Hello N.J.R. Logistics Group, how could the Federal Government State and local Judications make travel in America better or improve the statics
Hello NSTB Board of Directors and Chair Mrs. Jennifer Homendy.
I represent Naomi Jeanette Robinson Logistics Group Board of Directors and the Owner and Spokesperson for Autonomous safety. My name is Tariq Robinson.
I am looking at high percentages of problems first. The main problem is not the contractor. It is the Grading Foremen or Superintendents of these companies. When approaching an intersections you can reduce rollovers dramatically by making the box inside an intersection flat. no crown just level with a pitch up or down.
Lets use your investigation as the problem. What are the elements in a roll over?
- Tires (Track Width)
- Suspensions
- Lateral Accelecration (vertical Tire Loads)
- Height of Cargo
- Weight of The Vehicle (lateral Motion of The Vehicle)
- Roll Angle of a Vehicle
The average size of an intersection in North Carolina (Dual Lane Highway U.S. Route-64 East @ U.S. Route-301 North in Rocky Mount, NC
The Exit Ramp onto U.S. Route-301 North is Dual lanes. (Width of 24')
U.S. Route-301 South Dual lane and Shoulder (Width 0f 30')
Center Median (Width of 12')
U.S. Route-301 North (Width of 30'')
The Intersection box Length is 24' Length x 72' Width
Now if you have a crown in the road on U.S. Route-301 it will be located at 36' in the center.
Look at your laws at axle spacing. You can only have 40,000 lbs. between any set of axles
Take 40,000 lbs. / 1,231 lbs. per foot = 32' between last drive Axle and Front Trailer axle.
So the Tractor will be out of the intersection by 4' and the trailer axle front just entered the intersection.
Now The rear of the trailer is always higher than the front.
Now you have the center of weight (Rear of trailer is higher than front. So the weight is shifted to the front on a decline of the roadway.
Lets do the math (Physics) ___________flat line is legal. The road is intersection is 72' at the exit ramp starting point onto U.S. Route-301 South and to the far end of U.S. Route-301 shoulder is 72'
So the rear of the trailer trailer floor is 55" from the ground
The Tractor Frame height is 42" without 5th wheel plate
The 5th Wheel plate is mostly 8" in height
42" + 8" = 50"
So the rear of a trailer is 5" Higher in the rear on level ground
Now you have a crown at 36'
The State Curb face is 8"
So you have a 8" Crown on U.S. Route-301 + 5" Decline to the front of the trailer. = 13" the cargo at the rear of the trailer is higher than the front.
So once this truck hits the intersections the front of the trailer is level to the rear of the trailer. As soon as the last drive tires surpass the crown the weight of the trailer shift to the front.
REMEMBER the tractor is out of the intersection to the weight is on the outside of the trailer pushing the tractor to the shoulder. The tires grip and keep the tractor in place.
You have 44,000 lbs. cargo . The trailer don't want to turn. It wants to go straight.
So if the trailer height cause a roll over. Why do you put crown in road to increase the energy in a rollover. 36' length with a 36' Length with 8" Lift = 1" per 54" in distance (4.5')
36" wheel spacing / 4.5' Distance = 8" the center of gravity has increase higher.
So who is the person or group of people that need to be in court on a commercial vehicle roll over?
How many truck drivers have Engineering skills?
How Many Truck drivers know if the road has a crown in it?
So why is the truck driver being charged with a crime that the Grade Foremen or Super didn't do when surveying the grades. Why the grade was not a burst?
You gave truckers 2 strikes and then you make them longer and heavier than past years.
I say we asked for Federal funding to fix the problem of trucks that can't stop at a yellow light and makes a turn and flip. The trailer is going how the engineer crew design the water to flow. So if you design the water to flow straight your weight inside a trailer wants to do the same thing.
If you go back 100' before the intersection either mill out the crown if underground utilities are not present or add more asphalt approaching and exiting the intersection to reduce roll overs.
It is not the driver fault if he or she don't know engineering. So why are they being held in a court of law when i cane take a line level and bring resonable doubt in the jury that it is not the driver problem why these vehicles roll over, It is the lack of Inspectors Education on engineering. You can put that type of inspectors on a airport runway. A plane can't have a crown in the runway. So why do we have people that lack wisdom of public safety. That is the 1st problem in Department of Transportation. They choose people that don't know or lack understanding of grade safety and the flow of water.
2nd Why do we put bridges over streams or water when the bridge is the high point in the circumference? If you take Tar River crossing at Thomas Blvd. in Rocky Mount. The elevation of the bridge is 10' above the water table or flood stage of the city of Rocky Mount, NC
The bridge is higher than all the land surrounding the bridge. If the river crest the whole city is flooded and the bridge is the last to go.
Now engineering. If the city is lower than the bridge. You must dig down then channel to stop the city from flooding. How can people leave if only thing above water is the top of the bridge. You must make the river bed lower to make a bridge in low line areas.
Look at Western North Carolina. I been thru that area not familiar with the environment. However you have valley in the mountains. in these valleys the highest point is the bridge.. If the bridge is 10' above the flood crest. Why not dig the channel down 10' to save the town in a flood like North Carolina Seen in the mountains. Who take the measurement of these bridges. If you make it boat friendly with 10' clearance. Why not did the channel 10' to give the local 10' addition time to leave or see the flood table rises.
All the examples of accidents let me change that. Most of the statics and rulings is not the pilot or operator faults. It is poor engineering.
In all my travels this state has a poor guidelines of inspectors that are being paid off or neglect. You don't build to build. You must undergo test and safety to build a bridge. Why don't you test the water to reach the top of the roadway to the homes in the area. If the homes are flooded you need to undercut a tunnel underneath the city to get the wate out of people lawns. Why don't we study the town and cities more than testing for the bridge.
ay is lateral acceleration,
Fi are the vertical tire loads, i=l , 2,
h is the height of the cg,
T is the track width,
W is the weight of the vehicle,
Ay is the lateral motion of the cg relative: to the track,
Q, is the roll angle of the vehicle.
The equilibrium equation for roll moment about a point on the ground at the center . A simplified freebody diagram of track is: a heavy vehicle in a steady turn W*h*ay = (Fp - Fq)*T12 - W*Ay .
I am not defending how N.J.R. Logistics Group makes our money as the subject at hand or operating cost each contractor makes. The subject matter is rather we are attacking safety in our country.
Safety Recommendation A-17-021
TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION: Provide air traffic controllers with automated pilot weather report (PIREP) data-collection tools that incorporate design elements to prevent input errors, increase quantity, and improve the timeliness of PIREPs disseminated to the National Airspace System.
Recommendation Details Original recommendation transmittal letter
Overall status Open - Acceptable Response Mode Aviation Priority levelNon-urgentTimes reiterated1Is HazMat Nois NPRMNoSR coding Date issued 04/13/2017
Overall date closed
2.2 Scope of the Problem
From 2005 through 2014, FARS data show that speeding-related crashes accounted for 112,580 fatalities (see table 1). Although the annual numbers of total traffic fatalities and speeding-related fatalities both decreased during this period, speeding-related fatalities have consistently accounted for about 31% of all traffic fatalities (NCSA 2016a; NCSA 2017). During the same period, there were 112,948 traffic fatalities involving alcohol-impaired driving, which represents 31% of all traffic fatalities (NCSA 2015; NCSA 2016b).13
Thus, speeding-related fatalities represent a large portion of the total traffic fatalities in the United States; this portion is comparable to that attributed to alcohol-impaired driving.
Table 1. Total and speeding-related traffic fatalities,
2005-2014 Year
- Total Fatalities
- Speeding-Related
- Fatalities %
YEAR -2005
- Fatalities - 43,510
- Speeding - 13,583
- Percentage - 31.2%
YEAR - 2014
- Fatalities - 32,744
- Speeding - 9,283
- Percentage - 28.4%
TOTAL -
- Fatalities - 363,606
- Speeding - 112,580
- Percentage - 31.0%
2.2.1 Fatalities and Injuries
Of the 9,283 speeding-related fatalities in 2014, 5,933 (64%) were the drivers of the speeding vehicles; 1,835 (20%) were passengers in the speeding vehicles; 1,136 (12%) were occupants in other vehicles; 314 (3%) were pedestrians; and 46 (0.5%) were bicyclists, as shown in table 2.
This table also includes NASS GES data indicating that an estimated 336,742 people sustained nonfatal injuries due to speeding in 2014. More than 40% of the people injured were occupants of non-speeding vehicles, pedestrians, or bicyclists. Therefore, speeding poses a significant risk of death and injury to not only the drivers and passengers of speeding vehicles but also other road users.
Table 2. Estimated injuries in speeding-related crashes, by person type and injury severity, 2014
- Person Type
- Fatality Serious
- Possible/Minor
- Non-fatal Injuries
- Totals
Drivers in speeding vehicles
- Fatal # - 5,933
- Fatal Percentage - 63.9%
- Serious # - 18,745
- Serious Percentage - 62.3%
- Possible / Minor # - 128,466
- Possible / Minor Percentage - 41.9%
- Non-Fatal Injuries # - 147,211
- Non-Fatal Injuries Percentages - 43.7%
Passengers in speeding vehicles
- Fatal # -1,835
- Fatal Percentage _ 19.8%
- Seriousness # - 5,499
- Seriousness Percentage - 18.3%
- Possible / Minor # - 43,310
- Possible / Minor Percentages - 14.1%
- Non-Fatal Injuries # - 48,809
- Non-Fatal Injuries Percentage - 14.5%
Occupants in other vehicles
- Fatal # - 1,136
- Fatal Percentage - 12.2%
- Seriousness # - 5,171
- Seriousness Percentage -17.2%
- Possible / Minor # 132,408
- Possible / Minor Percentages - 43.2%
- Non-Fatal Injuries # - 137,579
- Non-Fatal Injuries Percentage - 40.9%
Pedestrians
- Fatal # -314
- Fatal Percentage - 3.4%
- Seriousness # - 510
- Seriousness Percentage - 1.7%
- Possible / Minor # - 1,285
- Possible / Minor Percentage - 0.4%
- Non-Fatal Injuries # - 1,795
- Non-Fatal Injuries Percentages - 0.5%
Bicyclists
- Fatal # - 46
- Fatal Percentage - 0.5%
- Seriousness # - 34
- Seriousness Percentage - 0.4%
- Possible / Minor # - 555
- Possible / Minor Percentage - 0.2%
- Non-Fatal Injuries # - 689
- Non-Fatal Injuries Percentage - 0.2%
Other / Unknown
- Fatal # - 19
- Fatal Percentage - 0.2%
- Seriousness # - 24
- Seriousness Percentage - 0.1%
- Possible / Minor # - 633
- Possible / Minor Percentage - 0.2%
- Non-Fatal Injuries # - 657
- Non-Fatal Injuries Percentages - 0.2%
Total
- Fatal # - 9,283
- Fatal Percentages - 100.0%
- Seriousness # - 30,084
- Seriousness Percentage - 100.0%
- Possible / Minor # - 306,658
- Possible / Minor Percentage - 100.0%
- Non-Fatal Injuries # - 336,742
- Non-Fatal Injuries Percentage - 100.0%
2.2.2 Vehicle Types
In 2014, 8,393 speeding vehicles were involved in fatal crashes. Figure 1 shows the distribution of these vehicles by type.
Of these speeding vehicles, 6,422 (77%) were passenger vehicles, which were involved in 6,369 fatal crashes, resulting in 7,273 fatalities.
These fatalities represented 78% of all speeding-related fatalities in 2014. According to the FHWA, there were about 240 million registered passenger vehicles and 8 million motorcycles in 2014, which respectively represented 92% and 3% of the total number of registered vehicles. Buses and trucks represented 0.3% and 4% of the total, respectively.
Figure 1 also shows that 1,548 speeding motorcycles (18% of all speeding vehicles) were involved in fatal crashes in 2014. This safety study focused on passenger vehicles, which constitute the majority of vehicles involved in speeding-related fatal crashes. Some of the countermeasures examined in this study are applicable to both passenger vehicles and other types of motor vehicles, including motorcycles.
Passenger Vehicles 76.5% (6,422)
Motorcycles 18.4% (1,548)
Large Trucks 3.1% (263)
Other/Unknown 1.8% (154)
Buses 0.1% (6)
2.4.1 Road Types and Land Use
Different road types serve different functions, and they have different characteristics, such as traffic volume, access, geometry, and speed limits.
Table 3 illustrates that the percentage of fatal crashes that involved a speeding passenger vehicle in 2014 varied among the different road and land use types. One misconception about speeding-related crashes is that they primarily occur on high-speed roads such as interstate highways.
However, local roads had the highest percentage (30%) of fatal crashes involving speeding passenger vehicles.
Collector roads had the second-highest percentage (29%). Twenty-six percent of fatal crashes that occurred on freeways involved a speeding passenger vehicle.
Table 3 also shows that a higher percentage of fatal crashes involved speeding passenger vehicles on rural roads (27%) than on urban roads (22%) in 2014.
Local roads experienced the largest difference by land use; 35% of fatal crashes on rural local roads involved speeding passenger vehicles, whereas 25% of fatal crashes on urban local roads involved speeding passenger vehicles.
Table 3. Number and percent of fatal crashes involving speeding passenger vehicles, by road type and land use,
2014 Rural Road Type Urban All Number % Number % Number %
Interstate and Freeway
- Road Type - Rural
- Rural Fatalities - 316
- Rural Fatalities Percentage - 24.9%
- Road Type - Urban
- Urban Fatalities - 711
- Urban Fatalities Percentage - 26.6%
- Total Fatalities on Interstate and Freeway - 1,027
- Total Fatalities on Interstate and Freeway Percentage - 26.1%
Other Principal Arterial
- Road Type - Rural
- Rural Fatalities - 598
- Rural Fatalities - 18.9%
- Road Type - Urban
- Urban Fatalities - 699
- Urban Fatalities Percentage - 16.6%
- Total Fatalities on Other Principal Arterial - 1,297
- Total Fatalities on Other Principal Arterial Percentage - 17.6%
Minor Arterial
- Road Type - Rural
- Rural Fatalities - 687
- Rural Fatalities Percentage - 25.6%
- Road Type - Urban
- Urban Fatalities - 551
- Urban Fatalities Percentage - 21.3%
- Total Fatalities on Minor Arterial - 1,238
- Total Fatalities on Minor Arterial Percentage - 23.5%
Collector
- Road Type - Rural
- Rural Fatalities - 1,019
- Rural Fatalities Percentage - 29.3%
- Road Type - Urban
- Uban Fatalities - 282
- Urban Fatalities Percentage - 28.2%
- Total Fatalities on Collector - 1,301
- Total Fatalities on Collector Percentage - 29.0%
Local
- Road Type - Rural
- Rural Fatalities - 808
- Rural Fatalities Percentage - 35.2%
- Road Type - Urban
- Urban Fatalities - 626
- Urban Fatalities Percentage - 25.4%
- Total Fatalities - 1,434
- Total Fatalities Percentage - 30.1%
Total
- Road Type - Rural
- Rural Fatalities - 3,469
- Rural Fatalities Percentage - 26.7%
- Road Type - Urban
- Urban Fatalities - 2,892
- Urban Fatalities Percentage - 22.2%
- Total Fatalities - 6,369
- Total Fatalities Percentage - 24.4%
For me to have an answer to my elders who drove and operate vehicles and flying planes is a disrespect to them saying "Your Not Qualified to Control of Operate a Combustible engine Mechanical Parts Safely in or on Our Air Space, Highways, Interstates and Waters Safely."
The statics in how humans operate, and control Combustible Engine Mechanical Parts are declining. The job of NTSB is to correct the decline. I am 100% in compliance with this ruling we are having a discussion about.
I know i have to be perfect. what i asking the board is you have 80,000 lbs. total weight in a semi truck you have accidents that are from tailgating, lack of communication (CB Radio), Response, Alertness and Reaction in every aspect of our transportation system. We agree on this matter.
It is not always safe to stop a truck, distractions in the front seat (Human, Animals, Technology and Materials placed in front seat. You want me to be perfect why autonomous is required. How do you plan on making the roads safe from distraction? How you going to make the roads safe lack of alert of dense fog and congestion accidents.
Humans are hitting animals, other humans by mis-judging the path of operations everyday with your current plan. With every year a decline with accidents and deaths. Let attack the reaction time. With Autonomous the camera can see as far humans and with night vision. That will increase reaction time from distracted drivers. That alone should get a doubt in the minds of autonomous being bad.