

Collision Safety Institute
collisionsafety.net

Vetronix Crash Data Retrieval System
cdr-system.com

ARC Network - Accident Reconstruction ResearchAccident Reconstruction Network > Research >Guardrails > News Articles

Accident reconstruction research


RESEARCH LINKS
Airbags & Restraints | Auto Manufacturers | Aviation Safety | Cell Phones | Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) | Crash Tests | Defects and Recall DB | DOT by State | Dictionaries | Drunk Driving | Event Data Recorder | Evidence Management and Storage | Exemplar Vehicles | Guardrails | Gov't Web Site | Insurance Fraud | Libraries | Momentum | Motorcycles | Naval Observatory | Recalls and Defects DB | Road Rage | SUV's & Rollovers | Tires | Traffic Signs - Highway | Trucks (Commercial)

Research / Guardrails

Interstate Median Entry Crash/Fatigued Driver
Report # 178
February 1997

ABSTRACT

The nighttime crash described in this report occurred on a rural, divided interstate highway when a drowsy driver, inadvertently, allowed her vehicle to enter the median. Once in the grassy median, the now startled driver steered hard to her right and regained the roadway. In an attempt to correct this now sharp maneuver back onto the pavement, she steered hard to the left causing her vehicle to re-enter the median where it struck, in a glancing impact, a guardrail system. The car was re- directed, while spinning, back into the left inside lane and came to rest with its front blocking this lane. Due to the damage on the car’s front, all frontal lights were broken and inoperative.

Moments later, several motorists stopped on the emergency outside shoulder to render assistance. While two pedestrians were in the busy roadway, attempting to redirect traffic away from the wrecked car in the left lane, a third motorist had exited his vehicle and was standing on the emergency shoulder just south of the crash location. Another motorist also traveling in the left lane suddenly saw the wrecked car and swerved to his right to avoid it. As he lost control of his car, his vehicle ran off the road to the right where it gently struck a stopped vehicle and then it struck and killed the pedestrian. This car then came to rest in the soft berm near some trees alongside the emergency shoulder. This crash illustrates the hazards of driving while drowsy and the vulnerability of pedestrians standing alongside the highways. Also discussed in this report is the poor driving history of the drowsy driver, her utter disregard for Virginia’s traffic laws and the importance of median barriers at locations such as this crash site to protect motorists from errant vehicles which may enter the median. Additionally, this report addresses why the vehicle’s air bags did not deploy when the drowsy driver struck the guardrail.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SYNOPSIS
CRASH DESCRIPTION
REMARKS
CAUSAL FACTORS AND CONCLUSIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERENCES


VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY TRAINING CENTER - CRASH INVESTIGATION TEAM
Report Number 178 - February 1997

SYNOPSIS

  • Day, Time, Season: Tuesday, 9:46 p.m., Winter
  • Vehicles Involved: 1996 Oldsmobile Achieva, 1984 Honda Accord, 1995 Chevrolet Full-Size Pickup Truck (Pedestrian Vehicle)
  • Summary: The Oldsmobile ran into the median, struck a guardrail and was redirected back out into the roadway where it came to rest. The following Honda driver, that the unlit Oldsmobile was blocking the roadway, swerved to avoid the Oldsmobile and lost control of his vehicle. The Honda then ran off the road and struck and killed a pedestrian who had just stopped to render assistance to the Oldsmobile driver.
  • Probable Cause: The Oldsmobile driver fell asleep while driving and lost control of her vehicle. The ensuing events, including the damage to her vehicle, the blocking of one lane of interstate traffic, the abrupt evasive action of the following Honda and the Honda striking the pedestrian, were all caused by the Oldsmobile driver’s poor driving actions.
  • Significant Points: Drowsy driver, vulnerable positions of pedestrians on the interstate, poor detectability of unlighted vehicles, poor driving history, suspended driver, and the safety/effectiveness of median guardrail barriers.

CRASH DESCRIPTION

On a cloudy, dry Tuesday evening in January at about 9:45 p.m., a 30 year-old Oldsmobile driver was southbound on a major six-lane, divided rural interstate highway. The lone driver had rented a vehicle near her home in Maryland and was driving to central Virginia on personal business. She left from her place of employment approximately three hours earlier and drove on the southbound lanes of the interstate facility. At a point where the unlit highway is constructed on a generally level and long straight section of roadway, she gradually ran off the inside lane and entered the rough, grassy median at about a five degree angle. After traveling in the median for only a short distance and with only the car’s left tires on the grass, the apparently, startled driver, steered hard to her right in an attempt to regain the roadway. As the Oldsmobile re-entered the left inside lane at a sharp ten degree angle, the driver steered hard to her left in an obvious attempt to control her vehicle, causing it to abruptly travel back toward the median.
guardrail
View looking south at the crash site. Damage to the guardrail is from impact with Oldsmobile. Note tire scuff marks from vehicle just before and after collision.

The car’s right tires made a noticeable yaw mark as it sharply ran off the pavement a second time. The car entered the median and began to rotate counterclockwise, striking the guardrail located approximately 10 feet from the edge of the left inside lane. The sharp attack angle with which the car’s front struck the guardrail was nearly 20 degrees. The collision damaged the bumper, grille and fender areas, and tore head lamps, running lights and side marker lights from the car’s front end. Because the collision with the median guardrail was of a glancing nature rather than a direct impact, compounded by the pre-impact rotating of the car, the Oldsmobile was redirected back into the roadway after sliding down the guardrail. As it was deflected off the barrier, the car continued to spin until its right rear bumper corner struck the guardrail. This slowed the car and allowed it to come to a stop facing northwest with its rear wheels resting on the grassy median and its front blocking nearly two-thirds of the left inside lane. The Oldsmobile traveled approximately 475 feet from the point where it initially ran off the road to its final rest.

Within minutes after the southbound Oldsmobile came to rest, two motorists stopped alongside the outside shoulder to offer assistance. At least one of the passersby walked out into the left inside lane, attempting to direct traffic away from the car and to assist the Oldsmobile driver, who was still in her vehicle. While this was occurring, other southbound traffic in the left lane was slowing and steering clear of the Oldsmobile. A southbound motorist, driving an out-of-state pickup truck pulling a horse trailer, stopped on the outside emergency shoulder about 325 feet south of the Oldsmobile to offer assistance. This 48 year-old male activated his emergency flashers and exited his vehicle with a flashlight and flares in hand. He went around the front of his vehicle and walked toward the Oldsmobile along the right side of his vehicle (farthest from traffic). As he approached the right rear corner of the trailer, while still standing on the paved shoulder, a southbound 1984 Honda Accord, driven by a lone 32 year-old male, came upon the Oldsmobile while traveling in the left, inside lane. Because the Oldsmobile’s head lamps and front side marker lights had been destroyed, the Honda driver could not detect it until it became visible in the beams of his headlamps. In an attempt to avoid the Oldsmobile, the Honda driver (estimating his speed at 65 mph) steered abruptly to his right, lost control of his vehicle, and yawed across the remaining two lanes of the interstate. The Honda then entered the emergency outside shoulder at a sharp ten degree angle and struck, with its right front corner, the pedestrian who was standing next to his trailer. The Honda lightly grazed the right rear corner of the trailer with its left front corner as it carried the pedestrian on its hood and windshield across the emergency shoulder and down the grassy , muddy berm bordering to the southbound lanes. The pedestrian vauled over the roof of the Honda and came to rest about 55 feet south and 20 feet west of his parked pickup truck. He died instantly due to massive head and chest injuries and was found lying in the mud nearly hidden by the earthen debris. The Honda came to rest 70 feet south and 25 feet west of the pickup truck against several small pine trees. The Honda driver, although startled, was not injured in the crash. He exited his vehicle several minutes after the crash and walked back to the paved shoulder near the stopped truck. The Honda driver was not aware that he even struck the pedestrian.

The investigating trooper received a call from his dispatcher advising of a wreck on the interstate, and he arrived at the scene several minutes later. Although traffic had slowed considerably by the time police arrive, the trooper parked his police cruiser in the left lane behind the Oldsmobile, so that its flashing blue lights would be high visible to southbound motorists, affording them sufficient time and distance to decelerate and change lanes safely. Emergency personnel, including rescue squads and other troopers responded to the scene. Other motorists with flashlights and flares had stopped to assist emergency personnel. The uninjured Oldsmobile driver was assisted from her vehicle and directed across the busy interstate highway to one of the stopped vehicles as the investigating trooper arrived on the scene. She was later transferred to a police cruiser where she was questioned. Although the scene was not cleared for nearly two hours after the crash occured, no problems other than traffic congestion were experienced.

It was not until the investigating trooper was directing the motorists who had stopped on the shoulder to leave the scene that it became apparent that the owner of the parked truck and trailer was missing. When this driver could not be located, the area between the truck and the wrecked Honda was searched. The pickup truck driver’s body was found lying in the ditchline about an hour after the emergency personnel arrived on the scene. Due to the nature of his injuries, the delay in reaching him was not a causative factor in his death.

Top

REMARKS

It was determined that the pickup truck driver was en route to a border state to make a delivery when the crash occurred. Family members advised that this man, whose horse transport business required him to frequently travel nationwide, would routinely stop to assist motorists who were disabled or involved in a crash. Therefore, the fact that he stopped at the crash site to render assistance was not unusual.

The Honda driver had been visiting friends located about 40 miles north of the crash site and was returning home (about 20 miles away) when the crash occurred. He was familiar with both his vehicle and the highway. He indicated that he was driving with his car’s low beam head lamps on at the time of the crash. He stated to the trooper that he was traveling about 65 mph (the posted speed limit in this area) and saw a stopped car (the wrecked Oldsmobile) in the left lane in front of him. While swerving to avoid it, he lost control of his vehicle and ran off the road. He made no mention of seeing the pedestrian with a flashlight standing in the median just north of the Oldsmobile. He said he did not see anything except the stopped car that suddenly appeared in front of him. The Honda driver told the trooper that he had had one beer earlier in the evening. When tested with the trooper’s alcosensor, he registered a 0.02 percent Blood Alcohol Content (BAC), which was compatible with his statement.

The Oldsmobile driver had left Maryland and was en route to visit a friend when the crash occurred. She was only about 35 miles from her destination at the time of the crash. The driver told the trooper that she must have fallen asleep as she did not recall any of the events prior to her swerving out of the median. She advised that she was tired from her normal work day and she had been driving for about three hours when she wrecked. She was driving a rental car and had stopped about 20 miles back to drink a cup of coffee. While at the scene, prior to the trooper’s arrival, she was noticeably excited and emotional to the point of attracting attention to herself. A passerby (who was an off-duty police officer) suggested to the trooper that he may want to check her for alcohol and/or drug use, which the trooper did. Several marijuana cigarettes were found in her purse and when asked if she had been smoking and/or drinking prior to the crash, she stated that she had not. After she passed a sobriety test, the marijuana was confiscated, she was charged with reckless driving and possession of marijuana.

The first two motorists who came upon the Oldsmobile crash and called 9-1-1 from their cellular phones gave the following accounts of the crash. Upon seeing the car run into the median and strike the guardrail, the first southbound motorist stopped his vehicle on the paved emergency shoulder. He ran across the lanes of traffic with a flashlight in hand and attempted to reach the Oldsmobile while at the same time directing traffic around the wrecked car. A second motorist arrived at the scene and stopped on the northbound side of the interstate, also on the shoulder. This motorist, a professional truck driver, had heard over his citizens band radio that a crash had occurred at a particular mile marker and for southbound drivers to be aware of the car partially blocking the highway. Upon searching for and seeing the wrecked car, this truck driver pulled off the road and called 9-1- 1 to report the crash. As this driver was preparing to walk across the median to the Oldsmobile and while the first motorist was attending to the Oldsmobile driver, the southbound pickup pulling the horse trailer stopped on the outside paved shoulder several hundred feet south of the Oldsmobile. While this was occurring, other southbound motorists traveling in the inside left lane had to brake and swerve to avoid colliding with the Oldsmobile. Shortly thereafter, according to the witnesses, the southbound Honda, traveling in the left lane at a high rate of speed came upon the Oldsmobile, swerved to the right, ran off the road, and struck the horse trailer. The stopped motorists indicated that they did not see the pedestrian standing by the horse trailer and thought that the Honda had only struck the trailer before skidding to the edge of the woods. At that point, the Oldsmobile driver was taken to the car of the parked southbound motorist and the second crash was called in on "9-1-1".

In checking the 30-year old Oldsmobile driver’s record, it was discovered that although she had a Maryland operator’s license in her possession, her driving privileges in Virginia and Maryland were suspended at the time of this crash.. As suggested by her repeated driving infractions and subsequent convictions, this driver exhibited a disregard for authority and highway safety laws. According to her Virginia transcript, her first documented driving infraction occurred on November 29, 1987 when she caused a property damage crash in Arlington. She was driving a rental car and was not insured at the time of the collision, thus a civil judgment was rendered against her. On December 26, 1990, her privilege to drive a motor vehicle in Virginia was suspended by the Department of Motor Vehicles due to her not satisfying this civil judgment. However, between the time of this first reported traffic crash and before her first of many suspensions, she obtained a Virginia driver’s license in June 1988. This license expired in November 1995, however, it was not surrendered to authorities when she obtained her Maryland driver’s license on August 1, 1994. Her complete driving history as indicated by her Virginia and Maryland transcript is as follows:

Interestingly, her Virginia’s driver transcript originally indicated she had one safe driving point and her Maryland transcript indicated that she has zero safe driving points and zero demerits. Apparently because she was licensed in Maryland, which does not assess points for her Virginia violations on their point system, the 16 driving demerits she would have received under Virginia’s point system do not appear on her Maryland driving transcript. This driver caused the two serious highway crashes described in this report, incurred at least eight convictions, and received seven suspensions within a one year period. Yet although her driving privileges were revoked in Virginia and Maryland, she still illegally drove a motor vehicle, and was able to rent one.

Less than four months after the crash described in this report, this driver was convicted in her absence in Virginia for speeding 10-19 mph above the speed limit and driving under revocation. As it did in the past, the Virginia court suspended her driving privileges indefinitely. Given her past behavior, it seems unlikely that she will cease to drive in compliance with this order. Her driving history strongly indicates the need for some form of effective intervention and follow-up to improve (or limit) her driving behavior. This case illustrates the need for state motor vehicle departments, police jurisdictions, courts, federal highway safety agencies, and even auto rental companies to work together to identify and remove unfit motorists from our roads.

The 1996 Oldsmobile Achieva was equipped with driver and passenger side air bags that did not deploy in the collision with the guardrail. Air bags are designed for frontal impact crashes, the kind of crash which accounts for more than half of all passenger vehicle occupant deaths. According to NHTSA, air bags are designed for deployment in moderate to severe collisions at speeds of about 10-15 mph directly into a fixed object or about 20-30 mph into a similarly sized vehicle. The air bags’ crash sensor, located on the vehicle’s front near the firewall, will activate the air bags’ firing mechanism when it senses deceleration forces equivalent to a change in velocity of about 12-15 mph during an extremely short time period. Although the Oldsmobile incurred significant front end damage and its speed during the glancing type impact with the guardrail was estimated at about 50 mph, insufficient deceleration forces were exerted on the air bags’ sensor to deploy the air bag. The air bag functioned properly in this crash and was not defective.

The properly belted Oldsmobile driver remained in her vehicle during the collision and was sitting upright behind the steering wheel when the car came to a stop. As a result of being properly belted by the car’s combined 3-point lap and shoulder belt system, she did not strike the interior of the vehicle and consequently she was not injured. It is likely that had she not been belted, she would have struck the car’s interior (or possibly been ejected) during the two collisions with the guardrail and/or during the car’s rapid rotation. This crash is yet another testimony to the life saving and injury reducing benefits of proper safety belt use.

One of the primary reasons the Crash Investigation Team selected this crash for study was to focus on a highway design improvement which illustrates the effects of sound traffic engineering. The location discussed in this report is the same location of an earlier Crash Team report in which two motorists were killed when an out-of-control southbound car crossed the median and collided head-on with four northbound vehicles. An accident records check revealed that within the 18-month period prior to the double fatal crash along this 2.7 mile long section of interstate facility, at least 24 reported median entry crashes occurred. Of this number, a total of 12 crashes involved vehicles completely crossing the median, several of which resulted in head-on collisions with opposite direction vehicles. Considering the potential severity of head-on collisions, especially on heavily traveled, high-speed roadways divided by narrow, traversable medians, it was recommended that the State construct a proven median barrier throughout this section of interstate (and at other similar locations throughout Virginia). Nine years after the Teams’ recommendation, this stretch of highway was improved by the installation of a guardrail barrier. Since its installation along this section of interstate highway which carries over 80,000 vehicles a day, the risk of median crossing crashes has been reduced almost entirely. Had the median guardrail not been in place when the crash described in this report occurred, the Oldsmobile probably would have entered the northbound lanes where it could have collided with a northbound vehicle.

This six-lane rural interstate facility, posted for 65 mph, is divided by a 34 foot-wide, gently sloped, grassy median. The barrier, consisting of a double-faced, w-beam guardrail system, runs longitudinally down the median. Because of drainage, the barrier is not erected in the median’s center, but rather 10 feet from the southbound lanes and 24 feet from the northbound lanes. An analysis of crashes along this facility from January 1995 - December 1996, revealed the following: of the 200 crashes reported along this section of interstate, 97 (49%) involved a vehicle entering the median. Of this number, 83 (86%) struck the guardrail (one vaulted the barrier and struck an opposite direction vehicle head-on). Of the number of crashes in which a vehicle struck the guardrails, 63 (76%) were originally traveling southbound, which would be expected since the guardrail is closer to the southbound lanes than the northbound lanes. This analysis reveals the high number of errant vehicles which might have crossed the median had the barrier not been present. The Team concludes that the guardrail barrier has more than paid for itself in terms of crash severity reduction. Similar locations, where the potential of median crossing crashes is relatively high, should be studied and prioritized for the installation of a median barrier.

Lastly, this crash illustrates the hazards associated with driving while fatigued. According to the proceedings from the 1993 Highway Safety Forum on Fatigue, Sleep Disorders and Traffic Safety, highway crashes resulting from drivers asleep at the wheel are grossly underreported, especially in single vehicle run-off-the-road crashes. This is partly because culpable drivers are unlikely to admit to police officers that they fell asleep for fear they will be charged with a traffic violation. In many cases, drivers at crash scenes will tell the investigating officer that the reason they wrecked was due to other plausible alternatives ( someone cut me off , an animal ran in front of me , etc.) to shift the culpability. Additionally, drowsy driving is easily masked by other driver actions (alcohol use, driver inattention, etc.), so determining the true cause of the wreck may be difficult. Another factor contributing to the under-reporting of drowsy driving is that there is no measure for sleepiness like there is for intoxication.

The National Sleep Foundation estimates that as many as 30% of highway crashes are related to driver fatigue and/or sleepiness. According to the Virginia Crash Factor, there were at least 3,280 (1.4%) drivers involved in crashes in Virginia in 1995 who were reported as being apparently asleep and/or fatigued. In all fatal crashes, there were at least 59 drivers (6%) reported as being asleep and/or fatigued and in alcohol related fatal crashes, at least 697 (6.5%) were reported as asleep/fatigued. In a past special report prepared by the C.I.T. (SR#8-93) entitled Run Off the Road Statistical Analysis , it was found that during 1990-91, at least 13% of the fatal crashes involving vehicles that left the roadway resulted from drivers who fell asleep.

Most people are unaware that a drowsy driver is as potentially dangerous as the drunk driver. Unfortunately, sleep deprivation is seen as a norm in our society. It should be realized that lack of sleep and rest can seriously impair reaction time, awareness of surroundings, and ability to discern potential roadway and traffic conflicts.

The Better Sleep Council estimates that about 10,000 auto deaths occur each year due to drowsy drivers. Drivers should be fully rested before embarking on a trip and plan adequate rest periods into their travel agenda. Many drivers believe the myth that coffee, the radio, or the air conditioner will help to keep them awake if they feel sleepy while driving. Once the driver acclimates to these countermeasures, or when they are withdrawn, the driver is more sleepy than before. Once the body reaches the critical level of sleep deprivation, the person will fall asleep no matter what they are doing to counteract their sleepiness. At that point, the only remedy is sleep. Drivers should not underestimate their need for sleep or the importance of it. Motorists who are especially vulnerable to sleep-related problems are shift workers, teenagers and young adults, long haul truck drivers, and those with sleep related illnesses.

In order to better capture the numbers of crashes resulting from fatigue, police crash investigators need to look for physical evidence at crash scenes which may indicate that a driver was drowsy. Information may be obtained from the driver, witnesses and the physical evidence at the scene. Indicators of a drowsy or asleep driver are:

  • The driver having no memory of the events leading up to the collision (no remembrance of landmarks passed, which lane the driver was in or totally inconsistent accounts of the crash that do not match the physical evidence at the scene.)
  • The vehicle gradually drifts off the road at a shallow angle (usually 1-4 degrees.)
  • While off the road, the vehicle travels in a straight line over a relatively long distance with no evidence of evasive action ( i.e. braking/skidding, or steering input.)
  • Running head-on into an object with no attempted evasive maneuvers.
  • After gradually leaving the roadway, the vehicle re-enters the roadway at an abrupt angle (usually twice the angle degree at which the vehicle initially left the road.)
  • Or, once off the road, the vehicle leaves abrupt skid marks/furrows or sharp steering evidence (as if the driver is startled) although sufficient re-entry or shoulder clearance is available to safely stop the vehicle before striking a fixed object.

Top

CAUSAL FACTORS AND CONCLUSIONS

  1. The 30-year old southbound Oldsmobile driver was operating a rental car from her home in Maryland and was en route to a destination in Central Virginia. She had left from work at 6 p.m. and had driven nearly 3 hours on the rural, busy interstate facility.
  2. Although stopping approximately 20 minutes earlier for a coffee break, the Oldsmobile driver was still sleepy and her impaired condition caused her to fall asleep at the wheel .
  3. While driving in the left, inside lane on a straight, level section of rural interstate highway, the Oldsmobile driver allowed her car to gradually drift off the road to the left and enter the grassy median. As the car’s left tires entered the median, the driver became startled and steered hard to her right in an attempt to regain the southbound lanes.
  4. As the Oldsmobile sharply re-entered the pavement, causing the driver reacted by steering hard to her left. The car began to rotate counterclockwise and yaw across the inside lane, then sharply entered the grassy median a second time.
  5. While rotating counter-clockwise, the car’s front glanced the median guardrail system. This impact dislodged the car’s bumper, grille, hood, and front fenders and destroyed the car’s front head lamps and side marker lights. The car then rebounded out into the left inside lane as its rear struck the guardrail. The Oldsmobile came to rest with its front end partially blocking the left lane.
  6. While the collision with the guardrail was a significant impact to the car’s front end, the deceleration forces were not great enough to cause the car’s two air bags to inflate. This was a proper design component in the airbag system and not a defect in the system.
  7. After the Oldsmobile came to a stop, several motorists pulled onto the interstate shoulders to offer assistance. While their actions were beneficial to the Oldsmobile driver, these pedestrians were exposed to fast-moving, vehicular traffic.
  8. The Honda driver was unable to detect the presence of the inconspicuous Oldsmobile until he was very close to it. As a result of his sharp steering action, the Honda driver lost control of his vehicle and allowed it to run off the right side of the pavement where it struck a parked horse trailer and a pedestrian.
  9. No one at the scene, including the Honda driver, was even aware that the pedestrian had been struck and killed. It was not until the investigating trooper was asking those assisting at the scene to move their vehicles, that it became apparent that the pick-up driver was missing. A search was undertaken and his body was found between the Honda and his pickup. Because he died on impact, the delay in reaching him was not a causative factor in his death.
  10. The properly belted Oldsmobile driver, as a result of he lap and shoulder belt use, rode down the collision with no injuries. She did not strike the vehicle interior and remained inside her vehicle during the collision and spinning sequences of the car.
  11. The Oldsmobile driver admitted to probably falling asleep, and she exhibited typical driving-while-drowsy characteristics. She ran off the road at a gradual angle, and when she executed her evasive action, she over-steered abruptly to the right, and then to the left, causing her vehicle to sharply leave the road a second time.
  12. The presence of the median guardrail barrier prevented the Oldsmobile from completely crossing the median and entering the opposite northbound lanes where a more serious head-on collision could have occurred.
  13. The site of this crash is the location of an earlier Crash Investigation Team Report in which a southbound motorist crossed the median and struck a northbound vehicle head-on. As a result of this double fatal crash, compounded by the number of median entry accidents occurring at this location, the Team recommended the installation of a proven median barrier system. After the installation of the guardrail system and an analysis of the crash history, it appears that the barrier has been proven to be cost-effective and has prevented many other median barrier crossing crashes as well as probably saving several lives at this location.
  14. The Oldsmobile operators driving record listed many prior driving infractions suggesting a disregard for motor vehicle laws and enforcement/judicial authority. Within an eight month period, she received multiple reckless driving convictions and revocations yet she still drove. In fact, at the time of this crash, she was driving under revocation and had driver’s licenses from two different states.
  15. This run-off-the-road crash is a tragic illustration of the often fatal consequences of driving while drowsy. While the true number of crashes involving fatigued drivers may never be known because of underreporting, it is a type of crash that can be prevented. A drowsy or asleep driver is impaired in much the same way as an alcohol or drug impaired driver. Driving while drowsy is similarly unsafe because reaction times are lengthened and awareness of surroundings is diminished.

Top

RECOMMENDATIONS

  1. Those associated with transportation safety and training use the findings of this report to illustrate the following:
    • A. Motorists should be aware of the dangers of driving while fatigued.
    • B. Motorists, once aware of having run off the road, need to know how to safely regain the roadway. They should not abruptly swerve back onto the highway and should not slam on brakes, but rather grip the steering wheel tightly, decelerate gradually and steer back onto the roadway gently to safely regain control of the vehicle.
    • C. Motorists must focus their attention on the driving tasks at all times and be able to detect and maneuver around unexpected emergency situations without losing control of their vehicles.
    • D. Motorists should be aware of the dangers associated with stopping alongside roadways, even for emergencies.
    • E. Pedestrians should be aware of their vulnerability alongside roadways and especially on interstate highways where motorists do not expect pedestrians.
  2. The Virginia Department of Transportation use the findings in this report to:
    • A. Illustrate that highway improvements do save lives and reduce crash severity.
    • B. Illustrate the importance of identifying other locations with narrow medians where the installation of a guardrail could reduce the threat of cross-the-median crashes.
  3. The Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles, law enforcement agencies and judicial systems should continue to identify, remove from the roads, and properly punish and/or rehabilitate problem drivers.
  4. Rental car agencies, in an attempt to remove problem drivers from the roads and to protect their liability, should positively check to see if a customer (and any additional drivers) has a valid driver’s license. Because possession of a license card does not necessarily indicate that the driver is in good standing (i.e., not revoked or suspended), rental agencies should have a mechanism in place to allow them to access to the licensure status of renters.

REFERENCES

  • Better Sleep Council. "Vacation Daze: Drowsy Drivers Asleep On The Wheel", June 27, 1994. Alexandria, VA. Press Packet.
  • Highway Safety Forum on Fatigue, Sleep Disorders and Traffic Safety Proceedings: December 1, 1993, New York.
  • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (1996) "Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems and Their Use." Second Report to Congress. Washington DC.
  • National Sleep Foundation. (1996) "Drive Alert, Arrive Alive" pamphlet.
  • National Transportation Safety Board. (1966). Safety Study: The Performance and Use of Child Restraint Systems, Seat Belts, and Air Bags for Children in Passenger Vehicles.
  • Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles. (1955). Virginia Crash Facts. Richmond, VA.

Top

 




© 1997-2007 ARC Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
Any comments, questions or suggestions should be e-mailed to the ARC Network.

ARC NETWORK QUICK LINKS
Home | Member Home | Contact Us | Guest Book | Advertising | Web Site Design/Hosting | Locate an Expert Witness | Membership
AR News | Book Store | Corporate Directory | Discussion Forum | Education | Events Calendar | Expert Witness Directory
Newsletter | Organizations | Police Department Directory | Products Directory | Research Directory