Accidents are they real?

[jaff]

Are accidents real? Or is it the unfortunate's inattention?
Technically I cannot think of a situation where if you traced the root cause back, that it wouldn't be the Swiss cheese method of the innattentive or careless holes lining up to cause an event!

Thoughts?

[6739264]

There are only very few circumstances (such as catastrophic mechanical failure) where you could honestly say that the incident was out of the control of all persons involved. But then to get picky, you could identify the cause of the mechanical failure which may then also be inattention or the like.

As they say, the way to make driving as safe as possible is to remove the human element from the equation.

[chook]

There are very few pure accidents. The world I work in teaches that somewhere somehow are human did or failed to do something that lead to the incident!
So called "Acts of God" are very few and far between & even some of those after proper investigation reveal that a human did or did not do, think, react or whatever!
There is a huge industry (which I'm part of) making a stack of money out of the prevention of or reduction of severity of incidents. So I guess to answer the question No there not real! Think of it this way - there needs to be a condition & event without both nothing happens!
And as Jaff said there the "Swiss Cheese" model - once all of those holes line up, bang there is your incident!
If you think about it most of the Emergency Services work involves other peoples Risk Management not working correctly or at all
Anyway on that note
cheers

[jaff]

So if there are no accidents? therefore at every vehicle accident scene someone technically was driving without due care.
So at what point do the Police stop saying sorry about the "accident" seeya or issuing infringement notices for driving without due care, is it mandated or up to the individual officer.Does it depend on the person drivings attitude(cue the music) bowchicka bowbow bowchicka bowbow 

[RescueHazmat]

Meh.. Fire forum..

[bajdas]

Ok, if this is so.... where does a mechanical failure fit?...for example, blow-out on front tyre causes car to skid off road.

Everything manufactured has a known 'rate of failure' statistic.

Are you inferring that it is still the drivers fault because he/she could not handle the tyre blowout & subsequent skid? Or is it the manufacturer of the tyre's fault? Or the owner of the car for maybe not completing maintenance fast enough by replacing the tyre? Or the manufacturer of the car for not having ABS or electronic stability control safety systems installed in the car?

**just curious & I love playing devils advocate**   

[jaff]

Ok, if this is so.... where does a mechanical failure fit?...for example, blow-out on front tyre causes car to skid off road.

Everything manufactured has a known 'rate of failure' statistic.

Are you inferring that it is still the drivers fault because he/she could not handle the tyre blowout & subsequent skid? Or is it the manufacturer of the tyre's fault? Or the owner of the car for maybe not completing maintenance fast enough by replacing the tyre? Or the manufacturer of the car for not having ABS or electronic stability control safety systems installed in the car?





**just curious & I love playing devils advocate**   

Yeh didn't say my theory was watertight .......but I think that you would agree that the term "accident", is an over used expression for a ....up 

[Cameron Yelland]

hence why it is called Road Crash Rescue now and not Road Accident Rescue. 

[SA Firey]

If there is sufficient evidence to suggest that there was an offending driver responsible due to manner of driving which causes the collision, then the officer will issue a TIN on the spot for the offence.

Pip will clarify further, bit that is what I have witnesssed SAPOL doing at scenes.

[Zippy]

hence why it is called Road Crash Rescue now and not Road Accident Rescue. 

Thats not the case with the training lol...they still seem hell bent on calling it "URAR - Undertake Road Accident Rescue"

[Hazmat206]

How's this for an accident!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCxc4SjpN6M

[whitecloud]

There are only very few circumstances (such as catastrophic mechanical failure) where you could honestly say that the incident was out of the control of all persons involved. But then to get picky, you could identify the cause of the mechanical failure which may then also be inattention or the like.

As they say, the way to make driving as safe as possible is to remove the human element from the equation.

ROBOT VALET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bowforce]

No accidents just collisions. An accident would assume no one is at fault. Thats how you can issue a TIN

[Firefrog]

Do some research on "Human Factors" People are not infallible creatures. It is far too simplistic to say that accidents are caused by inattention for example.
Imagine the example where a pilot is giving their full attention to flying the plane but it still crashes. This cannot be attributed to inattention, quite the opposite. The root cause could be a range of things such as Task saturation, stress, fatigue, a cognitive error. There has been no mechanical failure but a failure in the human to complete a complex task without incident.

People fail - The root causes are rarely as simple as we may imagine.

Taken from http://www.atsb.gov.au/about_atsb/training/hf_course.aspx Human factors considers the effects of physical, psychological, and environmental factors on human performance in different task environments, including the role of human operators in complex systems.

[chook]

Quite right Firefrog - there are many volumns written on human behaviour & the causes of incidents. Even down to the design of control panels, layout of equipment, logical sequences etc. For example we had a double fatal the other night (it started as a search). The cause will be human error, however they were foreign students (who drive on the wrong side of the road), brand new car(familiarity with equipment), poorly lit windy road with sharp corners & a large unprotected irrigation channel. The root cause will be driver error (speed+alcohol), however there are a number of contributing factors which if removed may have prevented their deaths or at least reduced the severity - including the channel being full of water to celibrate the 50th birthday of the weir! Normally it would have been empty at this time of year. As an aside the nuclear power industry did some land mark research on this subject (for obvious reasons) in the 60's, petrochemical & aviation has followed as well as the US navy, to try and reduce the likelyhood of human error. And finally if you think about the control of a major incident, a look at the amount of information coming in & going out (inputs/outputs)& decisions that have to be made (& timeframes)people wonder why there are mistakes/ or their radio call isn't answer immediately! Some thing to consider!
cheers

[jaff]

Firefrog and chook, me thinks maybe you boys ought to think about changing vocations to........spin doctors!

No your Honour, " I did not lie, I simply failed to tell the truth"

Most times ducks are ducks!, not sleek chickens, not cosmopolitan geese, not understated peacocks, .....they're just freaking ducks    DO    YA    GET IT!

[chook]

Ha Jaff you forget I'm already employed as a spin doctor I work in OHS for a large multinational - do you really think we do anything else?