Lessons To Be Learned From a NM Tragedy

On June 27, 2009, four teens lost their lives in a collision in New Mexico, caused by a drunk driver on the wrong side of the road. Rightfully so, the response has been a call for more efforts to prevent DUI occurrences.

This article gives some details about the crash:

http://tinyurl.com/lzt2wr


What caught my eye in the comments section following the article was the questioning of the role of the parents in potentially avoiding the situation in the first place. The teens were in the first car of a caravan of four vehicles carrying teens to a house party. The time of the collision was around midnight. The driver of the vehicle is listed as sixteen.

Even without the GDL restrictions, a relatively inexperienced driver should not have been on the road with 4 passengers at midnight, with the probability of a return home presumably sometime after 1 or 2 am.

The second thing that caught my eye was the damage to the vehicle:





Clearly, the driver, in a panic situation, swerved to the left to avoid the head-on collision. That is not surprising, but is exactly the wrong thing to do. She obviously also reacted too late, since the oncoming vehicle caught her in the right front quarter.

Had the driver been through our Level 2 simulation training, she would have known that she needed to go to the right, and would have been drilled on the need to get out of the way, rather than stay in lane until it was too late.

Most experts believe that the answer to teen fatalities is further restrictions on teen drivers until they gain sufficient experience and maturity. We train company fleet drivers in defensive driving techniques using this simulator, and about 75% of these experienced (>10 years) drivers either fail to avoid the head-on collision, or subsequently lose control during the avoidance maneuver. Time spent behind the wheel of a vehicle is not the solution.

The value of our simulation training lies in exposure to critical situations, evaluation of initial reaction, and practice of correct response. You simply cannot get that from an online course, in a classroom, or during supervised on-road driving with an instructor.

Avoiding Collisions (Even if it’s not your mistake)

On the way to the office yesterday, I passed by an intersection collision that had just occurred. A compact car (driven by a young man) had been struck on the left side by an SUV coming up the road. It was pretty obvious that the car had cut across the path of the SUV, leading one to believe that the teen had started up from the stop sign without seeing the SUV coming up the road.

Was this just another case of an inexperienced teen causing a collision? Of course, the teen should have been more careful.

But what about the “experienced” driver of the SUV? The vehicle locations at rest after impact, lack of skid marks, together with the crash severity, told me that had the driver of the SUV simply performed the correct action, the collision could have been avoided entirely.

While there was considerable sheet metal damage done to the car, the vehicle positions told me that the SUV driver had hit his brakes and swerved to the left in an attempt to avoid the collision. The teen’s car had almost cleared the road when struck, and was not hit with enough impact to significantly move it sideways. Had the SUV driver simply braked hard and steered to the right, he most likely would have missed the car.

We teach our Level 2 students a police academy tactic to “Steer to the Rear” if a vehicle is unexpectedly moving across their path. There are 2 reasons for this move: First, if the intruding vehicle has momentum, that will be the spot that gets vacated; in other words, don’t go where they are heading, go where they’ve been. Second, if a collision is unavoidable, a glancing blow to the rear of most vehicles will result in far less damage to either vehicle. The majority of vehicle weight is in the front, where the engine and transmission reside, so that if you strike another vehicle with your front end (heaviest) you will encounter less resistance at its rear, where it’s lightest. Of course, there are always exceptions to any rule – for example, this doesn’t apply to a loaded tanker or concrete hauler!

Creating a Safe Teen Driver

Key To a Defensive Driving Attitude

How many times have you heard a teen say "It's not fair!"

My observation is that this can be a key contributor if the newly minted driver is involved in a collision with another vehicle. The new driver has just learned the Rules of the Road, and has been told over and over that obeying them is required. Subconsciously, the new driver has developed the attitude that everyone else will do the same. When this expectation is not met, the result can be a collision.

One of the key elements we stress in our defensive driving course is to always assume that the other driver will do the wrong thing - that way, you as the defensive driver may be pleasantly surprised when they do the right thing, but you'll be ready when they don't.

Getting a new driver to watch out for the mistakes of others will go a long way in making them a much safer driver, even if "it's not fair".

Making Our Roads Safer For All Of Us

The latest statistics for road deaths were just announced showing a reduction in roadway deaths to the lowest number since Kennedy was in office. Much of the credit was given to the economy, since driving miles were down.

Since the 60's, trillions of dollars have been spent on making our vehicles and roads safer. Little has been done to change the way in which new drivers are trained. Yet a study conducted by the government showed that over 70% of vehicle collisions are definitely caused by driver error.

If we really are serious about addressing this issue, the United States must catch up to Europe where driving a vehicle is a privilege, not a right, and driver training is serious business.

Cell Coach - Distracting or Lifesaving?

In our January e-newsletter, we introduced readers to a new device on the market - the Cell Coach manufactured out of Tucson, Arizona. The Cell Coach was designed to put an end to driving while talking/texting on cell phones especially for teen drivers.

Installed under the vehicle's dashboard, the device emits a loud alert when it detects cell phone signals either from the driver making a call, answering a call or attempting to send a text message. The sound, a 90 decibel alert, is so loud and annoying that teens can't help but hang up, concentrate and drive.

Some teens that have tested out the product say that it has made them stop using their cell phones completely while driving.

If you've used this product or if you know of someone who has, we're interested in hearing if it's been helpful and whether or not the shrill sound of the alert distracts the teen driver. Also, how long does the alert sound after the teen has hung up the phone? We think this is a good idea. What do you think?

Sting Ops in High Schools?

I recently read an article in Boston about a sting op at high schools in Weymouth, Massachusetts. Police set up checkpoints at 13 high schools in the area to catch teens in action.

Out of the 802 students stopped at checkpoints, 151 were not buckled up, 49 were driving their friends and four were driving while talking on cell phones.

The sting op was put into effect by the Registry of Motor Vehicles to again educate students on safe driving.

Do you think a sting op would be an effective tool to teach/discipline students while heading in/leaving campus? Or, do you feel that a sting op is taking it too far?

Not paying attention

The other week I was driving down Baseline Rd. The light in front of me went from red to green so I kept at my same pace of 45mph without having to slow down or stop. Out of the corner of my eye, I noticed a young boy start to cross the street, but there was a truck to the right of me so couldn't tell if he stopped at the light or continued crossing. It wasn't his turn to walk, he just did, not paying attention to the oncoming cars. He was in his own world just talking on the phone and listening to his Ipod. Out of the corner of my eye, I saw him pass the truck and had to slam on my brakes to avoid hitting him as did the other cars to my right and behind me. He just stopped, looked at me and continued walking like nothing happened. His lack of regard to his surroundings could have caused a major wreck. Luckily it didn't.

Just goes to show that whether you're behind the wheel or walking in the crosswalk, to always be aware of what's around you. Had I just been looking straight ahead in front of me, something catastrophic most likely would have occurred.

If you've had experiences you'd like to share, post back.

Teen Gets Jail Time for Texting...and Driving

Apparently the British are a bit harder on drivers who text than the US. Just recently, 19-year old Rachel Beggs was driving AND texting when she rear ended 64-year old Maureen Waites, almost killing her. The crash caused Waites' car to spin out of control and hit a barrier. The crash was caused by Rachel's repeated use of her mobile phone (9 times in the 15 minutes leading up to the accident) while driving 70mph in the dark.

It was her irresponsible behavior that sentenced her to four long years in prison. Looks like she learned the hard way...to keep your eyes on the road (not on your phone) at all times.

Do you think the US should enforce this on all drivers who are caught texting or talking on the phone and cause crashes?

Is a Camera in a Teen's Car Helpful or Distracting?

It's a new pilot program that allows cameras to be
placed inside a teen's car just below the rear view
mirror. The extra eyes let teens actually "see their
mistakes" when driving and captures events
happening before and after a car crash occurs. Once
the camera captures the "event", it emails it to the
parents to review with their teen driver.

University of Iowa researcher Dan McGeehee states
the videos provide a reality check to over-confident
beginning drivers.

"This really shines a spotlight on their own driving and
they can see themselves that they made some
mistakes," McGeehee says.

McGeehee took 25 drivers who fell into two groups,
those who drove "well" and rarely triggered the
cameras (about three times for every thousand miles
driven) and those who triggered it a lot (nearly 19
times for every thousand miles they drove). After
seeing themselves, the riskier drivers improved by
90%.

Teens in Minnesota are the first to test the program,
although American Family Insurance is ready to get on
board. It hopes to take the program to a national
level.

DrivingMBA wants to know if you think having a
camera in your teen's car will help them become
better drivers or become a distraction to them. Some parents may feel that these cameras provide just enough driver training for their teens. What do you think?