According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) nearly a third of all crashes are rear-enders. So, when an experiment by psychologist John Voevodsky in 1974 found that San Francisco taxis equipped with a third brake light suffered 60.6% fewer rear-end collisions, it got the attention of the NHTSA. After replicating these results on a larger scale, they required center high mounted stop lamps (CHMSL) on all new cars in 1986. However, recent studies show a reduction in accidents of only 5%!*
I suppose drivers now are too busy texting to be deterred by CHMSL. ; ) But now Ford is experimenting on wirelessly warning those following when a driver puts the brakes on. See more details here. I suggest it set an alarm off on cell phones too—similar to wireless emergency alerts.
But the only real solution to rear-end collisions would be a system that automatically reduces speed on serial tailgaters. They are a menace to society in my opinion. Meantime let’s hope our highway patrols do what these cops did on California’s freeways.
*(Thanks to University of Minnesota Professor Sanford Weisberg of the School of Statistics for bringing this to my attention in his seminar today.)
#1 by Eric Kvaalen on October 30, 2013 - 8:23 am
There is a reason to “tailgate” — or at least to keep the distance to the minimum safe distance. The reason is that a road can carry more traffic if there is less space between the cars. This is important because if a road can’t carry the right flux of traffic it causes traffic jams.
In the YouTube video, the policeman says you need three seconds. That is an exaggeration. An alert driver only needs one or two seconds.
Also, he says to one person that it would take 300 feet to stop. But that’s irrelevant. What’s important is how far you go before you put your foot on the brakes. If you start braking a few yards before the place where the person in front of you did, then you won’t crash into him (assuming your deceleration is the same as his).