Collision Warning Systems
An extra set of eyes for drivers.
PHIL ROMBA
CONTRIBUTOR
All drivers like comfortable, good-looking trucks with convenient communications tools. The best drivers, the ones who care about their equipment and their driving records, also appreciate collision warning systems. That should place driver retention squarely on the list of reasons why fleets should spec collision warning systems, or CWS.
Eaton VORAD's (VORAD stands for Vehicle On-board RADar) Doppler radar-based systems were first installed on Greyhound buses. Soon, technology-savvy fleets such as U.S. Xpress began to install the systems. Those carriers have since been joined by many other high-profile fleets -- Prime, Penske and Con-Way, to name just a few. There are now as many 50,000 CWS-equipped trucks on the road, according to Eaton VORAD, the company now marketing the system.
Eaton VORAD's system uses high-frequency radar (that does not interfere with auto radar detectors) to scan up to 350 feet ahead of a truck. At near instantaneous speeds, waves that encounter objects bounce back to the system, providing warning of that object's size and relative speed. The system's computer interprets the dynamic relationship between vehicles (or objects) on the highway. In other words, the CWS can tell the difference between potential accidents and non-threatening driving situations.
Eaton VORAD has documented statistics showing how just an extra second of warning of an obstacle can give drivers time to react and avoid a collision. According to the company, three years of data on 1,900 trucks show accidents were reduced 78%. Six of the eight fleets in the study saw accidents reduced 100%.
Averitt Express, Cookville, Tenn., conducted a two-month test of Eaton VORAD EVT-300 systems with six drivers and trucks. Systems without driver display units were installed at the start of the test so that the radar could track driver performance for the first month. During the second month, driver display units were installed so drivers could be warned about obstacles.
Data showed a clear improvement in driving technique in the second month. Drivers increased following distances, giving themselves more time to react to traffic ahead and alongside their vehicles.
Another technology, the Eagle Eye Electronic Obstacle Detection System (www.tst-eagleeye.com), appeals to regional fleets, particularly -- though not exclusively -- to those involved in city deliveries. Eagle Eye's manufacturer, Transportation Safety Technologies Inc., said the system is being used by about 20 fleets on hundreds of trucks.
Instead of radar, Eagle Eye uses ultrasonic sound to detect objects on either side and behind the tractor, trailer or truck. As many as seven sensors are tied into a dash-mounted driver module that gives drivers audible and visual alerts when objects are within 10 feet. The module provides a readout of the approximate distance to an object. According to Transportation Safety Technologies, a forward-looking module will be available next year.
The Eagle Eye is clearly intended for use in the tight maneuvering situations that characterize city pickup and delivery work. It is also useful in lane-changes, particularly when a driver is merging back to the right lane after passing.
Nick Strimbu Inc., Brookfield, Ohio, tested two Eagle Eye systems for six months. The fleet hauls steel coil, steel products, pipe and building materials with a mixed fleet of 150 Freightliner and International tractors. The fleet's 285 trailers are primarily spread drop-decks and lowboys.
Nick Stimbu President Bill Strimbu said Eagle Eye was installed to monitor blind spots. Both drivers who tested Eagle Eye reported it had helped avoid collisions.
One veteran test driver was Richard Hughes, who runs 10,000 to 12,000 miles a month in a Freightliner Columbia with a drop-deck trailer. Hughes said that to him, the Eagle Eye system has become as important as brakes.
"It saved me from one accident when there was a car in the blind spot. When I started to come back into the lane, the beeping alert from the Eagle Eye made me look again and I saw the car," Hughes said.
Growing driver acceptance of CWS notwithstanding, the primary reason fleets specify CWS is the cost of accidents. Transportation Safety Technology's President Michael P. Coyle cites estimates from one of the nation's largest leasing companies that show lane-change accidents cost on average $100,000 per incident, a figure that does not include intangible costs like negative impact on reputation. Costs for intangibles can triple the total price tag for a single such mishap.
So why haven't more fleets installed the systems?
"Customers feel good about the promise of fewer accidents and lower costs. But when it comes down to it, safety doesn't always sell. Customers operate on thin margins. So it can be very difficult for them to invest money unless they can see a pay-back in six to 12 months," said Coyle.
Should driver retention figure into the decision to buy or not to buy?
As more drivers use CWS, their appreciation is clearly growing.
Rick Youngblood, manager of market development for Eaton VORAD, said some drivers are using data from his company's product as a reference of sorts when they look for another job.
Sidebar
It All Adds Up
