ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 ก.ค. 2013
- This three-dimensional animated reconstruction shows the accident sequence for an intersection-related accident near Chesterfield, New Jersey, which occurred on February 16, 2012 at 8:15 am local time.
The animation illustrates the overall sequence of events from just before the collision until the vehicles reach their final rest positions. The school bus was traveling northbound on Burlington County Road (BCR) 660 through the intersection with BCR 528, while the roll-off truck (with a fully loaded dump container) was traveling east on BCR 528, approaching the intersection. The school bus driver had stopped at the overhead flashing red traffic beacon and STOP sign before proceeding through the intersection. The roll-off truck was not required to stop at the intersection; the overhead beacon was flashing yellow for traffic along BCR 528. As the school bus entered the intersection, it failed to yield to the roll-off truck and the truck impacted the school bus behind the left rear axle. The bus rotated nearly 180 degrees and subsequently struck the metal pole supporting the traffic beacon, bringing the bus to a stop. The impact with the pole occurred behind the right rear axle of the school bus. After the collision the roll-off truck traveled about 186 feet coming to rest in a field.
The roadway and the area of the accident are scale models built from the three-dimensional survey data, photographs and laser-scanned point cloud data. The trees are based on photographs and point cloud data from the accident site. Other vehicles are placed in the scene based on photographs and witness statements, but the exact position, make and model was not recorded for any of these vehicles. The animation depicts the vehicle motion developed through a simulation that was based on the physical parameters of the roll-off truck and the school bus coupled with the evidence of tire marks and the damage to the vehicles. The initial speed of the roll-off truck is 53 mph, and the speed of the truck at impact with the school bus is 40 mph. Uncertainties in the vehicle parameters, limited physical evidence and approximations used in the computer models would permit some variation in the calculated motion of the vehicles while still matching the overall vehicle behavior. The animation does not depict the weather or visibility conditions at the time of the accident. The animation does not include audio.
The animation sequence shows two views of the accident. The first view is an overhead view and the second view follows the roll-off truck. The animation sequence is shown twice divided by the title "Repeat of Animation Sequence".
this was hard to look back at, we lost someone that lit up the school with her personality and almost graduated from 6th grade but never had the chance to.
The key word in that statement is 'lawfully'. As the bus had a stop sign and the truck did not, then by definition, the bus was not "lawfully" in the intersection.
So who owes an apology for their felonious stupidity?
Who cares? All we want to know is: how do we avoid a repeat?
Playing the Blame Game is such a pointless exercise.
@@michaelkarnerfors9545: More importantly, the NTSB's purpose is exactly "how do we avoid a repeat?" and it's explicitly stated that their investigations are not for assigning blame or liability.
@@michaelkarnerfors9545
Fix the intersection.
But in reality the politics are to blame operators.
Bus driver may have been negligent..but roll on driver was negligent...
If the Bus was state operated..any suggestions of negligence would have parents asking questions..
Solution...Driver error by the truck driver..
That's how it works.
So "lawfully" , vehicles just spawn into intersections like a video game? lmao
0:44 if only the trees weren't so close to the roadway near that intersection. Maybe then the bus driver would have noticed the truck???
the amount of visibility hazards at many intersections is appalling.
JeepYJ91 - If he didn’t have a clear view to the left, he should should have pulled just enough to see before proceeding to cross. But it also looks like the truck was speeding.
@@GH-oi2jf sometimes you just have to intrude into their line until you can see anything coming. close calls happen every day in my town I'm sure someday there will be a big wreck. just stupid design
looks like the bus pulled out in front of the truck, period ! even if it was overloaded, had defective brakes, the Bus driver caused this accident ,in my eyes
I agree 100%
According to the NTSB report, the truck was overweight, speeding, and had defective brakes. There is fault on both sides.
the bus violated the truck's right of way period full stop. but for the school bus this would not have happened.
you would be shocked how many large vehicles are BARELY or if not at all in proper shape to take the road... companies test their luck wanting to save money
If "Fault has been found with the Truck Driver. End of Story." how do you explain this ...
"The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) determines that the probable cause of the Chesterfield, New Jersey, crash was the school bus driver’s failure to observe the Mack roll-off truck, which was approaching the intersection within a hazardous proximity."
But also that the truck was overweight, speeding, and had faulty brakes. "[T]he safety board found that [the truck was] above the 45 mph speed limit before the crash and that his truck was about 5,000 pounds overweight. Both factors contributed to the severity of the crash, as did a series of problems with the vehicle's brakes, which reduced their effectiveness...."
@@boggy7665 but that’s not the cause
Yes, the bus shouldn't have pulled out. Prosecutors found that the trucker wasn't criminally reckless, but as others have said here, in civil court he may have been adjudged negligent.
"[T]he safety board found that [the bus driver] should have seen the truck approaching the intersection and that his failure to do so was likely caused by a chronic lack of sleep. The safety board also said [his] use of anti-anxiety, pain relief and anti-depressant drugs may have contributed to his inattention, along with his consumption of alcohol before bed." (His drug and BAC tests came back negative.)
"[T]he safety board found that [the truck was] above the 45 mph speed limit before the crash and that his truck was about 5,000 pounds overweight. Both factors contributed to the severity of the crash, as did a series of problems with the vehicle's brakes, which reduced their effectiveness...."
Jeez, talk about the perfect storm of events. Very sad.
5000lbs over? Damn.
any driver knows that the school bus is at fault.. stop sign means you don't go til its clear.
So Accident Caused by poorly Designed roads !
This intersection with such wierd angles should be a simple traffic light system and then no Accident.
Not exactly (nothing in here about "poorly designed roads"):
"The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the Chesterfield, New Jersey, crash was the school bus driver's failure to observe the Mack roll-off truck, which was approaching the intersection within a hazardous proximity. Contributing to the school bus driver's reduced vigilance were cognitive decrements due to fatigue as a result of acute sleep loss, chronic sleep debt, and poor sleep quality, in combination with, and exacerbated by, sedative side effects from his use of prescription medications. Contributing to the severity of the crash was the truck driver's operation of his vehicle in excess of the posted speed limit, in addition to his failure to ensure that the weight of the vehicle was within allowable operating restrictions. Further contributing to the severity of the crash were the defective brakes on the truck and its overweight condition due to poor vehicle oversight by Herman's Trucking, along with improper installation of the lift axle brake system by the final stage manufacturer - all of which degraded the truck's braking performance. Contributing to the severity of passenger injuries were the nonuse or misuse of school bus passenger lap belts; the lack of passenger protection from interior sidewalls, sidewall components, and seat frames; and the high lateral and rotational forces in the back portion of the bus."
IF IT WAS A PROPER INTERSECTION WITH LIGHTS OR A STOP SIGN WITH MIRRORS ACCIDENT WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED ..
Fault lies with eh Council / Government
Then why did the NTSB not even mention the "poorly designed intersection", let alone blame it for the accident? My guess is that that was because the design of the intersection was not a significant factor.
Fault of the school bus driver, alone. Nothing wrong with that intersection.Wierd angles? Just turn head a little more left and see what is approaching.Could the truck not veer right and miss the bus?Years ago I veered right and missed an SUV which slid on snow through her stop sign. Missed by less than a foot.
yes but the truck driver probably thought the bus driver would see him and stop.. you only have one chance to get it right also what was behind the bus?? not shown also did the bus hesitate, start stop the go again who knows
I hope in the last 10+ years the NTSB has improved their animation software.
I don't know why this was recommended to me
looks like there is a traffic circle now at that intersection.
A driver is required to remain stopped until all traffic close enough to constitute an immediate hazard has passed. This is not a four way stop, thus the truck has a natural right-of-way or privilege of the immediate use of the highway. The driver of the school bus entered and continued into the intersection when the truck driver lacked adequate time and distance to stop due to his speed. If he WELL exceeds the road speed and if the school bus would have made it if he was traveling the speed limit, the truck driver owns the crash. Otherwise, this is the bus drivers fault all day long.
+Sashabooboo Nope i doubt he could see the truck coming.
This is the Fault of the local laws or US laws regarding that silly intersection.
IT SHOULD BE NORMAL TRAFFIC LIGHTS.
Honestly the parents of kids should have sued the state or federal gov (whoever made that silly intersection design in the first place).
@@benjay2985 you want to pay for all those lights? Average cost for 4 way lights is about 1.2 millino dollars, then about 15,000 per year to operate and maintain them. The road does not have the volume of traffic to warrant that expense. The crash occured because both drivers were negligent in operating their vehicles. A signal system would not have prevented that.
Completely missing from the recreation is sound. In addition to seeing the truck, the school bus driver might have been able to hear the truck coming. Did the truck warn with his horn?
The introduction states that the simulation contains no audio. As I've learned many NTSB animations do not include audio.
Bus is at fault
Yup. Break out the checkbooks. It's lawsuit time. I wonder if this was a private contractor bus or a bus actually owned and operated by the school system.
It's great that the bus driver stopped at the flashing red, but you have to sufficiently yield to approaching traffic once you do stop.
The stop line for the bus was badly located, too far back from the edge of the main road. At the sign, the driver's view was obscured and did not reach even half way to the point where the truck was at the moment the bus moved forward. Once the bus driver decided to move he/she should have paused at the point where there was a better view before proceeding. Irrespective of the faults mentioned with the truck, the ultimate blame should rest in majority 75%/25% with the bus driver. The weight, speed and vehicle defection of the truck contributes the remaining 25% of the blame.
1:40 In so einer Situation halte ich doch meine Fahrrichtung in der Mitte der Fahrbahn oder nach rechts, weg vom Unfallgegner.
1:40 In such a situation I keep my direction of travel in the middle of the lane or to the right, away from the other party in the accident.
Both are equal ,Schoolbus has Stop sign ,Truck doesn't have
There's something wrong with this comment:
There's no space between "equal" and "," and there's space between "School bus" and "," and there's no space between "sign" and "," and there's space between "Truck" and ","
Here's how its suppose to be like:
"Both are equal, School bus has Stop sign, Truck doesn't have"
@@railfanningmichael3970 Who effing cares?
Pretty good at least though
Com on guys. The truck did try to brake. There's skid marks.
Shanna Logan. trees obscure bus driver’s view - had to commit to rolling into intersection for a clear view - i experience this kind of hazard often
One skid mark. The truck was speeding, overweight, had faulty brakes. Not surprised based on what I see of dump drivers' conduct around my area.
These flashing yellow with flashing red junctions are confusing especially with todays drivers, as they are accustomed to having four way red flashing intersections. California has banned the use of 'red with yellow' and switched to adding signs to in this case the bus drivers stop sign that say CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP. Flashing red lights are still used but aren't so common here, but you would never see a yellow with red.
Interesting. No more Yellow and Red flashing lights? Just red lights alone on the street which must yield?
it would be a four way stop.... red lights mean stop right??
Harry Aiken Not a four-way-stop. The arterial traffic has right of way. Side traffic mustop and yield to the arterial traffic.
but at this particular location a 4 way stop would be appropriate
Harry Aiken No. Stopping traffic on an arterial may create huge back-ups.
forget
That intersection is problematic..
Had to fix blame elsewhere.
It's obvious that the bus driver thought he could clear the intersection in time before the Mack Truck arrived. The Mac should have slowed - decelerated - his speed knowing that he had a blinking yellow cautionary light. I'd have to look at the actual report, but simply stating that it was the bus driver's failure in observing the Mac Truck doesn't encompass the totality of the situation.
the school bus ran a stop sign endangering the lives of children. The bus driver should be cited and fired. The school system will probably be sued costing taxpayers more money.
You need to read the entire report and not rely on this very over simplified version of what happened. All this is doing is showing you the vehicle action, it does not show you the other details as determined by the investigation.
was anyone killed ?
And your grammar did too.
@@nityking1 just answer his question dick
Every gallon of gas is taxed yet where does it go? We can go to MARS but still can't invent a material to fill potholes that last one season. Or streets should be smooth as pool tables, night vision should be in cars and on roads. Fix all these deadly intersections and don't wait until a lot of deaths force them to...
i was on that bus it was very scary we had to go into a person house it was i scary day for everyone on that bus. i will never that day,
You need to find another bus and go back to school to learn how to write.
Thud979 my sister was 6 when she wrote this and don’t worry she’s still in school.
@@thud9797 i feel bad for laughing 😂
porho
Bus
OVER THE LINE. THERE ARE LINES AT STOPS FOR A REASON.
The bus got booty rapped
OMG Đhîďđ Ťhãý Đéíđs ¿¿¿¿
How did u make this video please?
they are professional forensics who do these videos for courts during investigations, 1. they will not talk to you 2. they will not tell you how they do it, but its very primitive anyway
RIP Isabelle...
Not so realistic make debris
NowlinPros You're a special kind of dumb
MicroKORGI Rd.
and dead children
@nityking1 No children were flinged off the bus in this crash, even in real life.
...and blood.
School bus too long.
Frank Ernesto too long? another special kind of stupid!
No needy job-job. Alltime livy welfare, wile yu worky.
Cheap road owners won’t install traffic lights.
Union bus driver looking for a cop out.
(A) The Operator of vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to other vehicles and to pedestrians lawfully within the intersection or an adjacent crosswalk at the time the signal is exhibited - Source: Utah State Code,Title 41, Chapter 6a, Section 305, Para (2)(a)(ii)(A)
Now, apologize for your felonious stupidity.
yes but in this case the bus could not legally enter the intersection with approaching traffic not at suffient distance to cross without the other vehicle braking.... ie yield the right of way to the truck which is not required to stop.which is failure to yield on the bus not the truck furthermore the bus had a flashing red light which in America means stop and proceed when clear/safe to do so... common sense but when you throw lawyers at the situation they would say that the striking vehicle is at fault with something like failure to take necessary action to prevent an accident or if the tire locked up/skidding they could say the "driver lost control" and so it goes on and on.....bottomline : somebody gets hurt especially children "somebody s gotta pay" attitude kicks in and here we go again roun and round
Bus was clearly in the intersection. This is why the rear part of the bus endured the brunt of the impact. Fault has been found with the Truck Driver. End of Story.
Both share fault. Truck was overweight, speeding, with faulty brakes.
no, fault was clearly laid on the bus driver, he was cited for fail to yield, the other driver was cited for securement issues, not related to the crash.