Roads Deaths in 2012 now higher than 2011

mydiscworld

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=138

Summary for the year up to 9.00 am June 6th 2012
Daily Comparison 2011 - 2012

Total Killed to 06/06/11 74 Total Killed to 06/06/12 75

Total Collisions to 06/06/11 67 Total Collisions to 06/06/12 72

mydiscworld

Collisions are also up btw.

I've been saying for a while now that once the new motorways were finished the annual road deaths figure would stay pretty flat.

Perhaps some more Speed (aka Safety) Cameras would help a tiny bit.

Next big step in my opinion is compulsory eye tests.

Discussed here a few months ago
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=76995378

And way back in 2003 here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=801702

seamus

We were doing well up till April.

Weather would be my main guess. April was wetter and colder this year than last year, May was pretty much the same (hence similar figures), June so far has again been wet and cold, particularly over the bank holiday.

This pattern would also seem to match with the exceptionally mild and dry month we had in January corresponding to a big difference in figures.

I don't think speed cameras are of any particular benefit. I think there would be more benefit in evaulating dodgy parts of our road system to remove sharp bends & hidden junctions, and insert street lighting at any major junctions.

Hifiman

Road deaths have gone up by about 13 since the drink drive limit was lowered late last year. (The new limits came into effect just before the October Bank Holiday 2011)

Four more were killed in November 2011 compared to the same month in 2010 while eight more were killed in December 2011 than December 2010.

The RSA would have been vey quick to point out a reduction following the lowering of the limits - but there has been an increase of over 15% when you compare the seven-month period since November with the same seven months in the previous years (2010/2011)

It was predicted by some (Donegal Coroner etc.,) that lowering the limits would make little difference - but in fact it has - deaths have risen!

Jayuu

There has been great progress over the last few years so sadly its probably inevitable that at some point that rate might level off or even creep back up.

While it probably would help if road improvements continued, ultimately unless we come up with a different form of mass transportation or some new radical innovation on preventing collisions there are always going to be incidents and, regretfully, fatalities.

To be honest I don't think there is any one factor that can be linked to this slight increase. Let's just hope that the next six months are a safer period.

AugustusMinimus

It's just statistical variance. One more death doesn't mean something odd is happening.

antoobrien

seamus wrote: »

I don't think speed cameras are of any particular benefit. I think there would be more benefit in evaulating dodgy parts of our road system to remove sharp bends & hidden junctions, and insert street lighting at any major junctions.

Can anybody remember when the revenue generator "safety" cameras were introduced. It'd be interesting to see what the relative effect that this has had vs say the introduction of penalty points or the lowering of a DD limit.

veryangryman

antoobrien wrote: »

Can anybody remember when the revenue generator "safety" cameras were introduced. It'd be interesting to see what the relative effect that this has had vs say the introduction of penalty points or the lowering of a DD limit.

I think you just listed the benefit

niloc1951

An important issue in the figures is that deaths as a result of collisions resulting from sudden illness, eg. heart attack for example, are not separated.

Such collisions are not attributable to 'driver bad behaviour' and all is needed is one or two such tragic occurrences involving multiple deaths to skew the figures significantly.

mike65

Unless the end of year figure is more than about 8% higher I'd not read anything into this beyond people still die on the roads and always will.

robclay26

I know many would disagree to this idea, but i personally think it would be the right job:
In aviation every 2 years a private pilot does a check ride with an instructor, or commercial every 6 months with an airline.
So take this concept to the roads.
Our licences are for 10 years and I believe (open to correction) that after a certain age that are for shorter periods of time?

Well for all drivers under 50 the should have to take a skills test to get a licence renewal after their 10 year licence expires. This test is just to show they know the basic rules and proper way to drive and to be safe. (NOT A FULL BULL****E DRIVING TEST)
Drivers over 50, Licence valid for 5 years and a skills test again to renew it
Drivers over 70, licence valid for 2 years and a skill test to renew it.

The validation period is shorter for older generations because they in general have a substandard of driving. Example: driving at 80km or 60km in fast lane on motorway when the left lane is clear, or driving the wrong way up the Dual carriage way or motorway.

I would like to mention that also pensioners should have this renewal test done free of charge if the meet criteria similar to medical card approvals. Low income pensions are free and the rich pay the normal fee.

But before something like this can be done, the delays and backlogs in driving test would have to be a thing of the past. Also the driving test itself needs to be changed, its a load of ballocks!!

Its time to remove from the road dangerous drivers! Go safe Vans are Ballocks the make money for the government.
Saving lives on the roads is done by:
(1)improving driving skills in all conditions, Rain, ice, Snow etc
(2)fixing the Dangerous roads them selves. better signage and markings at dangerous junctions, straightening out the bad bends on back roads etc. But this costs money, Go- Safe Vans make money!
Go-safe vans according to the Gardai are places where fatal Accidents accoured, not serious or minor, but fatal, it says it on their site. I know of a few camera areas near me that have had not a single Minor, serious or fatal accident since 2005 according to the RSA map, but the Go-safe map has a speed van zone in them and i see them pretty much everyday.
Other places such as the N4 east of Mullingar with the junction for Kilucan is one of the most dangerous in the country, ( i know it is been upgraded at the moment) but the main N4 is 100KPH and it should be only 80KPH with a speed van here, this is a dangerous junction and many many accidents, just look at the RSA site with the map.



I wrote yesterday to the RSA and the Garda Traffic Unit on many subjects with driving in this country and what should be done.

Bottom line: Driving standards, Testing, Roads and regulation of it by the Gardai is Ballocks!

mydiscworld

mike65 wrote: »

Unless the end of year figure is more than about 8% higher I'd not read anything into this beyond people still die on the roads and always will.

My point was not that the roads are getting worse or more dangerous. I agree that anything +/- 8% is within an expected annual variance.

My point was more can be done to have the number lowered.

robclay's idea of a basic test every 10 years when your license expires seems logical. This should incldue mandatory eye test imo. And be no more than 50euro all in.

mike65

I would agree with a decade test, NCT for cars every two years (every year for anything over 10 years) and yet most humans don't need to take one until 75 (I think).

the_syco

How many were single driver accidents that hit a wall or tree after coming off a straight road?

And have these such "accidents" risen?

ardmacha

Well for all drivers under 50 the should have to take a skills test to get a licence renewal after their 10 year licence expires.

I imagine an enhanced rules test would be easier to administer in the the first instance. People with substantial driving experience rarely lack control of their vehicles.

The validation period is shorter for older generations because they in general have a substandard of driving.

Why then do people in their 50s have the lowest accident rate?

niloc1951

the_syco wrote: »

How many were single driver accidents that hit a wall or tree after coming off a straight road?

And have these such "accidents" risen?

Sadly they probably have, in line with the rise in our national suicide rate . A friend of mine, who's son committed suicide, met a member of the RSA at a function and during a conversation that person admitted to holding the opinion that young males killed in single vehicle accidents could well have intentionally created the accident as a way out of this life, so sad.

On the other issue about 'older' people needing re-testing. My experience is that if I am being overtaken dangerously or witness other dangerous driving it's sure to be a 'younger' person :P.

AugustusMinimus

niloc1951 wrote: »

Sadly they probably have, in line with the rise in our national suicide rate . A friend of mine, who's son committed suicide, met a member of the RSA at a function and during a conversation that person admitted to holding the opinion that young males killed in single vehicle accidents could well have intentionally created the accident as a way out of this life, so sad.

On the other issue about 'older' people needing re-testing. My experience is that if I am being overtaken dangerously or witness other dangerous driving it's sure to be a 'younger' person :P.

I would imagine a high proportion of these single vehicle accidents are suicides. The truth is for the most part, we have no way of telling.

I'd also imagine that a certain percentage of two vehicle accident may also be suicide. Very hard to imagine what goes through the mind of a suicidial person. Certainly not thinking straight.

antoobrien

niloc1951 wrote: »

On the other issue about 'older' people needing re-testing. My experience is that if I am being overtaken dangerously or witness other dangerous driving it's sure to be a 'younger' person :P.

My father is driving for over 30 years at this stage, I know the roads have changed drastically since he sat his test (e.g. no dc when he did it). Personally I think the idea of a license for life is a reciepe for disaster.

ardmacha

My experience is that if I am being overtaken dangerously or witness other dangerous driving it's sure to be a 'younger' person

Many people know the rules perfectly well, but choose to ignore them. Which is why it is difficult to eliminate road fatalities and injuries.

I know the roads have changed drastically since he sat his test (e.g. no dc when he did it).

Do you mean that he did not do his test on DC or that there wasn't any? The first DC in the Republic was built in 1940 or so, probably 20 years before he was born.

Personally I think the idea of a license for life is a reciepe for disaster.

I think many people here agree that a comprehensive rules test on licence renewal would be a good plan for everyone.

antoobrien

ardmacha wrote: »

Do you mean that he did not do his test on DC or that there wasn't any? The first DC in the Republic was built in 1940 or so, probably 20 years before he was born.

Hell I did my test in 2005 and I didn't get onto a a 4 lane rd (don't know if any of the test routes take in any of the 4 lane stretches either) - so no, that's not my concern.

There were no DCs/4 lane roads in or around Galway until the mid-late 80s. The odds of him having regularly used one of the ones that had been built regularly are slim to none. So the "training" and test at the time that he got his license is radically unsuited to modern roads.

ongarboy

Yes the increase may just be a statistical variance although I feel as if I'm hearing about more fatalities in the recent past then I did last year. Cork, in particular seems to be having an awful time of it with road deaths recently.

niloc1951

antoobrien wrote: »

My father is driving for over 30 years at this stage, I know the roads have changed drastically since he sat his test (e.g. no dc when he did it). Personally I think the idea of a license for life is a reciepe for disaster.

But your father learned to drive when one had to rely on ones own ability and not the idiot protecting technology of ABS, ASR, Airbags, crumple zones, collapsible steering columns, etc. etc.

In those days one was very much aware that your safety/survival was in your own hands.

Dual Carriageways and other modern roadway technologies are but a new environment to understand and be aware of, which I am sure present little challenge to us 'older' drivers who had always to deal with challenging driving conditions and were not cosseted in air-conditioned, computer controlled, entertainment centres.

Hifiman

ongarboy wrote: »

Yes the increase may just be a statistical variance although I feel as if I'm hearing about more fatalities in the recent past then I did last year. Cork, in particular seems to be having an awful time of it with road deaths recently.

You're correct. Cork is one of the worst as far as road deaths are concerned.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0414/1224314731098.html

ROAD DEATHS increased by 50 per cent in Co Cork last year, while more than a quarter of all fatal crashes took place in the southern region. Cork is the only county to record an increase in road fatalities in 2011, with decreases recorded in every other county

number10a

Hifiman wrote: »

Road deaths have gone up by about 13 since the drink drive limit was lowered late last year. (The new limits came into effect just before the October Bank Holiday 2011)

Four more were killed in November 2011 compared to the same month in 2010 while eight more were killed in December 2011 than December 2010.

The RSA would have been vey quick to point out a reduction following the lowering of the limits - but there has been an increase of over 15% when you compare the seven-month period since November with the same seven months in the previous years (2010/2011)

It was predicted by some (Donegal Coroner etc.,) that lowering the limits would make little difference - but in fact it has - deaths have risen!

Riiiighht. So being required to be more sober while driving has increased road deaths??

While it's fair to say that lowering the limit has not decreased road deaths, you cannot say that it has increased them. That has to be due to other factors (for example, a virtually ice free winter meaning more people were out driving and they were driving faster than the previous winter).

Otherwise what you are saying is that people drive better after one or two drinks than those who have had nothing to drink.

mydiscworld

Hifiman wrote: »

You're correct. Cork is one of the worst as far as road deaths are concerned.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0414/1224314731098.html

ROAD DEATHS increased by 50 per cent in Co Cork last year, while more than a quarter of all fatal crashes took place in the southern region. Cork is the only county to record an increase in road fatalities in 2011, with decreases recorded in every other county

I mentioned a few months ago I'd like to see the fatality figures by county, road name and even down to stretches of roads.

This way you could clearly see which are the most dangerous and in need of immediate action.

Hifiman

number10a wrote: »

Riiiighht. So being required to be more sober while driving has increased road deaths??

While it's fair to say that lowering the limit has not decreased road deaths, you cannot say that it has increased them. That has to be due to other factors (for example, a virtually ice free winter meaning more people were out driving and they were driving faster than the previous winter).

Otherwise what you are saying is that people drive better after one or two drinks than those who have had nothing to drink.

It's about the best use of Garda resources. The vast majority of drink drive deaths involve levels well above the old limits. If Garda time is taken up processing the least dangerous offenders, then maybe more of the more dangerous offenders may escape detection. This from a German study:

http://casr.adelaide.edu.au/T95/paper/s9p2.html

Thus, countermeasures directed at those persons driving at BACs higher than 0.08% can be expected to be most effective in reducing the number of accidents attributable to the effects of alcohol. In contrast, measures directed at drivers with BACs less than 0.08% cannot be very effective. At most, 4% of all accidents attributable to the effects of alcohol may be prevented.
This also implies that simply changing the legal DUI limit from 0.08% to 0.05% is insufficient with respect to alcohol-induced accidents as the potential reduction would be only about 4%. Further inspection of the risk function indicates that certain subgroups of drinking drivers are responsible for the alcohol-related accident risk in the higher BAC range. Measures capable of deterring drinking drivers in this range were expected to have a substantial impact on traffic safety, namely, result in a decrease in accident rates.

cocoshovel

the_syco wrote: »

How many were single driver accidents that hit a wall or tree after coming off a straight road?

And have these such "accidents" risen?

Why must people use this as the only example, if you are implying what I think you are even implying I dont think those are what some make them out to me. Such an unorthodox way to do it too.

Decoda

mydiscworld wrote: »

I mentioned a few months ago I'd like to see the fatality figures by county, road name and even down to stretches of roads.

This way you could clearly see which are the most dangerous and in need of immediate action.

Might not be exactly what you're looking for but it gives some details of fatalities, location, type of collision etc only up to 2009 though.

http://www.rsa.ie/RSA/Road-Safety/Our-Research/Ireland-Road-Collisions/


DC

L1011

Hifiman wrote: »

The RSA would have been vey quick to point out a reduction following the lowering of the limits

Would have been the same as them claiming the reduction caused by an 80% slump in traffic due to freezing weather being down to the introduction of GoSafe vans that weren't actually on the roads at the time :rolleyes:

If the figures go down this year, they'll claim a victory for new measures. If they go up, we won't hear a peep.

mydiscworld

Looks like the Irish Times read this board for topics to write about

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0611/breaking48.html

But in an epic piece of journalist they mistook 2012 figures for 2011

"There had been 75 deaths in 73 collisions so far this year, compared with 76 deaths and 68 collisions in the same period last year."

As you can see per link below, it's actually 75 in 2011 and 76 in 2012

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=138

Hifiman

mydiscworld wrote: »

Looks like the Irish Times read this board for topics to write about

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0611/breaking48.html

But in an epic piece of journalist they mistook 2012 figures for 2011

"There had been 75 deaths in 73 collisions so far this year, compared with 76 deaths and 68 collisions in the same period last year."

As you can see per link below, it's actually 75 in 2011 and 76 in 2012

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=138

Yes, you're correct. As of today, 76 have died in 2012, compared with 75 up to the same date last year. Even though it's only a difference of one fatalality, this is a bit of a disaster for the RSA when you think of the time, energy and considerable resources they put into the campaign to lower the drink drive limit. They actively dismissed anyone who said it would make no difference to road deaths - even though their own evidence was quite flimsy. (I remember they showed the example of Switzerland where there was a drop in deaths when the limit was lowered. The fact was, there was a downward trend at the time anyway, and it had simply continued after the limit had dropped. You'd need to prove that this downward trend would have ceased without dropping the limits.) The truth is, in Ireland, enforcement of the old limit was far more succesful and the big drop in deaths happened under the 80mg limit. Since it has been dropped, the trend has been reversed - and if it continues, 2012 may be the first year since 2005 where road deaths have increased. And that's with Safety Cameras in place as well.
I heard RSA chief, Noel Brett say yesterday, that drivers were becoming "complacent" again. "Complacent" Really? So it's not down to tougher laws, stricter penalties and fancy new Speed vans or breathalizers? It's all about whether drivers are "complacent" or not. And have the RSA been hauled in by the Minister for Transport to explain just why they think lower drink drive limits and safety cameras somehow appear to have made drivers "complacent?" I doubt it!

mydiscworld

Tougher laws, stricter penalties, fancy new Speed vans, breathalizers and lower drink drive limits will only ever go so far.

The main reason for the constant, sizeable drops since 2005 was the newly opened motorways. People no longer had to do dodgy overtaking.

AugustusMinimus

I personally think it's 3 fold.

1. Random breath testing did help. However, the recent drop in the allowable limit will do little or nothing IMO.

2. New motorways and upgrades to many roads around the country. The biggest factor IMO.

3. Lower traffic and number of road users due to the recession.

Hifiman

mydiscworld wrote: »

Tougher laws, stricter penalties, fancy new Speed vans, breathalizers and lower drink drive limits will only ever go so far.

The main reason for the constant, sizeable drops since 2005 was the newly opened motorways. People no longer had to do dodgy overtaking.

I agree 100%. There has been an unprecedented roll out of Motorways and major bypasses not to mention projects such as the Dublin Port Tunnel which took thousands of trucks off the streets of Dublin. These have been the main contributor to the drop in fatalaties. It's actually provable - I remember hearing the Parish Priest from around Durrow/Abbeleix talking about the amount of fatal smashes he was called out to, on that stretch in the years before the final part of the Dublin/Cork motorway opened. Only thing is, the RSA never acknowledge this. They were formed in 2006 just as all these Motorways were nearing completion and they claim the credit for the drop in deaths. The NRA meanwhile get no praise whatsover. As for the drink driving issue - the problem was/is that the numbers were always grossly exagerated to make the case for tougher laws. Take a look at the RSA's dedicated Drink Driving web-site. One of their main Drink Driving "facts" includes alcohol related fatalities (one third of which have nothing to do with drink driving -e.g. a pedestrian with a small amount of alcohol, struck by a sober driver is an alcohol related fatality but not a drink driving one) The RSA regularly talk about this 1 in 3 figure when discussing drink-driving when in fact one third of those deaths (the 1 in 3, that is) are not drink-driving deaths.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Road-Safety/Campaigns/Current-road-safety-campaigns/Drink-Driving/Drunk-Driving-Myths--Facts/

DRINK DRIVING FACTS:

Alcohol is estimated to be a contributory factor in 1 in 3 fatal collisions

Solair

It's also worth remembering that in a very small country like Ireland, a small change in the raw numbers can mean a huge change in the statistics.

Where as in France, the UK, Germany etc the stats will quite likely be a lot more stable due to the population sizes.

We need to focus on a trend that could fluctuate +/- about 10%.

To get any sense of whether things are improving / disimproveing you'd need to monitor a 10 year trend and plot a graph through the middle of the points to get a sense of what's actually happening.

While an increase in road deaths this year is tragic, it may be down to pot luck too.

From what I've seen we seem to be roughly in-line with Scotland which is what I would expect given the mixture of road types and driver behaviour.

I'd say the main things we should be concentrating on now that motorway projects are complete and fairly extensive are :

1) Fixing dangerous junctions.
2) Improving pedestrian facilities, especially in outer suburban / semi-rural areas.
3) Absolute crack down on crazy 'boy racer' type drivers.
4) General improvement of driver education on things like roundabouts, motorways via active public information campaign and maybe even a small tax incentive to do a upskilling course?

I still think the dominant problems in Ireland are more about engineering than driver behaviour, other than the crazy boy-racer type incidents.

The N-Roads are pretty good and the motorways are generally excellent, but there are still a LOT of problems with minor roads that have bad junctions, poor markings, inadequate warning signage etc etc.

You're not talking major construction work to remedy a lot of those situations either, in many cases it's just a bit of line painting and maybe re-designing junction markings or clearing hedges near junctions to allow for adequate vision. There are quite a lot of cases though where bad junctions need to be re-aligned.

I also think we need to look at perhaps sourcing some cheaper, simple, car-triggered traffic lights for really dangerous junctions.

There must be some better value solutions than the existing systems that local authorities are fond of buying.

ardmacha

It's also worth remembering that in a very small country like Ireland, a small change in the raw numbers can mean a huge change in the statistics.

Exactly. This is a total of series of random events and there will be statistical variation. The number of fatalities in NI almost halved between 2010 and 2011, they might easily rise this year.

There is a lot of aggregate speculation here about motorways etc. Look at the data from earlier periods and that will answer the question, how many accidents were on national routes, at junctions etc.

Amtmann

Hifiman wrote: »

DRINK DRIVING FACTS:

Alcohol is estimated to be a contributory factor in 1 in 3 fatal collisions

Lazy writing from the RSA. It might be a fact that someone *estimates* drink driving to be a contributory factor, but it doesn't actually mean that drink driving is a contributory factor in 1-in-3 fatal collisions.

Solair

ardmacha wrote: »

Exactly. This is a total of series of random events and there will be statistical variation. The number of fatalities in NI almost halved between 2010 and 2011, they might easily rise this year.

There is a lot of aggregate speculation here about motorways etc. Look at the data from earlier periods and that will answer the question, how many accidents were on national routes, at junctions etc.

I've seen stats and the motorways are FAR safer than any other types of road.

They need to analyze where and why accidents are occurring. There must be some kind of trends.

Engineering solutions are much faster and more effective than trying to mould driver behaviour, so if those hardware issues can be sorted out you have a huge impact on overall stats.

I would strongly suspect serious problems with junction design and other legacies of bad engineering / lack of proper design on some of the N-roads (especially secondary N-routes which received far less attention) and on some of the busy R-routes.

Hifiman

The trend is not just continuing but growing - five more deaths in the last two days. What gimmick will the RSA come up with now? (Apart from telling us all, to "expect the unexpected.")

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/woman-dies-after-being-pulled-under-her-own-car-3138306.html


Up to date Garda figures here:

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=138

road_high

I agree with posters re the major difference in death figures is mainly down to improved roads rather than some govt quango telling drivers what to do.
Remember old sections of the old N1, N8, N7 and N9 were seriously awful with desperate junction "design" and really poor alignment. Once the new M-ways appeared alongside them the deaths dissapeared. It was not (very sadly) unusual to hear of crashes killing 3 or 4 or more people on these routes. Stretches on the N8 like between Abbeyleix and Portlaoise, Fermoy and Mitchelstown were appalling for multiple vehicle crashes. And this is why some N routes (I'm thinking the N20 & N24) that have not been improved are still poor and people die on them yearly.
Also, the safety of cars has improved immensely. Take a VW polo now vs one in the 90s and there's no comparison whatsoever. You have a much better chance of survival.

AugustusMinimus

I'd be interested to know the year on year stats for road deaths on the N20 for instance.

I wouldn't be suprised if it stayed steady up to 2008 and then fell back due to the recession.

Iwannahurl

Misleading thread title -- please amend.

Garda statistics:

88 deaths Jan-June 2011.

86 deaths up to 20th June 2012.

According to the Garda website, the total killed up to June 20th last year was 77.

Is that an error, or were eleven people killed on the roads between June 21st and 30th last year, bringing that month's total to 88 as shown in the table?

It's possible -- likely in fact -- that more will be added to the road death total this month.

Tragically, another fatality reported yesterday (June 20th): Woman dies in Co Galway car crash.

It seems hardly a day goes by without a fatal crash occurring somewhere. No room for any complacency on the part of any state agency.

Victor

If you have a series of record lows, eventually things will increase. A perfectly expected feature in statistics called 'reversion to mean'.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is that an error, or were eleven people killed on the roads between June 21st and 30th last year, bringing that month's total to 88 as shown in the table?

There seems to have been exceptionally few fatalities in the first half of June 2011.

Screenshot of the figures from 20 June last year. The difference between the 77 and 80 may be error or it may be that the garda numbers are preliminary and time and date of death may affect numbers, e.g. an accident on 18 June with a person dying on 19 June won't be recorded until 20 June (or later if the weekend, etc.).

mfitzy wrote: »

I agree with posters re the major difference in death figures is mainly down to improved roads rather than some govt quango telling drivers what to do.
Remember old sections of the old N1, N8, N7 and N9 were seriously awful with desperate junction "design" and really poor alignment. Once the new M-ways appeared alongside them the deaths dissapeared. It was not (very sadly) unusual to hear of crashes killing 3 or 4 or more people on these routes. Stretches on the N8 like between Abbeyleix and Portlaoise, Fermoy and Mitchelstown were appalling for multiple vehicle crashes. And this is why some N routes (I'm thinking the N20 & N24) that have not been improved are still poor and people die on them yearly.
Also, the safety of cars has improved immensely. Take a VW polo now vs one in the 90s and there's no comparison whatsoever. You have a much better chance of survival.

So it was the cars, not the motorways? The reality is that there are many factors at work.

Solair wrote: »

I've seen stats and the motorways are FAR safer than any other types of road.

But we can't turn every road into a motorway. However, if 40% of fatalities were happening on national roads in 2004* and fatalities have fallen by more than 50%, then there must be other factors at play.


* http://www.nra.ie/Publications/DownloadableDocumentation/RoadSafety/file,3629,en.pdf

They need to analyze where and why accidents are occurring. There must be some kind of trends.

They do.

Engineering solutions are much faster and more effective than trying to mould driver behaviour, so if those hardware issues can be sorted out you have a huge impact on overall stats.

Putting in low-medium cost remedial measures are much more effective than a motorway building programme.

Victor

Victor wrote: »

But we can't turn every road into a motorway. However, if 40% of fatalities were happening on national roads in 2004* and fatalities have fallen by more than 50%, then there must be other factors at play.

Not necessarily, if there's a large drop in traffic on said roads then one would expect less fatalities on them by at least the percentage fall in vehicle numbers along with the lower likelihood of crashes involving multiple vehicles on said roads.

Victor

Deleted User wrote: »

Not necessarily, if there's a large drop in traffic on said roads then one would expect less fatalities on them by at least the percentage fall in vehicle numbers along with the lower likelihood of crashes involving multiple vehicles on said roads.

You might rethink that.

In 2004, 374 persons were killed, 40% (150) of them on national roads, 60% (224) on other roads.

In 2009, 238 persons were killed, 36% (86) of them on national roads, 64% (152) on other roads.

Unless trips from Kenmare to Killarney or Sligo to Castlebar are now being done by motorway, how have road deaths on the regional and local roads dropped from 224 to 152.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Misleading thread title

No - correct at time of publication:

mydiscworld wrote: »

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=138

Summary for the year up to 9.00 am June 6th 2012
Daily Comparison 2011 - 2012

Total Killed to 06/06/11 74 Total Killed to 06/06/12 75

Total Collisions to 06/06/11 67 Total Collisions to 06/06/12 72

L1011

Victor wrote: »

Unless trips from Kenmare to Killarney or Sligo to Castlebar are now being done by motorway, how have road deaths on the regional and local roads dropped from 224 to 152.

Tractor effect of the motorways will have had some impact on that.

There are a number of trips that I do for work that I would, pre motorway, have gone on R roads for but the motorway is now faster - where I live to New Ross for example, would previously have been R road for over half the journey and is now motorway/DC/decent N road the entire way.

Doesn't fix your examples, but it has changed a lot of driving elsewhere in the country.

Iwannahurl

Victor wrote: »

If you have a series of record lows, eventually things will increase. A perfectly expected feature in statistics called 'reversion to mean'.

There seems to have been exceptionally few fatalities in the first half of June 2011.

Screenshot of the figures from 20 June last year. The difference between the 77 and 80 may be error or it may be that the garda numbers are preliminary and time and date of death may affect numbers, e.g. an accident on 18 June with a person dying on 19 June won't be recorded until 20 June (or later if the weekend, etc.).

https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/2160/209695.PNG

Looking at those AGS figures, my reaction is that if they are going to report a running 'tally' they should wait until the month's figures are finalised. Unless of course they think that they can influence the figures -- ie prevent road deaths -- on a week by week basis.

That said, it's worth noting for sure that regression to the mean hasn't gone away you know. Yearly stats and especially secular trends are more reliable indicators of progress in terms of road safety policies and the contribution of different factors to any fatality reductions or increases that may occur.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

No - correct at time of publication:

The thread title is misleading as it is ambiguous and has not been updated, unlike the stats. It should be amended, IMO, to allow for any changes in the stats, and to reduce bias in the discussion.

OTOH, a more accurate title for the original post on June 6th (eg "Daily road death comparisons up to 6th June 2012 higher than for the same period in 2011") might be too long, too specific and too blandly factual for some.

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The thread title is misleading as it is ambiguous and has not been updated, unlike the stats. It should be amended, IMO, to allow for any changes in the stats, and to reduce bias in the discussion.

OTOH, a more accurate title for the original post on June 6th (eg "Daily road death comparisons up to 6th June 2012 higher than for the same period in 2011") might be too long, too specific and too blandly factual for some.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much

Its obvious for anyone who cares when the thread was initially posted.

Iwannahurl

MYOB wrote: »

Methinks the lady doth protest too much

Its obvious for anyone who cares when the thread was initially posted.

For some it was just an excuse to engage in the usual RSA/speed camera bashing and general sniping at efforts to improve road safety (other than measures such as building more motorways of course).