News   Apr 23, 2024
 253     0 
News   Apr 23, 2024
 804     0 
News   Apr 23, 2024
 466     0 

Double Decker Buses in Ontario - Safety?

Not according to the CTSB who issued a report on exactly that with the last 2013 crash investigation.

Let me make this simple for those who are blind to see: Why should a bus not be required to meet "crash-worthiness" safety standards that a car must? Vehicles over 26,000 lbs are exempt in Canada. Try getting a 130 passengers in a car.

Over to you...

Some interpretations are that they are *required to*:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...-to-improve-bus-safety-transportation-safety/

In the event, the CTSB certainly can participate, and have agreed to do so, they just don't have the *lead role* in it, which gives them even more power than a police investigation:
Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board Act
S.C. 1989, c. 3

Assented to 1989-06-29


Unlike a police investigation, the CTSB release detailed reports to the public and are governed federally. The Ottawa Police are Provincial. "Crashworthiness" is a federal competence.

2015 TSB Recommendations & TC Responses
R13T0192 – CROSSING COLLISION BETWEEN VIA RAIL CANADA INC. PASSENGER TRAIN NO. 51 AND OC TRANSPO DOUBLE-DECKER BUS NO. 8017, MILE 3.30, SMITHS FALLS SUBDIVISION, OTTAWA, ONTARIO – 18 SEPTEMBER 2013.

TSB Full-Text Report (R13T0192):
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2013/r13t0192/r13t0192.asp

I couldn't open the G&M link. While the TSB might have the freedom to comment on any transportation matter, the legislation empowering them limits their investigative authority to air, rail, marine and pipeline. The powers of an investigator would be limited by the Act and the Act doesn't empower them to investigate road accidents. They are providing technical assistance in this investigation. The agencies with investigative authority are the police and the coroner and even those investigations have to be firewalled from each other.

I'm certainly not arguing that large commercial and public-commercial vehicles should not have better safety standards, but that is a matter for the Department of Transport. The matter of seat belts on school buses is much more complicated.
 
The photo in #44 posting is the first phase that is being replace by LRT

This photo is at Greenboro BRT Station shot in 2005 and you can see the different between them. Can't recall the other years I shot the system, but didn't do it this year when I was there
05-000020.JPG
 
Thinking about all the factors a bit more
- this was an express bus as was the via rail crash. Paradoxically, the least experienced drivers are the ones that do these routes with the largest buses and most passengers. They are the least desirable becuase it involves a split shift, so falls way down in Union pecking order


I guess you can say we in Ottawa are at the forefront of European equipment in North America. Besides our very large fleet of double deckers (as many as GO, but for a much smaller population), we also have non FRA compliant Alstom Lints with a level crossing at the very active VIA rail mainline and another level crossing with an active but low traffic freight spur.
 
Thinking about all the factors a bit more
- this was an express bus as was the via rail crash. Paradoxically, the least experienced drivers are the ones that do these routes with the largest buses and most passengers. They are the least desirable becuase it involves a split shift, so falls way down in Union pecking order


I guess you can say we in Ottawa are at the forefront of European equipment in North America. Besides our very large fleet of double deckers (as many as GO, but for a much smaller population), we also have non FRA compliant Alstom Lints with a level crossing at the very active VIA rail mainline and another level crossing with an active but low traffic freight spur.
Yes, I was on a Trillium Line train that had to stop to wait for a VIA train to cross. A collision is a real risk if signals are ignored. 100++ Trillium trains cross 20+ VIA trains at Ellwood Junction every day.
 
I couldn't open the G&M link.
My apologies, it was subscriber only. Here it is from another source:
The head of the Transportation Safety Board says the federal government needs to move fast on better national "crashworthiness" standards for buses and other commercial passenger vehicles in light of two deadly bus collisions over the last year.

Last week's double-decker transit bus crash in Ottawa that killed three people and injured 23 others, as well as the Humboldt hockey-team bus collision that killed 16 and injured 13 last April, highlight the need for passenger buses to meet stricter safety guidelines, says TSB chair Kathy Fox.

"We know that these buses don't have to meet the same standards that our cars have to meet or that school buses have to meet, and we think that needs to change because in some types of collisions, they don't necessarily have the kind of protection that passengers should be able to expect when they're travelling on public transport."

Calls have been made for the federal agency to lead the investigation into the Ottawa bus crash, as it did when another double-decker OC Transpo bus collided with a moving passenger train in 2013, killing six people. The involvement of the train in that case allowed the TSB to head the investigation, with authority to compel evidence and provide national recommendations.

The Ottawa and Humboldt crashes did not fall within the federal agency's jurisdiction because they only involved road vehicles.

However, Fox says the TSB has a particular interest in the Ottawa crash because of key findings from the 2013 OC Transpo collision investigation. It found large vehicles over 26,000 pounds in Canada are not required to meet the same standards as smaller passenger vehicles or school buses when it comes to front-impact, side-impact, rollover or crush protection.

In Friday's crash, the upper deck of the Ottawa city bus hit a shelter, whose roof cut several rows deep into the bus's right side. Many of the injured survivors required amputations.

The 2013 probe also called for all commercial passenger buses to be equipped with event data recorders, similar to those required for planes, trains and marine vessels.

Rob Johnston, who led the investigation into the 2013 crash, says the OC Transpo double-decker bus did meet all applicable safety standards. The problem is, those standards need to be strengthened, he says.

"The deficiency really lies with the Canadian motor-vehicle safety standards with regards to vehicles in excess of 26,000 (pounds)," he said.

"Without those standards being improved upon, there is going to be some risk," he said, acknowledging that many people do travel safely on these vehicles daily.

Transport Minister Marc Garneau was not made available for an interview, but in a statement, his office said steps have been taken to address the recommendations from the 2013 TSB investigation.

"We have completed a review of accident data from urban centres to support the potential development of a standard for crashworthiness," said Garneau's media-relations manager Delphine Denis.

"Work is already underway to bolster this review through tests on bus structures to inform next steps."

The last interaction Transport Canada had with the TSB on this work was a year ago, Fox says. She was encouraged to hear the department is taking the recommendations into consideration and doing some research. But in the meantime, the Humboldt and Ottawa crashes have killed more Canadians.

"That just reinforces for us that Transport (Canada) needs to expedite their activities to implement crashworthiness standards for passenger buses, because we recognize that it's going to take time," Fox said.

"There is some urgency that they take action... This is a Canadian issue, it's not just an issue in Ottawa."

Ottawa police are continuing to investigate the cause of Friday's crash.
https://obj.ca/article/federal-gove...-over-bus-safety-standards-after-ottawa-crash
 
Last edited:
Yes, I was on a Trillium Line train that had to stop to wait for a VIA train to cross. A collision is a real risk if signals are ignored. 100++ Trillium trains cross 20+ VIA trains at Ellwood Junction every day.

The Indusi system prevents a Trillium line train from passing a red signal, but that's not the case if the via train blows past a red.

Anyway back to the topic at hand, I still feel safe enough on double deckers, some of the posts i made here today were typed from the "death seat" position on a DD. However I don't object to making things safer. I just feel people react with the knee jerk "think of the children" response and we'll over engineer a solution. If we believe that any risk is too much risk, than we won't be able to get out of bed in the morning.
 
I just feel people react with the knee jerk "think of the children" response and we'll over engineer a solution. If we believe that any risk is too much risk, than we won't be able to get out of bed in the morning.

Exactly the same was said of seatbelts and vehicle safety.

Airplanes are even safer statistically than bus travel. Do you think air safety is "knee-jerk'? I suggest you're the one misappropriating the risk factor. If you want to take a risk, that's your choice. Most don't. Their wishes of assurance of safety when they travel should be respected.

You have a greater chance of being injured travelling on a bus than being shot. Is gun safety "knee-jerk" reaction?

Here's the kind of revelation that's starting to emerge: (this has more bearing on GO buses on highways than it does most transitways)(I had a personal experience of this Christmas 2017 returning from Guelph, and feeling the rear end of the bus losing lateral traction in the slippery conditions on Hwy 401 around Milton, it was a snow storm at the time, and the bus driver insisted on doing regular posted speed. As someone who was a professional truck driver in younger years, I sensed it being dangerous)
Egan: Double-decker buses did poorly in 2007 winter road test, Manconi says they were upgraded and are safe

KELLY EGAN
Updated: January 17, 2019

A first-generation OC Transpo double-decker performed so poorly during winter testing in 2007 that the driver felt it was unsafe to even continue.

The surprising conclusion is buried in an 189-page report done by the National Research Council as the city was evaluating the fitness of the U.K.-made buses in cold climates. Over time, OC Transpo would buy 133 of the $1-million buses, now the subject of close scrutiny after a second disastrous crash last week.

“This bus has not yet been deployed into a North American winter climate area such as Ottawa, therefore it was of interest to evaluate its winter performance,” the introduction reads.

The Enviro 500, made by Alexander Dennis Ltd., was sent to a well-known test track in Blainville, Que., and outfitted with sandbags to simulate a real passenger load.

Among the standard tests in the bus industry is one called “double-lane change” in which the bus is required to start in the right-hand lane, move smartly to the left and, about 35 metres later, move back into the right lane. (Imagine passing a car, then returning to the curb lane.) The test was done 26 times at different speeds, with pylons marking the lanes, on a snow-covered track with patches of ice beneath.

The faster the bus moved, the worse the results were. At 35 kilometres an hour, the bus made five clean runs on the double-lane track, with no issues. At 40 km/h, the bus only had two clean runs out of five, striking one cone on the other three attempts.

When the test speed was bumped to 50 km/h, things began to fall apart on that January day, when the temperature was -20 C. The bus entered the course at 47 km/h, the report says.

“New track; over steered when entered into the course,” the comment section reads. “The driver said it was not safe at this speed; hit cones, broke the steering wheel sensor, had to go wide on exit to recover.”

Later on the same page, the authors write: “The driver was able to bring the bus to a stop safely. However, he expressed his concern about attempting another manoeuvre at the same speed and it was decided that no other tests would be performed.”

OC Transpo general manager John Manconi stressed that the current buses are safe vehicles in winter.

He said NRC recommended in 2007 that rear-traction assist systems and electronic braking be added as options to the vehicles and that OC Transpo has always added those features in bulk buys in 2012, 2015 and 2017.

“We’ve gone the extra mile. I don’t want the community to panic over this stuff.”

The NRC said those added features would be a “significant improvement” on slippery surfaces.

There is no mention in the NRC report that speed limits on the Transitway vary from 50 km/h through the 50-plus stations to as high as 90 km/h in straight, clear stretches.

But the testers did issue a warning.

“Based on test results, a bus driver should have no difficulties in executing a double lane change on a similar surface, when the entrance speed is less than 46 km/h. This is below the 60 km/h speed limit of a typical urban arterial road and well below the 100 km/h speed limit of the Queensway.

“It is unlikely that a driver would be able to make a successful double lane change evasive manoeuvre in conditions similar to those of these tests at the prevailing speeds on these highways. This manoeuvre would be even more difficult if the temperatures had been around freezing, when the snow and ice would have been much more slippery.” [...]
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/loca...-manconi-says-they-were-upgraded-and-are-safe

I mentioned in an earlier post my concern of 'one of the front wheels hitting a curb' as reported by some, and consequent to that, a loss of distributed braking modulation as a result of that, making the ABS unstable for an instant, but enough to lose breaking on some application points, and increased on others. Servo systems are only as stable as the algorithms being attuned to unexpected inputs, and hitting a curb with the front wheel might be one. I don't know. I'd like to see reports. But alas, this is Canada. And Transport Canada will only act in many cases after the fact, and cover up as much as they can.

Which is why a number of us would like to see the CNSB take the lead investigative role. As national transport agencies do in most advanced nations...

Interesting technical details here: (I had commented on the chassis construction, erased it until I can confirm details elsewhere)
https://landtransportguru.net/alexander-dennis-enviro500/
 

Attachments

  • 1547782347364.png
    1547782347364.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 384
Last edited:
I'm not saying we shouldn't do the investigation or make changes, I'm saying we should wait for the full investigation before we jump to the conclusion of what should be done, and in the meantime I'm not fretting until that work is complete. The Europeans do have safety agencies as well, and crash standards, and actually do require seat belts on Intercity coaches. This bus is a common design there and there have been accidents there. So what have they concluded over there? We seem to be looking at it in a vacuum and rushing to an answer.

Also I'd want proof of your statement about guns. In Toronto the odds of being shot are 1 in 200000 according to this article

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...e_safer_than_you_think_statistics_expert.html

But i couldn't find the right rate for buses. The best i could find is this article with old stats

http://www.riskcomm.com/visualaids/riskscale/datasources.php

Which puts the bus risk at 1 in 6.6 million, and the risk of being shot in an accident as 1 in 1.1 million,.and homicide as 1 in 24000, but those are American numbers
 
Also to quote your airplane thing, in an airplane accident they look at all factors, not just the plane. My point is stop having a myopic view on the bus itself. Everything from the shelter design to the roadway to training to whether this driver should have been driving should be in play.

Bus design probably can be improved, but there's lots more to consider here in reducing accidents, and there are things that might be cheaper and more effective in preventing injury and death then simply changing the bus itself. A difference between a bus and a car is that one has a professional driver, so more can be expected of a bus driver and the system itself than the case of a car where you have to consider the skill of the average driver
 
So one more explanation of what I'm trying to convey here. We could yank all double deckers out of service and say "problem solved", but you might not know that in Ottawa rural commuter buses also use the transitway, and those buses are usually highway coaches. That puts those passengers also in the danger zone if the same accident occurred, and they would have been at the right height to be decapitated.

I'm just saying we have to look at as a whole. I think you're saying the same thing, but we disagree on the interim. I look at it as a situation that's okay and can be improved, whereas you say it's too dangerous until the improvements are made
 
I think you'd best read back.
Sorry, that was my general rant, not directed at you. I'm watching the media talking heads as usual making this (always repeated in all tragic situations) flawed logic


A double decker crashed therefore double deckers are unsafe therefore we shouldn't use them.

It's far too simplistic and drives me nuts. We don't learn or improve anything when we go down that road
 
It's far too simplistic and drives me nuts. We don't learn or improve anything when we go down that road
But that's what happens when Transport Canada (and other federal and provincial agencies) chronically ignore recommendations from highly specialized independent agencies like the Transportation Safety Board, time and time again. If Canadians wanted the truth, and objective counsel, then they should be clamouring for greater accountability from (in this instance) the Feds. Some in Ottawa are, but nowhere near enough. Canada is one of the least accountable of western nations when it comes to these issues. FOI is a joke in Canada.

You might want to peruse these Google search results for "canada transportation safety board recommendations ignored"
https://www.google.ca/search?q=cana...27j0j7&client=ubuntu&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

The bigger story isn't this particular crash, and certainly isn't the TSB, who time again have gone to great lengths to be scientific, thorough, honest and accountable...it's Transport Canada.

Addendum: And that story is being made responsibly and well referenced in the media. Example:
The Canadian Press
Published Tuesday, January 15, 2019 4:26AM EST

OTTAWA - The federal government faces questions today about its plan to increase safety on commercial buses following last week's deadly crash in Ottawa that killed three people and injured nearly two dozen more.

The fresh scrutiny comes after Transportation Safety Board chair Kathy Fox took aim Monday at what she saw as the government's failure to act on earlier recommendations to increase "crashworthiness" rules for buses.

Those recommendations sprang from the TSB's investigation into another Ottawa bus crash in 2013, in which a city bus broke through a warning gate at a rail crossing and hit a moving passenger train, killing six people on the bus.

Fox said Transport Canada had done some work on the recommendations but that "significant progress has not yet occurred and the safety deficiencies remain outstanding."

She added that Friday's crash in Ottawa as well as last year's collision involving the Humboldt junior hockey team all underscore the need for Transport Canada to take action on implementing crashworthiness standards for buses.

Ottawa police are continuing to investigate the cause of Friday's crash, which saw a double-decker bus slam into a shelter at a station west of downtown Ottawa.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/feder...safety-standards-after-ottawa-crash-1.4253853

And it goes beyond that. Transport Canada has chronically ignored TSB reports for rail and aircraft safety too, both areas that the Feds accept as being in the TSB's mandate.

As per aviation regulation and TC: (From the Fed's own website)
1547820686080.png

1547820611911.png


What specific irritants do you have with the Canadian Aviation Regulations and why? Note the part and section. What supporting documentation or specific details can you provide?
4 months ago
[...]
  • Davidm 3 months ago


    I completely agree. Transport Canada seems more interested in the public perception than on advancing safety. Every other civilized country has better fatigue rules than even the proposed regulations. Yet, somehow, they're "too expensive" or "too onerous" for us in Canada. Us as Canadians think of ourselves as world leaders in many regards. In terms of aviation flight and duty time regulations, we are among the worst in the world. Truly embarrassing.
    Share


  • Rod Miskey 2 months ago


    Well said Otis. Afghanistan has more restrictive and more modern FTDT limits than Canada does.
    Share
  • [...etc, etc...]
 
Last edited:
Also to quote your airplane thing, in an airplane accident they look at all factors, not just the plane. My point is stop having a myopic view on the bus itself. Everything from the shelter design to the roadway to training to whether this driver should have been driving should be in play.

Bus design probably can be improved, but there's lots more to consider here in reducing accidents, and there are things that might be cheaper and more effective in preventing injury and death then simply changing the bus itself. A difference between a bus and a car is that one has a professional driver, so more can be expected of a bus driver and the system itself than the case of a car where you have to consider the skill of the average driver

Is there an industry standard for busway design.....a CSA/ISO or CUTA kind of thing? Here we are discussing this in the abstract where there may be a specific source document governing all this. Makes a difference if the busways in question had a standard but didn't apply it, or the standard was inadequate, versus designers had a blank sheet, did the best they could in the absence of guidance, but missed some things..

Re professional drivers - I agree that on average transit drivers are far better trained, experienced, and have skill beyond the average motorist. However it’s a question of the amount of overlap between two bell curves, not the point to point comparisons of two means. I’m not so sure that the bell curve for the pro’s is any narrower, ie there is a lot of variability in driver behaviour. Some close friends who are very skilled transit operators are very quick to admit that there are some bad ones out there, mostly rookies hired in a meagre job market, and potentially inadequately monitored. And everyone has bad days and bad moments.

My point is not directed at the driver in this crash, it’s at the premise that a skilled human represents an effective safety barrier. Driving is highly repetitive, and there are wide tolerances for inattention or misjudgement, - ie you make the same error 1000 times and nothing bad happens, but the 1001th time it kills you. So while I respect the skill of the average transit operator, the design can’t depend on driver capability.

- Paul
 
Is there an industry standard for busway design.....a CSA/ISO or CUTA kind of thing?
This is an excellent question, and goes right to the heart of a serious provincial/federal gap in competence/legislation.

I've looked for one, can find nothing, save that it is considered provincial in jurisdiction. And here's where things get testy for a number of reasons, not least the provinces jealously guarding their 'turf'...and the Feds not taking leadership to make it a federal competence. Far more people are killed on roads in this (and many other) nation(s) than air, marine or rail. The Feds already accept that they are responsible for vehicular safety standards, but getting them 'up to speed' on it is like getting a five year old to behave on a plane.

Example:
Seatbelts on school buses could have prevented thousands of injuries, numerous deaths

‘Exaggerated’ Canadian government study asserted restraints might harm children
Harvey Cashore, Kimberly Ivany, Bob McKeown, Saman Malik · CBC News · Posted: Oct 14, 2018 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: October 14, 2018

Thousands of injuries and numerous child deaths could have been prevented across Canada and the United States in the past three decades had school buses been equipped with seatbelts, an investigation by CBC's The Fifth Estate has found.

Yet, for more than 35 years, Transport Canada has been at the forefront of a North American-wide campaign against the use of seatbelts on school buses, based largely on a 1984 study that asserted they are not only unhelpful — they may also cause injuries.

Now, the four-month Fifth Estate investigation has exposed serious problems with that study and reveals that government officials have known for years that seatbelts save lives and prevent injuries on school buses — information the department has kept hidden from the public.

And in the wake of the CBC investigation, it appears cracks are showing within Transport Canada over its rigid position against seatbelts.

After being told of results of The Fifth Estate's research, Transport Canada's chief of crashworthiness research said seatbelts are "a good first step" towards improving school bus safety.
[...]
More recently, numerous U.S. federal and state regulators and safety organizations like the National Safety Council are turning their backs on the 1984 Transport Canada study, leaving the Canadian government increasingly isolated in its official anti-seatbelt stance.

Transport Minister Marc Garneau declined several requests for an interview.

But in an exclusive interview with The Fifth Estate, Transport Canada's Suzanne Tylko provided a message that differs from what her own department has said in public. (Suzanne Tylko, a senior engineer with Transport Canada, conducted a crash test in 2010 that concluded the high-back padded seats in school buses are not enough to keep kids safe in the event of a side-impact crash. Those tests results were never released publicly.)

While seatbelts don't prevent all injuries and deaths, she agreed they "do prevent ejection."

"Seatbelts are a good first step," she said.
[...]
Tylko told The Fifth Estate's Bob McKeown she did not know why Transport Canada has not stated this publicly nor why it has not changed its anti-seatbelt position.

"You would have to ask people who decide those policies because I can't answer that," Tylko said. She also said she didn't know why her eight-year-old report had never been released.
[...]
The Fifth Estate spent several weeks compiling and reviewing numerous studies from across North America prepared by academics and test crash facilities, examining computer modelling and interviewing safety experts and scientists.

The research showed repeatedly that seatbelts would have prevented numerous serious injuries and deaths in school buses.

In the United States, such findings have already gained widespread acceptance. Safety organizations like the National Transportation Safety Board and the National Safety Council are now unequivocal that seatbelts on school buses save lives and prevent injuries.

In a speech in 2015, the head of the U.S. equivalent of Transport Canada — the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration — put it bluntly.

"There is no question that seatbelts offer improved safety. Seatbelts [on school buses] will save the lives of children who we might otherwise lose in crashes," Mark Rosekind said.
[...]
The Transport Canada test crash film claimed that a system called compartmentalization — the use of high-backed padded seats — was enough to keep children safe. What's more, it said that lap seatbelts might cause "fatal injuries" and should be kept off school buses.

The promotional film said that slow-motion video and test measurements showed the belted dummies experienced a potential "fatal" whiplash as their heads hit the back of the seat in front of them.

The study was soon quoted in numerous industry and academic papers across North America.
[...]
Still, a close examination of that study shows that Transport Canada never tested side-impact crashes or rollovers, where most serious injuries and death occur.

Nor were any of the dummies fitted with three-point lap and shoulder belts, already proven to prevent ejection and injuries in cars.

A scathing 1985 review by University of Michigan researchers dismissed the study as "exaggerated" and said that its conclusions were invalid.
[...]
The University of Michigan critique concluded that Transport Canada's own data actually "supports the need for occupant restraint on buses."

"No case can be made from the results of this test program that belted children will have an increased likelihood of severe head and neck injuries in frontal crashes," the researchers said.
[...continues at length...]
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/school-bus-seatbelts-1.4826500

Internal Transport Canada study showed school buses 'failed' safety tests

Safety group alarmed warnings not shared with public
Harvey Cashore, Kimberly Ivany, Bob McKeown · CBC News · Posted: Oct 15, 2018 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: October 15, 2018
[...]
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/inte...ed-school-buses-failed-safety-tests-1.4860611

Déjà vu yet again...
 
Last edited:

Back
Top