Car fatality rates are at historical lows, thanks in large part to steady increases in vehicle frame strength and rigidity. But as Newsweek reports, tougher vehicle frames make it harder for rescue teams to reach trapped passengers after a crash. Highway rescuers must purchase ever-more-expensive extraction tools to keep up with increases in frame strength, and are forced to work deeper and deeper into the "golden hour" between the accident and emergency-room treatment. Rescuers also have to be careful not to puncture hidden pressurized-gas cannisters (which fire side-impact airbags) or hidden electrical lines, requiring extra time to peel away interior plastics before extraction can begin. With rescue times climbing past the ten-minute mark and rescue equipment costing even the smallest towns upwards of $50k, there's a case to be made that stronger is not always better. Add this to our own reporting on the downsides of strengthened roof crush standards, and the automobile safety picture becomes increasingly… complex.

As Maurice Chevalier so adroitly pointed out, "old age is not so bad when you consider the alternatives." However, as the bolus of baby boomers continues to boogie toward the end of the demographic charts, there are more drivers over the age of 50 on the roads than ever before. That creates problems; many senior drivers weren't that hot behind the wheel even before they became members of the bifocal brigade. With that in mind the AAA has partnered with the University of Florida's National Older Driver Research and Training Center to create the "Smart Features for Mature Drivers" web site. The site contains advice for chronologically enhanced drivers like "don't allow other drivers to pressure you into sudden moves" and "keep the radio volume low to minimize distraction." (No, they don't say "turn off your left-hand turn signal.") They even suggest what to look for when buying a new car, including large knobs, four doors, keyless ignition and proven crashworthiness. I know the AAA means well, but those of us who refuse to be seen in a Buick or Avalon agree with Mark Twain: "Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." So excuse me for a while; there's an RS4 out there somewhere calling my name. 

Yesterday, we reported that Dallas, TX is having problems with its red-light camera revenues. Apparently, Orlando, Florida's town fathers don't read TTAC. WFTV reports that city commissioners have approved a contract to pay a Georgia company $500k a year to install and maintain red-light revenue raisers at ten different intersections. "We're really doing this as a means of public safety," Mayor Buddy Dyer insists. "And most of the statistics show many accidents are caused by running red lights." Really? I don't think so. Anyway, if it's all about the children, why does the deal hinge on whether or not cities will be allowed to issue tickets to those caught by the cameras? In fact, if the laws aren't changed, the cameras won't be installed. Perish the thought.

The Dallas News reports that the Live Large, Think Big city is dealing with another consequences of red light cameras: they work. "We did not anticipate having such success so early with the number of people not running red lights," said Zaida Basora, Dallas' assistant director of public works and transportation. "If you have success in safety, you don't have a lot of success in revenue. The other side is the people will go back to what they were doing before without the cameras." Since installing the cameras, Dallas estimates gross revenue from red light cameras dropped from $14m to $4m. The kicker? Dallas signed a contract guaranteeing the system's operators $3800 per camera per month. Dallas is now planning on scaling back to just 100 cameras (that's $380k per month to the sys admin). Last month, Dallas faced accusations of race-biased camera placement. So is the shut down a financial issue or just an out for last month's problems? One wonders which cameras were switched off.. but it's probably both.

In an op ed entitled "Driving Miss Chloe," New York Times scribe Caitlin Flanagan argues that the drop in teenage drivers reflects over-protective parents. Seemingly oblivious to journalistic scandals involving fictional composites, Flanagan invents a teenage girl named Chloe and castigates her for riding with Mom in a Toyota Sienna– instead of learning how to drive. "When I was in high school in the 1970s, we had a name for teenagers like Chloe: losers… In my day, we did whatever was necessary to get out on a Saturday night: we climbed out of windows; we jumped on the back of motorcycles; God help us, we hitchhiked. We needed, on the most basic and physical level, to be out in the dangerous night, with one another, away from our parents and the safety of home. It was no way to live, and some of us didn’t. But it was a drive so elemental and essential that there seemed no way to deny it." In a nod to reality, Flanagan mentions the enormous cost of insuring a teen driver– and then dismisses it in her relentless assault on today's teens' lack of gumption. "Learn to drive? Why would they want to do that?" she concludes. Offer coherent analysis of teen driving trends? Why would Flanagan do that?

Reuters reports Honda has published a driver's guide for women in Japan that includes info on, among other things, how to pump their own gas, how to safely transport the kids, how to park, and advice for aging female drivers. Honda says the pamphlet "erases all your fears about driving." When asked if this meant Honda thinks women are worse drivers than men, the company's PR flack replied "We don't think so. There are some specific cases of women drivers, and we focus on those cases." There are specific cases of men who drive like idiots too, but HoMoCo doesn't seemed all that bothered about that, now do they? It makes us wonder if Honda will be introducing an Accord La Femme.

A new report concludes that California's rough roads are "creating additional operating costs for drivers due accelerated vehicle deterioration, additional maintenance needs and increased fuel consumption." The Road Information Program (TRIP) pegs the financial damage at more than $650 per driver per year– compared with $413 nationally. San Diego's "street-maintenance failings" cost the average motorist some $684 a year. It's even worse in the City of Angels; bad roads in LA cost automobilists a whopping $778 per year. TRIP says 23 percent of America's major metropolitan roads "feature pavement in poor condition." In California, it's as high as 65 percent. To help the media fulfill its "this sucks and it's getting worse" meta meme, TRIP claims that "Travel on urban roads is increasing, and travel by large commercial trucks is growing even faster than travel by cars." No word when California will go for a double whammy– fix the roads and save the planet– by raising gas taxes.

Talk about the rush hour fender-bender from Hell. The Khaleej Times reports that over 150 cars piled up on the Abu-Dhabi to Dubai highway yesterday, in the worst wreck in the country's history. Authorities report four deaths and 317 injuries in the crash, which also involved 12 buses. About two dozen cars caught fire, triggering a massive rescue operation and snarling traffic for hours. Officials say that foggy conditions and rush hour congestion contributed to the disaster, pointing out that the close quarters driving of commuters makes such pileups more likely. Armed Forces personnel and helicopters were called in to clear up the crash zone, a task made all the more difficult by bad weather and the presence of 12 destroyed buses. Be careful out there!

Jack Gillis reckons the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) crash test ratings are misleading. "It's impossible for car buyers to separate the truly good performers from those at the bottom of the list," asserts the Director of Public Affairs for the Consumer Federation of America (CFA). Gillis points out that nearly every new vehicle sold in the U.S.– some 96 percent of them– are blessed with a four or five star NHTSA front crash rating. His Car Book provides a guide to the non-invidious distinctions between models, and our podcast clarifies Gillis' call for new testing standards. Meanwhile, here's the best/worst from the CFA's safety list, which combines front and side NHTSA ratings for an overall ranking. 

Category/Best/Worst

Subcompact/Hyundai Accent/Toyota Yaris
Compact/Chevrolet HHR/Chrysler PT Cruiser
Intermediate/Toyota Avalon/Pontiac Grand Prix
Large/Acura RL/Cadillac DTS
Minivan/Kia Sedona/Kia Rondo
Small SUV/Jeep Liberyty/Jeep Compass
Midsize SUV/Volvo XC90/Cadillac SRX
Large SUV/Chevrolet Tahoe/Chevrolet Trailblazer

Current federal regulations require that car and truck roofs support 1.5 times their vehicle's weight. According to The Detroit Free Press, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) is recommending that this standard be upgraded to 2.5 times the vehicle's weight on the driver's side. The industry-sponsored safety campaigners released a study concluding that the strongest existing SUV roofs reduce the risk of injury by 39 to 57 percent. The Chevy Blazer fared the worst in their roof crush test, while Nissan's X-Terra, Jeep's Liberty and third-gen Ford Explorers scored the highest. (Both the Explorer and the Grand Cherokee showed significant improvement in newer models vs. previous generations.) The new study does not deal with the impact of seat belt use (or lack thereof)– judged by "real world" analysis to have greater impact on rollover deaths than roof strength. Also, as TTAC's Bob Elton pointed out back in '06, reinforcing SUV roofs would raise the vehicle's center of gravity, potentially increasing the likelihood of a rollover. Although the IIHS called for active handling for all SUVs, the laws of physics cannot be ignored– or revoked.

According to KHOU, police in Colleyville have printed up "Stop Thief!" signs to battle car thieves. The signs, designed to hang from a cars' rear view mirror, tell would-be thieves there are no "valuables, money, computers, purses or briefcases in this vehicle." (Ah, but are there?) Chief Tommy Ingram admits the signs won't actually discourage thieves; they'll remind drivers to hide their valuables. KHOU also reports that back in Washington D.C., Transportation Secretary Mary Peters is urging Congress to allow Mexican trucks to continue driving into the U.S., 'cause halting the trucks would hurt agribusiness. (Opponents fear U.S. job losses and safety issues.) And good news if you're a Texas car dealer. The state's Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program (VRARAVRP) is a hit! The Star-Telegram reports that The North Central Texas Council of Governments, which administers the program locally, is adding extra phone lines and personnel to deal with the flood of interest since the state kicked-in additional money (up to $3500 towards a new car). Texas taxes hard at work.

At the moment, electronically enhanced night vision is only available on the BMW 5-, 6- and 7-Series and the Mercedes-Benz S-Class sedan. Our spies tell us that Bimmer's Night Vision option ($2200) is a drug on the market. Merc's Night View Assist would be similarly unloved if it weren't part of a $6190 options package. WardsAuto.com reports that the gizmologists supplying same say their second gen systems will bring the technology to the masses. In fact, Autoliov confidently predicts that sales of their proprietary technology will soar from today's 20k to 2013's 1m units per year. Autoliv's prognostication is based on a J.D. Power & Associates customer survey re: new-vehicle features. Night vision ranked fourth on buyers' wish list– and dropped to 18th when the price was disclosed. Yes, well, the new system is better than the old (surprise). "With the hardware looking for heads, arms and legs and the software evaluating data for false warnings from light poles and tree stumps, [Autoliv MD Stuart] Klapper says drivers typically will get a four-second warning on the night-vision monitor of any living thing in the vehicle’s path." At what speed? As the average vehicle requires about three to four seconds to stop from 60mph (at best), no matter how you parse it, the system is not ideal for Knight Rider wannabes. Just sayin'…

Zoops! Those of you with long memories may remember how I cooed and gushed over the Pontiac Solstice GXP's essentially perfect 2.0-liter turbo mill. That's the same motor in the Saturn Sky Redline, the Cobalt SS and the HHR SS. But you'll also recall I asked, "How can Pontiac get so much right (looks, engine) and, at the same time, get so much wrong (everything else)?" According to the Detroit Free Press, I'm even more right than I thought I was. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is investigating 40 reports that drivers have to press down too hard on the brake pedals. Allegedly, all the complaints originated in parking lots and driveways when starting the car. Twenty thousand Solstii and Skys are being examined. I don't remember this happening during my time with the car, though I do remember the GXP's driveline trying to eat itself. GM is offering the NHTSA full cooperation.

As if Ford wasn't losing enough money, AP reports [via Forbes ] the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals today ordered Ford to pay a California woman $82.6m for injuries sustained when her Ford Explorer rolled over in 2002. A jury had originally awarded the plaintiff $369m. Like street cocaine, that number has been cut several times in course of the case. Ford had appealed the verdict all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the Explorer met all federal safety standards. The Supreme Court sent the case back to the 4th Circuit to determine whether or not their ruling was in line with a previous determination which overturned nearly $80m in damages awarded in a tobacco lawsuit. Today's decision blesses the plaintiff with $55m in punitive damages. The legal point: federal safety standards are not enough to shield automakers from legal liability. The scary bit: class action lawsuits will now fall like rain upon Ford's head. The Blue Oval Boyz have yet to publicly comment on the case, probably as they're busy talking to their insurance agent and trying to figure out what they're going to sell next.

Earlier, we brought you news about a toll plaza protest in Maine. Now from Florida we hear that "tens of thousands drivers on the 408 might find themselves a bit confused." So says a female TV news co-anchor; to which her male counterpart helpfully adds (for the hard of thinking) "and [there's] fear that confusion could cause accidents." That's how the duo introduces a story for WKMG warning viewers about the opening of a new toll plaza that forces drivers to pass through two plazas– but only pay at one of them. Motorists must motor through the Holland East Plaza and the new toll plaza while workers build E-Pass lanes. Even with signs displaying "No toll, do not stop" in English, Spanish, Lithuanian and Farsi, officials say the presence of two plazas could cause motorists to slow down or stop. One worker described the project as "like changing the carpet in your house– with the furniture still inside." The project should be completed by 2009– barring any natural disasters such as hurricanes, union interference or scheduling inefficiency. Expressway Authority spokesman Brian Hutchings says: "We do know that it's going to be potentially confusing so we want people to stay on their game." God knows the personal injury lawyers will be.