Cycling, traffic safety and legal topics; energy, transit and transportion economics
RSS icon Home icon

  • Cross and Fisher 1977

    Posted on October 16th, 2007 azbikelaw 3 comments

    Cross and Fisher 1977 is a landmark and oft referenced study. I could not find it online, it is in multiple volumes and I am not sure which is which: e.g. here is vol III

    In the study, the authors categorized the 36 types of crashes (Type 1 through 36) into 7 groups (Group A through Group G.).

    The city of Toronto has a comprehensive 2003 study, and here is a comparative report from 1982 and Misoula, MT. Listening to Bike Lanes, Hiles delves into the overtaking (Group G, especially type 13) crash types. The Crash-Type Manual for Bicyclists by Carol Tan is newer and follows the Cross & Fisher types, then adds a few others ( here is a handy page that took the dozens of individual pdfs and coallated them into one table).

    The Cross/Fisher Class – Types, Percentage injuries/fatalities

    Accident type Cross/Fisher Study: (injuries/fatalities)
    Class A: Bicycle ride-out from driveway, alley and other midblock locations
    Type 1: residential driveway ride-out 5.7%/6.7%
    Type 2: commercial driveway ride-out 3.2/2.4
    Type 3: parallel direction driveway ride-out 2.5/2.4
    Type 4: ride-out over shoulder or curb 2.5/3.6
    Total Class A: 13.9%/15.1%
    Class B: Bicycle ride-out at controlled intersection
    Type 5: stop sign or yield sign 10.2%/7.8%
    Type 6: signal phase change; cyclist caught in intersection 3.1/0.6
    Type 7: ride-out at signal: multiple threat 2.0/2.4
    Total Class B: 17.0%/12.0%
    Class C: Motorist turn/merge/drivethrough/driveout
    Type 8: Motorist driveout from commercial driveway/alley 5.3%/0%
    Type 9: Motorist failure to yield at stop or yield sign 10.2/1.2
    Type 10: Motorist failure to yield at signal 1.9/0
    Type 11: Motorist backing from driveway 0.8/0
    Type 12: Motorist didn’t even slow for sign or signal 0.5/1.2
    Total Class C: 18.7%/2.4%
    Class D: Motorist overtaking/overtaking threat
    Type 13: Motorist overtaking, cyclist not seen 4.0%/24.6%
    Type 14: Motorist overtaking/out of control 0.7/4.2
    Type 15: Motorist overtaking/counter active evasive action 1.7/2.4
    Type 16: Motorist overtaking/misjudged space required to pass 2.0/1.8
    Type 17: Motorist overtaking/cyclist’s path obstructed 2.0/0.6
    Type unknown: (why is this class D?)
    		 0.1/4.2
    Total class D: 10.5%/37.8%
    Class E: Bicyclist unexpected turn/swerve
    Type 18: Bicyclist unexpected left turn; parallel paths; same direction 8.4%/8.4%
    Type 19: Bicyclist unexpected left turn; parallel paths; opposite direction 3.2/3.0
    Type 20: Bicyclist unexpected swerve left; parallel paths; same direction 1.5/3.6
    Type 21: Wrong-way bicyclist turns right; parallel paths 1.1/1.2
    Total Class E: 14.2%/16.2
    Class F: Motorist unexpected turn
    Type 22: Motorist unexpected left turn; parallel paths; same direction 1.3%/0.6%
    Type 23: Motorist unexpected left turn; parallel paths; opposite direction 7.6/0.0
    Type 24: Motorist unexpected right turn; parallel paths 5.6/1.8
    Total Class F: 14.5%/2.4%
    Class G: Other
    Type 25: Vehicles collide at uncontrolled intersection; orthogonal paths 2.8%/0.6
    Type 26: Vehicles collide head on, wrong way bicyclist 3.6/2.4
    Type 27: Bicyclist overtaking 0.9/0.6
    Type 28: Head-on; wrong way motorist 0.8/1.8
    Type 29: Parking lot 0.8/0.8
    Type 30: Head-on; counteractive evasive action 0.1/0
    Type 31: Bicyclist cuts corner when turning left 0/0.6
    Type 32: Bicyclist swings wide when turning right 0.3/0
    Type 33: Motorist cuts corner when turning left 0.4/0
    Type 34: Motorist swings wide when turning right 0.1/0
    Type 35: Motorist driveout from on-street parking 0.3/0
    Type 36: Weird 0/7.2
    Total Class G: 11.2%/13.8%

    Notes: The study covered 166 fatalities, and 753 non-fatal injuries.
    71% of the type 13 were in the dark, vs. only 30% of fatalities in general.
    Tan study, type 13: Rural roads were overrepresented almost 2:1 (62 to 38%), Darkness overrepresented, High (60-70kph) and Very high speed (80+kph) roads overrepresented, 2 lane roads overrepresented.

    Related link: The first Cross study.

    safety

    3 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

    Leave a reply

Search

Powered by WordPress
© 2007 - 2009 azbikelaw.org