CASR, based at Adelaide University, has called for international safety regulations to be introduced in Australia . . . “If we had a regulation similar to Europe or Japan we would see a reduction in the fatalities and injuries of pedestrians,” CASR’s Andrew van den Berg told Indaily . . . In one frightening statistic provided by CASR, a vehicle fitted with a steel bull-bar need only be travelling at 30km/h to cause a pedestrian fatality. Earlier this year the federal government moved to introduce minimum pedestrian safety standards for vehicles but halted the consultation phase after strong lobbying from the automotive industry, particularly the manufacturers of bull-bars . . . Of all the claims to the SA Motor Accident Commission, 5.6 per cent are for pedestrian injury but they account for 11.6 per cent of all claims costs for rehabilitation – about $40 million annually . . . CASR’s van den Berg suggested SA could similarly lead the way in legislating for pedestrian-safe vehicles . . . However, Road Safety Minister Tom Kenyon said the SA market was “not big enough for us to go it alone”.
Discussion posted at http://www.adelaidecyclists.com/group/lookforcyclists/forum/topics/...
More info at http://www.indaily.com.au/?iid=50415&sr=0#folio=001
Pedestrians: Be Holden aware. The Holden Commodore, pedestrian rating only 1 star.
Don't larger vehicles already pay an insurance premium above other vehicles in order to cover this ?
The other problem is that the roads in SA are to narrow and have no island or a very narrow island - main north road is a good example of this. The government make the roads dangerous and then blame the car manufacturers for not making their cars out of soft padded foam for the comfort of pedestrians who get hit.
Steven Yarwood's grand plan to lower the Adelaide speed limit to 40Kmph is yet more ineffective legislation if fatal speed is 30kmph and even 10 kmph is sufficient to injure or kill someone if they get crushed or run over. A car weights around 1000Kg + a person around 70Kg the best solution is to keep them separated.
Stephen wrote: Don't larger vehicles already pay an insurance premium above other vehicles in order to cover this?
I do not know, but I would prefer vehicle designs for the Australian market were safer (some European countries have achieved this), rather than be told that I would get a huge payout for being made a paraplegic.
Small vehicles like motorcycles do have lower registration - and light trucks and upwards do pay more for rego and 3rd party so maybe this reflects the risk in some way - it would be fair to argue for higher premiums for vehicles without pedestrian impact considerations also Cars designs have improved allot over the years the older cars have no impact considerations at all.
Insurers would want to charge more for higher risk - so owners of 5 star rated vehicles could argue that liability is lower and so should be insurance cost, but insurers tend to base rates on driver experience rather than what they drive So does this reflect the reality of the situation more.
The difference between the Subaru and Holden based on current standards appears to be hughley in favor of the Subaru this is due to the structure of the testing - I doubt that the real effect in most accidents is going to be that much and once one considers driver behavior and road design the vehicle design so long as it's not outrageous is only a small factor in the end.