Safe Speed Forums

I was wondering whether it was possible to extrapolate from old fatality accident numbers the number of fatalities that would have occured in today's safer cars assuming the same number of collisions? I am thinking that most of the changes in road safety improvements are down to this rather than any other factor. If one could prove roads in the sixties without draconian speed limits were safer per mile travelled (it would have to have a fiddle factor for increased traffic) then it rather blows the whole speed kills philosophy apart. I'd also be interested to know whether there is any data on average speeds during those times too. It also fits with the faster = safer due to more time and space created.

I also notice the local scam partnership has decided to put gatsos up in roadworks on the M6 just after J15. Clearly they don't realise this will make the road more dangerous

A paper by Noland (Imperial?)(not to hand) suggests that vehicle safety improvements are running at about 4% per annum in terms of reducing the liklihood of fatality. Naturally this should only be applied to vehicle occupant deaths. (about 1,700 a year in cars)



I agree it's the biggest single factor. There's also:

* post crash rescue / medical
* road engineering improvements
* traffic habituation
* 'modal shift' away from walking is reducing pedestrian casualties
* congestion reduces road risks in many circumstances (but not all).

These benefits are offset by:

* increase in traffic
* road users getting worse

The top view of the trends is examined on: http://www.safespeed.org.uk/smeed.html

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety