🚀 go-pugleaf

Dennis.Jensen@dwt.csiro.au (Dennis Jensen) wrote:

>Okay. So I guess it means that deaths in these cases can be counted as traffic 
>deaths or other deaths depending on the involvement or non-involvement of 
>other parties. I don't know the best way to resolve this, but to me it tells 
>an incomplete story.

I'm not sure if I understand fully what you mean so I'll just comment
on how it works in my state.  If the crash investigation and autopsy
reveals a driver first suffered a fatal medical problem then the death
is not counted as a traffic fatality although the crash still counts
as an accident and the cause will be listed as medical in nature.  If
that crash causes other deaths then *those* deaths *are* counted as
traffic fatalities.   OTOH if a driver suffers a non fatal medical
problem and crashes then the death will be counted as a fatality and
the cause of the crash will be listed as medical in nature.  If the
autopsy is inconclusive whether the medical problem was enough to
cause the crash the death will usually be counted as a fatality.  Now
toss into the mix the occassional suicide in a motor vehicle and you
can see how convoluted it can become.  Basically it boils down to if
the death can positively be linked solely to causes other than the
crash then the death will not be counted statistically as a fatality.
If there is any doubt then it will be counted.

>True, compared with aviation, the numbers are terrible. However, the correct 
>way to tackle the problem is using scientific method and good statistical 
>analysis, not gut feel.

Shock treatment alone is not enough but I do believe it has a place.  

>Very interesting. Do you know when the data was obtained, on what type of tyre 
>and what type of vehicle. Looking at the format, I would say about 1960's. 
>Tyres have come a LOOONNNNGGGGG way since then. But thanks for sending it, it 
>is very interesting.

The chart is a guide for use only when nothing better is available.
Tires are indeed better today however their performance under pure
deceleration isn't much different now than it was eight years ago.
We've run many tests with old tires, new tires, defective tires, you
name it, and the results simply don't vary all that much.  Where the
differences show up are in normal driving and handling.  Bear in mind
that in accident investigation we aren't nearly as concerned with
performance under normal conditions, we're concerned with performance
under abnormal conditions.   In a collision the vehicles are often
performing at the limit of their abilities so what is 'normal' won't
necessarily apply.  Not sure if I explained that very well, perhaps
you can see what I mean.


email address can be found at:
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/6123/