NHTSA: new regulations for motorcoach rollover crashes

[jamesontheroad]

Via the Detroit News and Autoblog, the NHTSA is proposing new regulations to improve passenger safety in motorcoach rollover crashes. The standards are being being modelled on EU legislation, but will inevitably add weight and increase lifetime fuel costs.

I'm slightly concerned that this is the first time that the law will "require emergency exits to remain closed during the rollover test and operable after the test" ... I would have thought that by now buses would have been manufactured with doors that could stay shut during a rollover.

Here's the NHTSA's press release...

U.S. DOT Proposes New Regulation to Protect Motorcoach and Large Bus Passengers in Rollover Crashes

Performance requirements would ensure a sufficient level of survival space and reduce the risk of ejection in rollover crashes

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) today proposed a new federal motor vehicle safety standard to protect motorcoach and other large bus passengers in rollover crashes. The proposal aims to improve the structural design of large buses to ensure that passengers are better protected in a deadly vehicle rollover by ensuring that the space around them remains sufficiently intact and the emergency exits remain operable.

"The consequences for passengers in rollover crashes are severe," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. "I want passengers to know that when this Department sees opportunities to make their travel safer so that they can more confidently visit their families or get to work, we are going to do just that and we believe this proposal is a step in that direction."

Today's proposed standard would establish performance requirements that each new motorcoach and large bus must meet when subjected to a dynamic test in which the bus is tipped over from a raised platform onto a hard level surface. The proposed standard would:

- Require space around occupant seating positions to be maintained to afford occupants a survivable space in a crash;
- Require the seats, overhead luggage racks, and window glazing to remain attached to their mountings during and after the test; and
- Require emergency exits to remain closed during the rollover test and operable after the test.
- Both the proposed test procedure and performance requirements are closely modeled after the European regulations for large buses. In a separate rulemaking action to improve safety even further, the Department is planning on finalizing requirements later this year for stability control technologies in these vehicles, which would help prevent rollovers from occurring.

"The traveling public deserves safer service and peace of mind when they board a motorcoach or large bus," said NHTSA Acting Administrator David Friedman. "Stronger large bus structures, combined with seat belt use will help keep passengers secured and protected in the event of a crash."

"Approximately 700 million trips are taken on commercial buses each year. Raising the standard for a motorcoach's durability, in the event of a crash, is critical to saving the lives of the passengers inside," said FMCSA Administrator Anne Ferro. "In addition to taking critical steps to improve the structural design of buses, we are committed to further increasing motorcoach safety through stricter oversight, in-depth investigations into high-risk companies, and by ensuring that drivers are properly licensed and medically fit for the job."

NHTSA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking can be viewed in the Federal Register and members of the public will have the opportunity to comment on the proposal for 60 days. NHTSA is proposing a compliance date of three years after publication of a final rule. Read the NPRM.

For additional safety information regarding motorcoach travel or to download FMCSA's free SaferBus mobile app, visit the Look Before You Book website. As always, FMCSA urges travelers to report any unsafe bus company, vehicle or driver by calling its toll free hotline 1-888-DOT-SAFT (1-888-368-7238) or online: http://nccdb.fmcsa.dot.gov.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Soon only Mercedes-Benz will sell busses here since they already know how to make busses that perform well in roll overs.

And by the by- roll over protection does not really massively increase cost or complexity. However, if you want to do it cheaply, you have to massively shrink windows.

 

[railiner]

I applaud this new proposed requirement. And I agree, the windows on modern coaches, especially the windshield's, are far too large.

In reading about the proposal for a minimal "crush zone", I wonder how those double-deckers will adapt....to me it seems that they are already too 'tight' in interior dimension, at least in their headroom.....

 

[Green Maned Lion]

WHAT? The windows are too damned small. All modern automobile windows are. I feel like I am driving a bloody bunker.

 

[railiner]

Better not ride in a Hummer.....

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Those have decent visibility compared to, say, the CLS550 I rented last year.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

To me, this sounds like the death of Van Hools.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Is that a BAD thing, Swad?

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

No. But I also think the government should require window escape bars on all coaches, as my live analysis of the G4500's little red handles was that they are inaccessible to half the passengers.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

By the way, MCI's old DL3 design should fit these requirements. After all, they rarely take fatalities in rollover accidents.

Like this one: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/08/13/bus-from-nyc-overturns-on-pa-turnpike-injuring-2-dozen/.

Or this one: http://www.wptv.com/news/national/greyhound-bus-flips-in-ohio-34-people-taken-to-hospitals.

Filip, what are you gonna do, boy?

 

[jamesontheroad]

Here's my confusion, as the token European citizen in the discussion. As per the original links, my understanding is that these standards will be based off (and presumably exceed) the current EU standards. The Van Hools are (famously) built to a European design which has already racked up hundreds of thousands of miles in service in Europe. So unless there is a significant expansion of the standards by the NHTSA, they are are probably already compliant.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Here's my confusion, as the token European citizen in the discussion. As per the original links, my understanding is that these standards will be based off (and presumably exceed) the current EU standards. The Van Hools are (famously) built to a European design which has already racked up hundreds of thousands of miles in service in Europe. So unless there is a significant expansion of the standards by the NHTSA, they are are probably already compliant.

Unfortunately, they do not have window escape bars, and my observations show that the little red handle is deficient for the purpose of allowing every passenger to easily escape in the case of an accident. Also, hundreds of thousands of miles is five years' work for a bus line. The average bus used by Greyhound drives 650,000 miles in five years of service.

The attached photo from inside a G4500 shows that the little red handle is not accessible to all the passengers. But putting a handle on either side of the window is also impossible, because one would remain latched while the other is opening. The only solution: a single, large, window escape bar down the entire bottom length of the window.

 

[Ispolkom]

Here's my confusion, as the token European citizen in the discussion. As per the original links, my understanding is that these standards will be based off (and presumably exceed) the current EU standards. The Van Hools are (famously) built to a European design which has already racked up hundreds of thousands of miles in service in Europe. So unless there is a significant expansion of the standards by the NHTSA, they are are probably already compliant.

Unfortunately, they do not have window escape bars, and my observations show that the little red handle is deficient for the purpose of allowing every passenger to easily escape in the case of an accident. Also, hundreds of thousands of miles is five years' work for a bus line. The average bus used by Greyhound drives 650,000 miles in five years of service.

The attached photo from inside a G4500 shows that the little red handle is not accessible to all the passengers. But putting a handle on either side of the window is also impossible, because one would remain latched while the other is opening. The only solution: a single, large, window escape bar down the entire bottom length of the window.

In the unlikely event of needing to use the window as an emergency exit, what prevents a passenger in seat 11 from standing on his seat and grabbing the emergency lever behind him?

 

[railiner]

Here's my confusion, as the token European citizen in the discussion. As per the original links, my understanding is that these standards will be based off (and presumably exceed) the current EU standards. The Van Hools are (famously) built to a European design which has already racked up hundreds of thousands of miles in service in Europe. So unless there is a significant expansion of the standards by the NHTSA, they are are probably already compliant.

I'm only thinking about the double-deck version's, which have very low ceilings (around 5 feet, 9 inches) on both decks....not much space to compress in that dimension.....

 

[Green Maned Lion]

If a vehicle is properly designed, the amount of headroom should be irrelevant. If a vehicle is designed with a proper structure, in the event of a roll over, the roof should not compress. At all.

Early Saabs were known for that. Besides the fake crash with princess Diana, it is unheard of for Benzes to have substantial deformation in roll overs, either. Google 190 pillar or something like that and see an image of an entire 1982 Mercedes-Benz 190 being suspended by an undeformed drivers side a-pillar alone.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

In the unlikely event of needing to use the window as an emergency exit, what prevents a passenger in seat 11 from standing on his seat and grabbing the emergency lever behind him?

The parcel racks are set too low. You would hit your head and you might trip over your own seat back. You cannot stand in a G4500 other than in the aisle. You cannot even stand on the floor, let alone the seats. You would get stuck and die horribly. Even if you reach the red handle behind you, you would not get enough leverage from that position to open the window.

Thankfully the G4500 has a central fuel tank, but the Van Hools have front fuel tanks and poor driver view range. Death chamber on wheels.

 

[railiner]

If only cars, and buses, were as strong to scale as toy 'Matchbox' vehicles.....there would be no deformity, whatsoever....

Now what they would weigh as a result, would be another matter.......

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

If only cars, and buses, were as strong to scale as toy 'Matchbox' vehicles.....there would be no deformity, whatsoever....

Now what they would weigh as a result, would be another matter.......

Oh!

 

[rickycourtney]

After the bus accident in Northern California that killed 8 passengers and the driver... I fully expect that NHTSA will reexamine the rules for emergency exits on buses.

The NTSB found that passengers resorted to kicking out the windows to escape, despite the fact that every window was equipped with an emergency escape latch (the red handle type that Swadian pictured.) The other issue that came up was that even though that bus had a side door (for loading a wheelchair), the door can only be operated from the outside and does not serve as an emergency exit.

For the record the bus in that crash was a brand-new 2014 Setra that complies with all current safety regulations.

 

[jamesontheroad]

If only cars, and buses, were as strong to scale as toy 'Matchbox' vehicles.....there would be no deformity, whatsoever....

Now what they would weigh as a result, would be another matter.......

A quick look at one I've got here suggests that, if scaled up accurately, the A-pillar of a family car should be about two feet in diameter. That should ace the Saab elk test

 

[Ispolkom]

If only cars, and buses, were as strong to scale as toy 'Matchbox' vehicles.....there would be no deformity, whatsoever....

Now what they would weigh as a result, would be another matter.......

A quick look at one I've got here suggests that, if scaled up accurately, the A-pillar of a family car should be about two feet in diameter. That should ace the Saab elk test

Uffda! I've had a deer come through my windshield (my Wisconsin neighbor's only question was "Did you get a tag for the deer?"), but a moose has a mass several times larger.