PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of RatingsOther■ [Rating: 2.5] This has been a continuing problem dating back to pre-LTPP. We need to focus on collecting quality dataat the time and not looking for it in a database. Outlier determination techniques already exist■ [Rating: 5] The proposed research would help agencies identify and assess possible outlying data valuesItem #35:G-29Performance of Longitudinal Barriers on Curves andSuper-Elevated Roadway Sections(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 1 1 1 5 6 3RAC 1 2 3 4 16 17 6Standing Committee on Research■ The scope of the effort is a concern. Is there a evidence of a problem?■ [Rating: 5] This is an important research that and needs to be pursued, because past evaluations have focused on straightsections of barrier on level surfaces.. The research should, however, make much greater use of analytical tools such asvehicle dynamics analysis and crash simulations to develop insights into the relationships between barrier features, roaddesign, and impact conditions. Many more of these factors can be evaluated using an analytical approach compared tocrash testing. These should be the focus a first phase. Crash tests will be needed to validate the findings and to testmodifications to hardware to be deployed on curved or super-elevated sections later.Research Advisory Committee■ Subcomittee on Design Rank # 3■ This research is very appropriate in evaluating performance issues with longitudinal barriers that have not previouslybeen studied in depth. Standard crash testing of barriers has always evaluated straight roadways and has overlooked theperformance variables for barriers placed on curves. NCAC has dabbled in this area a bit but much more evaluation isneeded.■ This project was ranked as the #1 priority for several AASHTO committees, including the Technical Committee forRoadside Safety. This project would address more real-world considerations for the placement of longitudinal barrierand perhaps enhance the typical flat-plane, straight barrier testing methodology that is in use today.■ The problem statement is well written, and shows a need for this research.Other■ [Rating: 5] Rank #3Item #36:G-05National Strategic Highway Safety Plan Support-Toward Zero Deaths: A National Strategy and Vision(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 1 2 5 5 4RAC 2 2 6 16 11 12Standing Committee on Research■ This is a logical extension of the states' efforts at developing strategic highway safety plans. I'm not sure if this is anNCHRP project, though, since much of the proposed work is not research. It is outreach and marketing. Also, I havesome question about whether the national plan will really add that much value beyond what the states havedeveloped.Rather too soon to do this? Many state DOTs have not implemented their SHSP enough to be assessedpartly due to budget predicament. Should wait until enough progress of implementation is made so that lessons learnedfrom implementation of the current SHSPs are available for the project.■ G-5 though G-7 seem intertwined■ Suggest combining with G-04 and G-06.■ [Rating: 5] This would be a continuation of an ongoing FHWA Safety effort where FHWA tasked AASHTO withIV-22
PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of Ratingsdeveloping a plan for formulating and implementing a National SHSP. This effort would build upon the developingFHWA/AASHTO plan. The costs seem reasonable.Research Advisory Committee■ Admirable and Needed. However some of the National Level efforts are beginning to take on a re-cycled appearance -possibly the result of previous unsuccessful efforts and general safety evolution. Several AASHTO Strategic HighwaySafety efforts (including the Integrated Process) laid out some ground work that hopefully this effort could build upon.■ This work is already occurring and is very valuable. However, this research report would be recreating something that isalready working!■ This proposal is redundant with little probability of improving safety performance.■ The Strategic Highway Research Program's Naturalistic Driver Study will produce new information relating to theresearch objectives of G05 and G07, specifically in the areas of outread and research, which may aid in the futureimplementation of the National SHSP. It may be useful to wait for SHRP2 results. SHRP2 data will make for a valuablenew link to SHSP portal(s) in the future.■ It's time to stop planning to plan and creating documents that end up sitting on the shelf, and starting acting to resolve theproblem. $600K would be better spent elsewhere.Item #37:G-09Support for the AASHTO IntellDriveSM Strategic Plan(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 2 1 3 5 6RAC 6 5 3 10 9 16Standing Committee on Research■ It is imperative that states be actively engaged in the development of IntelliDrive applications such that benefits mayaccrue to public transportation agencies in terms of improved traffic management, incident management, and informationdissemination. Additional benefits may also be found in data collected on infrastructure condition.■ Too expensive, too large an effort - need stimulus funding for this■ Work will be ineffective and wasteful, and better left to the private sector. See attached comments.■ [Rating: 4] This proposed effort by AASHTO is essential for establishing a process and mechanism by which AASHTOmembers can have greater involvement in the IntelliDrive Program through the creation of an IntelliDrive workinggroup. Their support is essential to the successful deployment of V21 Safety related applications that may require thesupport of state and local practitioners. However, the proposal SOW is vague and needs clarification. Suggest reducefunding for this initial step to $500,000.Research Advisory Committee■ Not applicable to Field Operations■ More automated vehicle avoidance systems and information exchange will know dought improve safety.■ It will take a project and concept like this to take us to the next level with regards to serious reductions in highway safetyfatalities and injuries and real-time network information for congestion mitigation. Low-cost short term countermeasuresare great but will only get us so far......■ IntelliDrive has the potential to significantly enhance both safety and mobility on a scale greater than any other programif fully implemented.■ Too much and too big a program for NCHRP. What is research benefit to state DOTs?■ IntelliDrive is a well-established research project with concrete goals and major support from FHWA. It has the potentialIV-23
Page 1 and 2: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
Page 21: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
Page 73 and 74:
PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
show all

PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?