MOTOR SMASHES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22609, 28 June 1935, Page 7

MOTOR SMASHES

THE LEVEL CROSSING PROGRESS IN WARNING DEVICES SOME RECENT FIGURES Complete safety for road vehicles on level railway crossings has not yet been devised. Though warning devices have been improved to the stage when they are extremely difficult to overlook, the element of human negligence cannot be eliminated. ' Other countries have tried mechanical barriers, let down when trains approached crossings, but of recent years the accidents caused by motorists running into these barriers have caused their abandonment in most cases. In New Zealand, as elsewhere (says the Evening Post), the last word has not been said on the matter of warning devices, and it is reassuring to learn that the question of protecting level crossings which may need them, but have not so far been thus equipped, is being given attention by the Government Railways Board. The fact that fatalities have occurred, not only at crossngs as adequately protected by warning devices as ingenuity could devise, but at such crossings where at least one other motor vehicle than the one in the case of which the fatality occurred, and sometimes several other motor vehicles, were pulled up in plain view awaiting the passing of a train which they had either seen, or been warned of by the signals, shows that even obvious warnings may be disregarded unless the motorist is alert. CAUSES OF CRASHES. Comparisons of the available statistics show that it is much more dangerous to drive along the country roads—streets produce comparatively few of the motoring fatalities—than over level crossings. They also show a decrease in level crossing fatalities, which coincides with the installation of more and better crossing warnings. While it is not strictly fair to compare level crossing accidents with road accidents, the opportunities for carelessness on all the roads being so much more frequent, and the" risks doubled by the mobility of both parties, either of whom may be the cause of the accident, it is permissible to attribute a considerable percentage of the crossing accidents to tlie negligence on the part of the motorist so often shown in the case of purely road accidents. Similar factors contribute to both these classes of fatalities. Motorists are impatient of delays. There is a similarity between the desire to pass other vehicles and to squeeze past in front of an approaching visible train. The great majority of motor fatalities occur, however, when the motorist nods, when his attention is either diverted or not fully concentrated. It is also probable that many motorists, including drivers of freight lorries, drive for too great a length of time to allow of the retention of the necessary concentration. They are wheel-weary, and especially at night with little traffic on the roads there is a tendency towards somnolence impossible to overcome entirely. WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY? The following figures were obtained partly from the Official Year Book and partly from the records of the Railways'Department. It might have been proper to include in the total of the motor fatalities those at railway crossings, but the figures are sufficiently illuminating without raising this debatable point. The Year Book follows the rule of attributing all fatalities in "crashes" between vehicles and trains or trams to the heavier and more powerful vehicle, which makes it clear that all level crossing accidents are included. This might be taken exception to on the grounds that the heavier vehicles confined to a known area of danger, with no mobility in other directions, can in many cases be avoided by lighter vehicles, but it nevertheless emphasises that motorists, from various causes, seem unable always to avoid localised and known dangers.

For the year 1932, 27 fatalities were attributed "to trains, 9 to trams, and 159 to motor vehicles. It is interesting to note that with the exception of one year, 1930, accidents attributed to trains steadily decreased from 1923 to 1932, probably due to more effective warning devices. Crossing fatalities from 1910 to 1828 (inclusive) totalled 150, and from 1929 to March 31, 1935 (inclusive), 111, a total of 201 for 25 years, or an average of less than 11 a year over a 25-year period. Those attributed to motor vehicles (which do not include level crossing fatalities) for six Years are as follows:—l929, 178; 1930, 220; 1931, 159; 1932, 159; 1933, 120 j 1934, 152;—total, 988; average per year over six years, 164.06. It will be noted that the yearly average of crossing fatalities, which was six between 1910 and 1928, increased to just under 10 for the last seven years, due to the increasing motor traffic in recent vears.