Getting Started

The Underride Network is concerned with issues affecting crash compatibility between small and larger vehicles including all sizes of trucks and SUV's. We support improved underride guards for large trucks and trailers; on the front, side, and rear! World regulation of guards has not kept pace with technological advancements to save lives and prevent injuries. We believe truck safety and vehicle compatibility are human rights issues and governments must address these issues from this perspective to ensure the safety and well being of their citizens.

Safety begins when we acknowledge victims, without victims there can be no safety initiative, without victims there is no reason or need for safety. Governments and organizations that do not acknowledge victims provide zero motivation for safety efforts and do not promote a healthy safety culture.

If you claim to represent trucking victims, first and foremost you must cry out that after 60 years trucks still do not have functional bumpers. We spend thousands on energy absorbing bumpers for cars and yet exempt the most dangerous vehicles on our roadways. Our government and the trucking industry and representatives give no charity for those orphaned by crashes with big trucks. They will accept zero responsibility for poor safety designs over decades without change. The underride guards on a majority of U.S. trucks are the same unsafe at any speed technology they have used without remorse for 50 to 60 years of death and destruction of American families. They cry out the victims are at fault, our government claims daydreaming causes most crashes.

We have built our cars to withstand 40 mph offset crashes, safe vehicles care not about fault, they just save lives and money, day after day and year after year. A few hundred dollars for underride guards will save lives year after year and reduce the bill for insurance and health care for all of us.

Underride Network

On this Mother's Day in the U.S. we fondly remember all of those Mothers we have lost to unsafe truck and trailer design and regulation. Whole generations of families have been forced to bear the cost of these tragedies for society and the trucking industry including the auto industry. Government claims administration after administration that cost/benefit analysis demands these deaths keep occurring to reduce costs for goods and services and shipping to society. They claim service of these victims and their families to society and yet refuse to honor them or even mention them, not even to lament their loss, not even to remember them. Government makes no effort to gather charitable support for the thousands of orphaned children of these lost mothers. We honor them here, we so lament their loss, we will support those orphaned as we can. Remember them this Mother's Day.

On national press coverage of the recent Sorrow to Strength Truck Survivors Conference

PRESS PAGE - SORROW TO STRENGTH 2013

Safety advocates urge Congress to regulate the size of trucks

PR Newswire - The Sacramento Bee

Press coverage of the recent Sorrow to Strength Truck Survivors Conference in the U.S. only highlighted truck size and weight and fatigue issues. The only victims put forward were mostly fatigue victims with 100% the so-called good victims whom were struck by trucks and did not strike trucks such as the majority underride victims. They argue blame should be placed mostly on trucks but inhibit or even ban victims with any contributory fault, does this not exclude most fatal victims and seem to say they are not worth saving? When we argue fault on either side we hurt overall safety, we must strive to save victims of all crashes and this involves shared fault between road users and road and vehicle designers and law enforcement or government regulators. They presented a list of wanted safety improvements with underride at the bottom and front guards are not even on the list. Law makers will check off the top 2 items, problem solved. Truck size and weight and fatigue, new laws are put forth or already passed on these issues. Fatalities are up. A majority of both crashes and fatal crashes involve some underride, mitigation does not just include limiting the overall mass of the heavy vehicle. We have geometry mismatch between guard height and light vehicle bumper heights, we will need length exemptions for trucks to extend guards out to compensate for 75% of crashes at up to 45 mph. Most countries follow U.S. Standards and front guards are critical to prevent a million plus pedestrian and cyclist injuries and deaths worldwide. Lighter straight trucks account for a third of fatalities, checking off size and weight does not solve the problem. Fatigue is an issue for trucks and cars alike, hours of service helps, but warning devices such as better lighting and tape and both cars and trucks placing triangles when stopped on the side of the road will decrease crashes even for errant drivers or especially for errant drivers. It seems half the story is being told by both sides and we must strive to present the total picture so law makers will provide resources where they are most needed.

Exerpt below from NHTSA's recent study of underride crashes, we would add rear underrides seem to fall at 52% thus making underride an issue in the vast majority of serious crashes and an issue for an majority of trucking victims, we feel the most important issue and the only issue it seems without an lobby.

The review of LTCCS cases produced evidence that front override and side underride are a significant problem in serious crashes between heavy trucks and light vehicles. Front override and side underride were found in most of the crashes examined. Preliminary estimates from this review are that override occurs in almost three-quarters of crashes in which the front of the truck is involved, and in over half of the crashes when the sides of the trucks were struck. The results here are based on only a limited sample of serious crashes for which detailed investigations were available, but they clearly indicate that the safety problem of the geometrical mismatch between light vehicles and trucks as currently configured is significant.

Truck Safety Coalition tackles underride issue on Capitol Hill

Due to the sheer effort and diligence of a local station in Indianapolis RTV6 The Indy Channel, underride issues are receiving some coverage and perhaps more importantly have been brought to the attention of the U.S. DOT and the new Secretary of Transportation. If this was not enough, they even covered victims that struck trucks not just those that were struck by trucks. We have only seen coverage of good victims either fatigue victims or those only struck by trucks as proof that victims are not at fault. This has left out a majority of severe truck crash victims and their issues in the U.S. and has allowed poor media coverage and delaying tactic studies by the U.S. DOT to exist. Underride victims have waited 6 years for the recently released underride study by the U.S. DOT as the DOT refused to accept more extensive studies in Europe as they claimed our traffic mix was different due to more small trucks and SUV's. During this first major activity by the U.S. DOT on underride issues for at least 6 years, trucking safety groups steer coverage to big trucks. This message is loud and clear to the U.S. DOT, underride issues have zero support in the trucking safety lobby and require zero action.

The U.S. DOT will not publicly acknowledge underride victims or publish safety recommendations for better guard technology on their website. They will not pay for crash testing of current or new guard designs. We are currently redesigning our truck and trailer fleets to improve air flow and gas mileage, now is not the time to remain silent. Trailer designs implemented now will probably last for 25 to 50 years, they must include better crash compatibility and pedestrian and bicycle compatibility.

Thanks to RTV6 underride issues and victims now exist to the new administration, the delaying tactic study was not completely released in silence, underride victims and those whom wish for a more balanced and scientific approach to trucking safety with shared blame and thus shared effort required of all parties won today.

Safety advocates push for change in tractor-trailer underride guards

Bumpers meant to prevent cars from sliding under - Report by RTV6 The Indy Channel

Vision Zero - An ethical approach to safety and mobility
Safety science demands an integrated approach to safety which includes sharing blame between users and designers of the system, implementing a safety culture.

UNICAMP "IMPACT PROJECT" teaches the technical aspects of truck underride while searching for moral and political solutions. If you wonder what the "wedge effect" is, go here to learn!

OBJECTIVES OF THE UNICAMP "IMPACT PROJECT": To save thousands of lives every year mainly in Brazil (but in the whole world as well), to reduce injuries and the handicapping of many more thousands in the name of human intelligence, and to promote concepts of traffic safety.

THE ENORMOUS CHALLENGE:
A TECHNICAL-JUDICIAL-POLITICAL-SOCIAL CHALLENGE

To fight ignorance, carelessness, apathy, the negligence and omission of government agents, and impunity (ignorance being the most difficult aspect) in all segments of society, including the judicial system and the media.

New crash tests and analysis by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety demonstrate that underride guards on tractor-trailers can fail in relatively low-speed crashes confirming similar results in NHTSA's own crash tests in the early 1990s.

The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association (TTMA) had already issued a voluntary Recommended Practice in April 1994 that included all the essential elements of the subsequent NHTSA standards except for the energy absorption requirement, the new guard standard issued by the Clinton Administration was a rubber stamp of the industry guards already on roadways, even these worthless guards were exempted from large trailers manufactured prior to January 26, 1998, single unit trucks, truck tractors, pole trailers, low chassis and special purpose vehicles, and "wheels-back" vehicles. These guards were shown to be ineffective in low speed crashes above 25 mph with catastrophic failures of the guard attachment to the truck or trailer common.

PR Newswire - UNDERRIDE GUARDS ON BIG RIGS OFTEN FAIL IN CRASHES; INSURANCE INSTITUTE FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY PETITIONS GOVERNMENT FOR NEW STANDARD - Crash Tests

Truck Underride Accidents: Drivers Endangered When Cars Slide Under Trailers, Trailer Bumpers Not Good Enough, Says Insurance Institute for Highway Safety - Report by ABC News

CRASH TEST PERFORMANCE OF LARGE TRUCK REAR UNDERRIDE GUARDS - IIHS Paper in PDF

The reinforced pallet box showed clearly, that side underrun can be prevented. While the a-pillar was heavily deformed in the test with the conventional pallet box, a compatible structure was provided by the reinforced pallet box in crash tests at 65 km/h. APROSYS.

Car on left survives 65 km/h crash test with proper side guard

Reinforced pallet box side guard APROSYS

An example of truck side underride protection, it is time! APROSYS D224 Demonstration of truck side design improvements in PDF

APROSYS - Integrated Project on Advanced Protection Systems www.aprosys.com
Strategies for enhanced pedestrian and cyclist friendly design - Deliverable Report D212A/B.

Softened cone in front diverts cyclists and pedestrians.

Side and rear skirt walls

"This system works similar to the closed wheel house. Side and rear skirt walls made of energy absorbing materials will prevent the vulnerable road user to be grabbed by a vehicle passing by and reversing. The side skirt walls will cover the wheel case. The system consists of very low side guards, like KRONE Safeliner, that will reduce the risk of run over."

APROSYS D224 Demonstration of truck side design improvements in PDF

NHTSA Fatalities in Frontal Crashes Despite Seat Belts and Air Bags

Underride: the primary frontal longitudinal members of the case vehicle did not engage with the structure of the other vehicle due to a height mismatch. This results in excessive damage depth and compromise of the occupant compartment on the case vehicle. Underride becomes a primary factor if an impact at the same velocity with good structural engagement would have had a low fatality risk.

Trailer’s guard did not prevent underride: The case vehicle hit the rear of a semi-trailer or singleunit truck equipped with an underride guard. Nevertheless, there was severe underride, presumably because the vehicle ran under the guard or pushed the guard out of the way, upward or sideways. This factor and the preceding one are not mutually exclusive; crashes where the trailer’s guard did not prevent underride are also crashes with underride. But crashes with underride do not necessarily involve the trailer’s guard – e.g., they could be collisions with a vehicle not equipped with guards, or into the side of a trailer where there is no guard.

Limited horizontal structural engagement: the primary frontal longitudinal members of the case vehicle did not engage with the structure of the other vehicle or object because the impact was (1) on the corner of the case vehicle, (2) strongly offset to the point where the direct damage on
the case vehicle was outside the longitudinal member, and/or (3) with a narrow object that fits between the longitudinal members. Intrusion of various components may increase and occupant trajectory can be affected. Air bags may deploy late or not at all. It becomes a primary factor if an impact at the same velocity with good structural engagement would have had a low fatality risk.

U.S. Transportation Secretary LaHood Announces Final Rule That Bans Hand-Held Cell Phone Use by Drivers of Buses and Large Trucks Press Release in PDF.

The final hand-held cell phone ban rule can be accessed here.

It is time to adopt modern reflective colors for truck and trailer conspicuity enhancements. The Underride Network had several member activists receive awards from then President Clinton for their work for reflective tape on big rigs and trailers. We recommended then and now that flourescent colors replace the poor performing red and white to save lives. Lime green and bright orange are commonplace on traffic signs and emergency vehicles because of their superior candlepower.

Config 1 Baseline normal brakelamp on trailer rear

Config 2 Octagonal flourescent reflective warnings on trailer rear

NHTSA The Effectiveness of Underride Guards for Heavy Trailers (PDF)
NHTSA mandates that all trailers with GVWR of 10,000 pounds or greater manufactured on or after January 26, 1998, be equipped with an underride guard. The dimensional requirements are specified in FMVSS No. 224 (Rear Impact Protection), while the strength testing and energy absorption requirements are outlined in FMVSS No. 223 (Rear Impact Guard).

The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association (TTMA) issued a voluntary Recommended Practice RP 92-94, Rear Impact Guard and Protection in April 1994, including the dimensional requirements of the subsequent NHTSA standard (FMVSS 224) but lacking the energy absorption requirement (FMVSS 223). From 1952, to 1998, trailers and semitrailers were Federally regulated by Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations that mandated rear impact guards, but allowed substantially smaller guards than the NHTSA standard and the TTMA recommended practice. These standards also allowed the guards to be set further from the rear of the trailer and imposed no strength tests on the guards.

Several data sources were analyzed to determine the effectiveness of FMVSS-compliant underride guards, relative to the guards in use prior to model year 1994, in terms of preventing fatalities and serious injuries. Using the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), it was not possible to determine a reduction in passenger vehicle fatalities. The model year of the trailer is not recorded in FARS, thus no precise analysis can be performed in terms of the type of underride guard on the trailer. The total number of passenger vehicle fatalities when rear-ending a tractor-trailer has not decreased over the years in terms of total number of fatalities, percentage of fatalities in rear-end impacts relative to other passenger vehicle fatalities involved in tractor-trailer accidents, or in number of fatal crashes per 1,000 total crashes.

Motorcycles and Truck crash compatibility

MOTORIDERSAFETY.ORG - http://www.motoridersafety.org/page1.php Motorcycle safety and underride crashes. Safety videos and personal stories.

NHTSA evaluated the effectiveness of the new rear impact guard safety standard in 2004. They have no current or future plans posted for rear underride guards or underride victims! They do not allow mentioning that underride or trucking victims even exist, which blocks efforts at any type of charitable assistance to seriously injured children or those orphaned by these easily fixed crashes.

Truck Underride Guards plans at NHTSA - Description: Analysis of frontal fatalities for those with air bags and wearing seat belts showed truck underride as the third largest group of fatalities behind extreme severity crashes and corner/oblique impacts. Evaluation shows more severe intrusion in offset crashes. The agency will assess research data and decide on the next steps. Next milestone: agency decision in 2012.

Results from VC-COMPAT Project show underride deaths can be reduced!

The analysis revealed that about 11 % of the fatally and 30 % of the seriously injured car occupants could be saved if trucks were equipped with energy absorbing front underrun protection systems (e.a. FUPS) instead of rigid FUPS, and that approximately 57 % of the fatalities and 67 % of seriously injured could be prevented from their injures due to improved rear underrun protection systems (RUPS). The report closes up with the major conclusion that improving rear underrun protection systems show a comparable reduction potential as for improving front underrun protection systems.

"The size of an energy-absorbing truck front structure directly correlates to the survivable closing speed between car and truck in head-on collisions (e.g. 75 km/h survivable closing speed requires a 400 mm long energy-absorbing structure, 90 km/h, requires 800 mm)."

From Volvo Report

FINAL REPORT OF HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES WORKING GROUP - PDF

Road traffic crashes kill 1.2 million people a year or an average of 3242 people every day. Road traffic crashes injure or disable between 20 million and 50 million people a year. Road traffic crashes rank as the 11th leading cause of death and account for 2.1% of all deaths globally. Most of the victims are young and classified as vulnerable road users (pedestrians, cyclists, and bicyclists). Current projections indicate fatalities will rise to 2 million per year by 2020. We are in the midst of a world crisis and vehicles designed to be crash compatible with vulnerable road users will be a critical part of the solution.

World Health Organization global traffic safety

APROSYS - Integrated Project on Advanced Protection Systems www.aprosys.com
Strategies for enhanced pedestrian and cyclist friendly design - Deliverable Report D212A/B.

Buses must also be compatible with cars and trucks, especially in crowded urban environments. School buses in the U.S. are infamous for their high rear overhangs and lack of seat belt protection.
MASS TRANSIT BUS-VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY EVALUATIONS DURING FRONTAL AND REAR COLLISIONS.

Quote from the Highway Safety Desk Book:

"The Washington State Department of Transportation has stated, "Millions of dollars are spent each year to make highways safer and the roadside features more forgiving to errant drivers. Why, then, do we tolerate parked or abandoned vehicles to remain along our highways for extended periods of time? We have designed standards that require a 'clear zone' on limited access highways. Nothing can be placed in this zone without providing protection to the motorist in the form of a guardrail, barrier, crash cushions, or break-away supports. Yet, we allow heavy vehicles to stand a few feet or even inches from the traveled lanes"

Killer Parked Trucks

During the 1990's even NHTSA's own engineers were sounding the alarm bells! A new guard regulation was being promulgated for the first time in the U.S. since 1953, the reach of this regulation was limited to certain trailers only, excluding the majority single-unit trucks. Crash tests were performed only at 30 m.p.h. (48 km/h) perhaps showing the lack of confidence in their own proposal or to hide lack of performance at higher more common crash speeds. Trailer heights were not standard, real world tests were limited, and only eight tests were performed for a standard to protect tens of thousands of lives. Testimony against this standard was almost completely unanimous from politicians, safety groups, victims, and the non-industry engineering community. Crash tests had clearly shown stronger guards would be needed for real world crashes. NHTSA knew minimally compliant guards under their proposal would only be reasonably completely effective at around 25 m.p.h. (40 kp/h). Curiously, many industry guards on the roadway since the early 90's would already meet this standard? We saw the beginnings of so-called public private partnerships during this period within government agencies (See the article above for more on this topic!) The current administration has delayed studies that preclude new regulation efforts to the end of their administration. People continue dying! See the article below for an analysis of the current standards during the late 90's.

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-01/Esv/esv16/98S4O09.PDF

NHTSA in 1991 stated "Rear impacts involving underride, which are virtually all PCI, have the highest severe injury rate, from 25-28 percent of all injuries sustained in rear end crashes. Without doubt, the great majority of these serious injuries occur above 30 mph, especially when one acknowledges the fact that two-thirds of all rear impact closing speeds are judged to exceed 30 mph. It is not surprising that severe injury production would be inordinately high in rear impacts by passenger cars given the statistical anomaly that over 50% of combination truck rear underride crashes by passenger vehicles occurred with big rigs that were stopped on the shoulders of high speed highways." The current U.S. guard standards were acknowledged to be effective to 30 mph, a 40 mph standard was acknowledged to be feasible, but was overuled as not cost-effective due to a 40% higher cost for the stronger guards. Modern cars can withstand a 40 mph impact into a stiff wall but an impact with current U.S. underride guards above 25 mph can often be fatal.

See: Killer Parked Trucks

VC-COMPAT - Vehicle Crash Compatibility Project in EC 5th Framework Programmeand see what can be accomplished when the public safety is placed first ahead of industry short-term economics. Presentations presented at the Final Workshop of the VC-COMPAT project, 17 and 18 October 2006 are available for download at this link:

http://vc-compat.rtdproject.net/ .

We know how to reduce 50% of truck related fatalities. There oughta be a law!

In the U.S. the most effective means to reduce fatalities and injuries by the largest numbers is not even discussed let alone allocated research dollars.

Picture - HINO Motors Concept Truck

800 mm front crash cushion
Rounded corners to divert vehicles in crashes
Soft front protects pedestrians and cyclists
improved visibility
Outerframe side protection
Flat side with no sharp angles to spread energy
Covered side improves airflow and mileage
Corners protected for offset crashes
Rear energy absorbing guard
Fatalities of all types of road users vastly reduced

Krone Safeliner with outer frame side underride protection

Stronger guard due to full frame design
Protects rear corners
Softens crashes into tires

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) found that newer SUVs with bumpers lowered by only a half inch reduced the fatality rate in side impacts with cars by 50%. They found similar results with front underride guards on SUVs. Regulating the heights of bumpers and requiring guards on large pickups, vans, and SUVs will save many lives. Governments are long overdue to address the vehicle crash compatibility issue in at least this minimal way. Right now cars may absorb 90% of the crash energy in crashes with heavier vehicles to the detriment of their passengers. When a heavy vehicle is manufactured there is a moral obligation to have it absorb it's fair share of the excess crash energy that it's heavier weight creates!

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) FIRST RESULTS OF NEW CRASH TESTS: MOST CAR BUMPERS DON’T WORK IN LOW-SPEED CRASHES; 3 CARS SUSTAIN $4,500 DAMAGE IN 6 MPH TEST WHILE OLD FORD ESCORT SUSTAINS LITTLE DAMAGE

IIHS Press Release

Guillotine Guard

In 2008, the U.S. still allows deadly guillotine guards on the backs of all single-unit trucks and many specialty trailers, including all trailers built prior to 1998. Is this 1952 safety regulation the best the U.S. government can achieve after 55 years, and why are car companies building trucks with 56 year old technology? These guards have no strength standard whatsoever, they can be 30 inches from the ground, 18 inches from the sides of the truck, and 24 inches in from the back side of the truck or trailer. The regulation states "The rear impact guard(s) must be substantially constructed and attached by means of bolts, welding, or other comparable means." Thin aluminum will do! These false guards do not prevent underride even at low speeds and cannot be considered state-of-the-art in civil litigation. They constitute false truck safety and should be removed and replaced from all vehicles before they kill thousands of additional victims.

It is clear to achieve substantial reductions in the number of severe injury and fatal crashes a FUP standard will be required in the U.S. The U.S. DOT should immediately harmonize a new U.S. FUP standard for new trucks to the current ECE Regulation No. 93 and allow length exemptions for extended underride devices. Work then must begin on a strong energy-absorbing guard standard meeting current state-of-the-art research standards.

ECE R93 The European Front Underrun Protection Device Regulation PDF Document.

The current stiff rear underride guard standards are a safety compromise that do not protect all sizes and weights of current vehicles. They ultimately are too stiff for small vehicles or are too weak for large vehicles. Only energy-absorbing guards provide protection for most sizes and weights of current vehicles and modern designs are cheap and simple to implement. Any new rear underride guard standard should be an energy-absorbing guard standard to reflect state-of-the-art research and interact properly with modern vehicle designs.

The U.S. must regulate the use of bull bars or cow catchers on the front of cars and trucks. These stiff mostly cosmetic vehicle protection devices increase the aggressivity of vehicles in a crash and pose a severe risk to pedestrians and cyclists. Europe regulates the aggressivity of these devices with Directive 2005/66/EC .

The crash compatibility of all vehicles is a human right!

The Underride Network wishes to thank Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways for their generosity in providing underride safety related articles from the CRASH archives.

Copyright of articles or documents belong to the author or source unless otherwise noted, articles are for personal information only and for-profit use is prohibited, please contact the author for other uses. U.S. Government information is in the public domain.

The Underride Network respects privacy rights and does not share or sell personal information with other parties without expressed prior permission. We do not endorse private companies or products.

The Underride Network does not lobby, give gifts, or make donations to politicians or political organizations. Lobbying only leads to political corruption. We believe an educated public is the best lobby.

The Underride Network strives to insure the accuracy of data and statistical information, these pages are for personal educational use, for research or professional use please insure accuracy at the source.

Truck Safety is a Human Rights issue.

Governments will be judged on the value they place on the lives of their citizens.

Web Site sponsored by R.R. Crawford Engineering

Weak underride guards make car-into-truck crashes deadly - CNN IREPORT

Sorrow to Strength Truck Crash Survivors Conference in Washington D.C. May 4th thru May 7th

Heavy-Vehicle Crash Data Collection and Analysis to Characterize Rear and Side Underride and Front Override in Fatal Truck Crashes, DOT HS 811 725, March 2013

Analysis of Rear Underride in Fatal Truck Crashes, DOT HS 811 652 August 2012

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10200736438949337 Indiana station RTV6 airing special on underride guards

NHTSA - Vehicle Aggressivity and Fleet Compatibility Research PDFs

School Bus Under-Ride and the Yellow Jacket Split

Looking Back: Article from U.S, News and World Report from 2000 - A Safety Rule, A Fatal Flaw

Cyclist’s death prompts call formandatory truck side guards - The Star

Cyclists call for truck side guards inwake of Toronto cyclist’s death - Globe and Mail

Improved Crashworthy Designs for Truck Underride Guards in PDF

Influence of a Truck Side Under-ride Guard Height on Cabin Intrusion and Occupant Injury Potential of a Small Car in Car/Large-Truck Side Crashes Abstract (Must pay for full article)

NTEC SideView Passenger Side Blind Spot Monitoring System for Heavy Goods and similar vehicles. Removes side blind spots to improve safety, here is link to presentation on You Tube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnbWvuYglEc

Truck Injury Lawyer Blog - TruckUnderride Wrecks Preventable - NewArticle in TrialNews

IIHS Asks NHTSA for StrongerUnderride Rule Article at SafetyResearch & Strategies,Inc.

An example of truck sideunderride protection, it is time!APROSYS D224 Demonstration oftruck side design improvements inPDF

NHTSA Workshop on Vehicle Mass-Size-Safety PDF presentationsavailable for download

YouTube - Trailer Under-Ride SafetyTest 2010 - Chevrolet Malibu (IIHS)- Crash Tests

Driving Down Lane Departure Crashes in PDF - AASHTO

Summary of Large Trucks and BusesInvolved in Crashes in the U.S.,2009 statistics from FMCSA - Sloweconomy and slower pace includingsafer car designs, equal lessfatalities but more to be done.

FMCSA Issues Proposed Rule onHours-of-Service Requirements forCommercial Truck Drivers(12/23/10) FMCSA HOS proposedrule in PDF

NHTSA proposes New Safety Rules for School Buses - Small steps finally to improve safety for school children.

Volvo crash test center video - Why do governments refuse to perform extensive real world crash testing?

Mercedes-Benz Safety Truck Video - Why not better mirrors and front guards on all trucks?

IRTAD SPECIAL REPORT - UNDERREPORTING OF ROAD TRAFFIC CASUALTIES

Video in WMV format making the case for esafety systems in Europe

Tougher Vehicle Safety Standard To Protect Against Side-Impact Crashes

Blind-spot mirrors to be retrofitted to older lorries- The measure could save up to 1200 lives in Europe by 2020.

Unscientific Utube video - When an SUV rams a smaller car It get's the point across, remember, underride guards on pickups and SUVs increase safety by 50%.

U.S. Transportation Department lobbies for big vehicles and U.S. automakers

Sweden - VARIATION OF CRASH SEVERITY AND INJURY RISK DEPENDING ON COLLISIONS WITH DIFFERENT VEHICLE TYPES AND OBJECTS

Blind spots are a deadly flaw for most SUVs

ABC video: Lowering SUV's one half inch increases safety by 50%

Innovation and Stagnation In Automotive Safety and Fuel Efficiency Report in PDF

Rear Underrun Protection System in Commercial Vehicles - German Research (Includes pictures of failed and mangled EU Rear Guards)

ERSO Heavy Goods Vehicles Safety in the EU

Industries Get Quiet Protection From Lawsuits

Daytime Running Lights (DRL): A review of the reports from the European Commission

ECE R93 The European Front Underrun Protection Device Regulation PDF Document

DIRECTIVE 89/297/EEC - Lateral protection (side guards) of certain motor vehicles and their trailers

Canadian rear underride guard tests and recommendations in PDF format.