NHTSA Wants Stricter Pedestrian Safety Requirements

by Chris Teague

Published: May 24th, 2023

nhtsa wants stricter pedestrian safety requirements

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Insurance Institute for Highway Safety occasionally update their safety testing protocols to keep up with changes in technology and the auto industry. The IIHS recently updated its side-crash tests with greater impact forces, and now, the NHTSA is considering a toughening of its pedestrian crash testing.

The NHTSA said the updates would measure pedestrian protection and detection and has asked for public comment on the matter. More pedestrians are dying on our roads, with 3,434 people killed in the first six months of last year – almost 19 deaths per day. The IIHS already has a test for day- and nighttime pedestrian crash prevention, so it’s not surprising to see the NHTSA add the criteria to its list.

NHTSA officials said that the organization is working on rules to make automatic emergency braking, pedestrian detection, and other features mandatory for new vehicles. The NHTSA noted that 20 automakers have committed to equipping at least 95 percent of cars and trucks, but more needs to be done.

The IIHS’ recent updates knocked several vehicles out of contention for a Top Safety Pick award, so we’ll likely see a similar shift when the NHTSA implements these proposed changes. Despite their sometimes annoying alerts, advanced driver aids have been proven to save lives, so it’s time for the rules to change.

[Image: Ground Picture via Shutterstock]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

#NHTSA #IIHS

Chris Teague

Chris grew up in, under, and around cars, but took the long way around to becoming an automotive writer. After a career in technology consulting and a trip through business school, Chris began writing about the automotive industry as a way to reconnect with his passion and get behind the wheel of a new car every week. He focuses on taking complex industry stories and making them digestible by any reader. Just don’t expect him to stay away from high-mileage Porsches.

More by Chris Teague

Comments

Join the conversation

9 of 55 comments

David S. on May 25, 2023

All valid points, I believe Art said it best, people lost in their phones oblivious to their surroundings.

2 Reply
- Lorenzo on May 25, 2023
  
  Pedestrians don't need a cell phone to be oblivious. Alan made the very good point that pedestrians should be taught. Most people in the US are unaware and meander like they're at a mall. The real world of streets and sidewalks is not a mall, and pedestrians need to be taught that they're at severe risk when they step in front of a moving car, motorcycle, or even a bicycle. I'm old enough to remember regular visits to schools by a police traffic officer to remind kids to look both ways before stepping off a curb, with the warning that anything moving on wheels cannot stop quickly, and that the human body suffers the most in a collision.
  
  Like
- Jeff S on May 25, 2023
  
  Lorenzo--Agree pedestrians should be taught about safety and being aware of vehicular traffic. I as well had a police office give that same talk to my elementary school. Maybe that talk should be given to adults as well.
  
  1
Punkairwaves on May 25, 2023

I've seen plenty of bad behavior by both drivers and pedestrians. It's time to get serious about enforcing traffic and jaywalking laws.

2 Reply
- Zerofoo on May 26, 2023
  
  I would also like to see bike lanes (and their use) be made mandatory on some types of roads. Mixing low-speed, lightweight, two-wheel vehicles with high-speed heavy vehicles is asking for trouble. Speed doesn't necessarily kill - speed differential does.
  
  Like
Zerofoo on May 26, 2023

COVID should have been the warning shot to city planners - high-density living spaces for humans carry health risks. Communicable respiratory disease and pedestrian hazards are two hazards of humans living racked and stacked on top of each other.

If you want to save lives, planning boards need to look at capping residential density in very dense urban environments.

Blaming cars for unsustainable increases in residential density is not the solution.

Like Reply
- See 2 previous
- MaintenanceCosts on May 26, 2023
  
  Denser areas didn't have any higher infection rates than others (in fact, the very highest rates were all in rural areas). Rural areas also have much higher pedestrian death rates than cities. If you prefer rural life, that's fine; you don't have to make stuff up to justify it.
  
  Like
- Lou_BC on May 26, 2023
  
  The obvious and best solution is to engineer environments to reduce vehicle speeds in any area where there is a high pedestrian load or increased incidence of pedestrians. 20 mph is the survivability threshold for person to vehicle impacts.
  
  Like
- Zerofoo on May 26, 2023
  
  "Denser areas didn't have any higher infection rates than others". I worked throughout the pandemic - my work takes me to cities constantly. Cities may not have had worse infection rates - but the financial impact to COVID seemed way worse in cities. Life seemed to go on pretty well in the suburbs and rural areas hardly noticed COVID at all. Many cities still have not recovered from the lockdowns necessitated by the density of cities. I stand by my point - Cities are vulnerable to all kinds of problems due to their density.
  
  Like
MaintenanceCosts on May 29, 2023

"Rural areas hardly noticed COVID at all."

I very much doubt that is true in places like the Navajo Nation or the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska, some of which lost 2% or more of their population to COVID.

No city had a death rate in the same order of magnitude.

Low-density living is a very modern invention. Before cars, people, even in agricultural areas, needed to live densely to survive.

1 Reply