Of the 54 children killed by automotive air bags, how many of their surviving parents
now care about high-output, multi-valve, race-track proven, new cars? With advertising
pap such as “Engine technology born of race tracks,” and “…we took on the role of
delivering our winning technology ideas to the cars and trucks you can drive,” car
makers want the sleek, sexy family sedan to perform rather than protect.
With every crash on a race track comes a detailed analysis of the incident. Driver
injuries, track conditions, weather, equipment failure, fuel cell containment — all the
variables manifest into near immediate, corrective measures. Kids getting terminally
smacked with an airbag, or any other shortcoming associated with poor design,
improper equipment use, driver errors or otherwise, are nothing more than pitiful,
statistical incidentals.
Belts, bags, straps, reinforced doors, beefed-up seat anchors, redesigned headrests,
etc., are the reluctant scraps of low-tech hum, tossed stingy-fashion into the vast
sea of drivers in a protracted pacification program. The racing industry seems to
consistently “put up” with the domestic versions of their mother company hybrids: It
would be difficult for a race team to toss a major manufacturer – and their huge
sponsorship programs — for the sake of not applying life-saving technology to the
common car.
These days, news headlines are once again back-pedalling to the sizable repair bills
associated with popular small pickup bumpers. In the early 1980s, this issue was
resolved with 5-mph bumpers. This standard was eventually dropped to a 2.5 mph
version due to the added cost of equipping passenger cars with 5-mph units. Follow
the ambulances to the money.
In the early 1970s, “Rich’s” aftermarket water bumpers where a moderate hit with some
safety-minded folks. With the chrome, factory versions removed, Rich’s dealers
retrofitted, plastic, water-filled “tanks” that allowed inadvertent bumps and low-speed
collisions, to soak the streets with purged water — not broken, expensive parts and
precious bodily fluids. Why didn’t they continue? They were ugly, fat, and the objects
of kicking vandals until the plugs popped. Who knows? They weren’t sexy.
As automobile manufacturers continue to slow dance with the vulnerable, crash-bearing public, organizations, institutes and bureaucratic organs, fumble and reinvent
what already exists: They justify their existence with volumes of redundant studies
analyzing data that will never convince a parent or loved one that an improperly
placed child seat or marginally lose seat restraint ultimately killed their precious cargo.
Care for another slow-dance? Ford Motor Company is about add side air bags to all of
its cars and Windstar minivans over the next two years. GM, and the foreign makers
all are catching the blow-bag fever. Chrysler, whose profits have remarkably risen,
does not offer side bags on any of its models. Follow the money — to the ambulance.
Where does our proactive government and our fearless leader stand in regard to
automobile safety? In his weekly address to the nation in December 1996, President
Clinton requested all Americans to buckle-up and keep kids 12 and under strapped-in
the backseat. In January 1997, he directed the secretary of transportation to
instigate action for the increase use of seat belts nationwide. Through Executive Order
13043 of April 16, 1997, the president penned another blot of impotence through fiat:
“Increasing Seat Belt Use In the United States:” Too little — decades too late — Mr.
President.
The passenger car industry is propelled by the pain, suffering, and fatalities associated
with its “race-proven” products. After viewing police photos of dead accident victims —
all wearing seat belts and shoulder restraints — poor headrest designs, weak seat
anchors, sharp interior configurations, piercing motors and components, skimpy roof
frames, etc. etc.; what other conclusion can I offer? How much do the optional leather-
wrapped steering wheels and gear selector knobs contribute to safety when both
are intertwined within a crushed anatomy? This image-pandering has
continuously stifled the safety issue.
As venerable an institution as the California Highway Patrol is purported to be, I once
took the initiative to begin an investigation. Attempting to circulate a short
questionnaire throughout the patrolling force, I wanted to find out just what an
experienced officer thought of wrecked cars. Here are the four questions I wanted to
have answered: 1) What seems to be the most consistent weakness in car design? 2)
Depending on the variables: excessive speed, driver under the influence, hazardous
weather/road conditions, etc., how could better designs override driver errors? 3) What
is your opinion regarding air bags and other “new” safety features? 4) If you could
present your opinions, concepts and suggestions to all automobile manufacturers, what
would you say?
The deputy commissioner wrote back with this: “Unfortunately, the
CHP does not participate in projects of this nature. While our officers are trained in
observation and accident investigation, they do not have the expertise necessary to
adequately identify design defects or shortcomings of the nature you request.” Oh,
really?
I will wager the rookie patrolman in Southern California has witnessed and investigated
more wrecks than all the pitcrews combined on all the race tracks in the entire world for
the last decade! These pitcrews — no matter the level of expertise — will provide inputs
and corrections will be made. Attempting to circumnavigate the naysayers, calls were
made to executive offices throughout the massive automobile industry. After
exhausting attempts for information I was told to simply “back off.”
Ironically, while the bureaucracies, environmentalists, and some of the major oil
companies are trying to get us out of our cars — most seem to allow extrication as well
as confiscation. Before we all are forced to hit the bicycle pedals, I propose we enjoy a
short but maximized safe driving experience before the day of the car crusher is
realized. Note: even Mr. Lee Iacocca’s new company, EV Global is pushing the electric
bicycle momentum.
Here’s the deal: Some years back, major universities throughout the nation, were
invited to submit entries for a contest. A submarine contest. Winners were invited to a
Florida beach with their best designs to compete for prizes. The ultimate accolade was
an appreciative eyeing from the United States Navy. Why not invite schools to submit
their best designs for safe car designs? Winners will go to Indianapolis for the “crash
finals” where top finalists will compete in four categories: rollovers, head-on, rear-
endings, and a “mystery” category. Speeds and conditions will escalate according to
remaining/surviving entrants. The winners will be presented with cash prizes, major
grants, patent protection and media rights.
Oh, and something for the kids: A contest to design a protective “crash cage” for the
majority of existing child safety seats; a structure similar to a race car protective cage
where an entire vehicle will disintegrate before the integrity of the cage is compromised.
These units will be on a “buy-back” system where, once the child outgrows the unit, the
manufacturer will remit some of the initial investment.
We can only hope and pray the race track wonder can retrofit the boulevard coupe with
safety features as opposed to fire-breathing, butt-beating performance. Where will
the world’s major automobile manufacturers stand on this issue? Does Ford have
stock in companies making gauze and gurneys? Does General Motors have stock in
ether and isopropyl alcohol? Does Chrysler design caskets?
