Statement of Dr. Gerhard Lehmann
VDO Mannesman AG

DR. LEHMANN: Thank you, Chairman. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

May I also ask who has a link to the highway transportation business?

(Show of hands)

DR. LEHMANN: Okay. Thank you. It's worthwhile to talk to you.

My subject is highway-recording systems, and I want to give a report on the European and as far as available on the U.S. experiences. I will highlight four points.

First, are highway recording systems a useful device? Then, present to you the available devices. Third, give you some field experiences, some case histories, of such devices, and last but not least, try to give some recommendations to the U.S. transportation policy.

Is highway-recording system a useful device? Road transport is an economic factor, an important one, but equally important as efficiency is the road safety. Extensive experiences have been gained concerning the accident-preventing effect of recording systems.

Let me mention the high contribution of the Tachograph to road safety in the commercial vehicle sector in the European Union. This success also stimulated other countries or other regions to introduce Tachograph legislation.

Here you see a world map that shows that throughout the European Union, consisting of 15 member states, highway-recording systems are mandated. But this does not only apply for the European Union, also Middle and Eastern European countries have a law saying that trucks and buses have to be equipped with a Tachograph as far as they are crossing borders.

But there are also other regions, like Japan, like Brazil, that have a full Tachograph legislation. In other regions, such legislation is under preparation.

Let me ask the question, what induced these regions to mandate recording systems like the Tachograph? There are four reasons.

First, it is the improvement of road safety by enforcing driving time and speeding.

Second, it is the harmonization of the competitive conditions where driving time and speeding plays a major role.

Third, it's the accident analysis that contributes to legal certainty.

Last but not least we are dealing with business, not only, so to say, road safety. It has to contribute to fleet management. It has to have an economic value to install such devices.

So, it becomes obvious that highway-recording systems are not the spy in the cab as often said, but a useful tool for efficient and safer transportation.

If you remember the world map you have seen right now, there were two white spots on it. The one is Africa, and the other one is North America. What is the explanation for this? As always in life, it depends on the circumstances.

In Europe, for example, it was the high number of accidents in the '50s and '60s in which trucks and buses were involved that led to the compulsory introduction of the Tachograph law. Furthermore, it was the foundation of the single market in Europe that was composed by nations with very different transportation rules. This made it necessary to harmonize the competitive conditions, of which driving time and speeding, as I already said, are major factors.

As we will see, the circumstances in the United States are basically the same. We have high accident rates with trucks involved. And looking at NAFTA, a new competitive challenge to the U.S. highway transportation business will come up. Those factors may justify a change of viewpoint in U.S.A. that comes closer to the European approach.

Now, let me come to the part: which highway recording systems are available? I want to address three of them, the three major and basic ones. This is a Tachograph, the Accident Data Recorder, and the family of On-Board Recorders.

The Tachograph. Since 1970, until today, a diagram chart-based Tachograph is in use throughout the European Union. In the year 2001, we will introduce in Europe a new type of Tachograph on which I will concentrate and which you see on the slides.

The major functions of this device are: the driver has to have a so-called driver card which is a chip card with a memory for 28 days driver's behavior. Second, there is so-called mass memory in that device that stores for 365 days all activities of the drivers that drove this vehicle and also the speed for the last 24 hours per second. This speed recording can be used for accident analysis. Last but not least, the device has a printer for enforcement purposes and driver- and operator-related information.

The second device is the Accident Data Recorder. This device will remind you of a flight recorder for passenger cars, trucks and buses. It is composed of sensors measuring the transversal and longitudinal acceleration of a vehicle as well as its change of direction, and it also memorizes the road speed.

In addition to that, the device stores signals for up to 10 signal providers like ignition, brake or directional indicator or sirens in emergency vehicles.

In the case of an accident, this data is recorded 30 seconds before the accident and 15 seconds after the accident. The accident as such is automatically detected by a very complicated algorithm.

The device can memorize several accidents. Critical traffic situations can also be manually stored by pressing a button. This device can be installed in any kind of vehicle, and there is no need for additional sensors.

The accident analysis, I will show you an example later on, is made by experts. They use software packages that belong to the system. This device was marketed in Europe five years ago, and we are now launching it in the United States as well.

Let me come to the third system, On-Board Computer. For on-board computers there are very individual solutions. They are composed of recording units for driver and vehicle data and individual facilities for trip-related data, for communication, navigation, infotainment, everything that is to the liking of drivers and of operators.

I have to say there is a couple of powerful on-board computer manufacturers in the United States.

Knowing now a little more about the available products let me come to the case histories of such devices. I want to concentrate on three examples: the Tachograph in Europe, the Accident Data Recorder experience we obtained in Europe and then I would like to mention some U.S. experiences with On-Board Computers.

Back to Europe and the Tachograph regulation there. The legal background in Europe can be summarized: The main objective for the introduction of such a device was the enforcement of drivers' hours and speeding violations, as I already said. It has to be highlighted that in the European Union there is a compulsory introduction of these devices in any truck with more than 3.5 tons and in all buses with more than nine seats. This is what the regulation says, and believe me, all forwarding agents follow that rule.

It has to be said that this device is fully specified by European law. This also applies for the new Tachograph to come in the year 2001.

Having such a powerful tool also for enforcement, one has to ask the question how do the European stakeholders evaluate that product? Do they like it or do they dislike it? I can say that drivers, their unions and motor carriers are in favor of the regulation because it contributes to equal competitive conditions. It contributes also to a better reputation of the highway transportation business. And, last but not least, this regulation protects the driver from being exploited by his operator.

At this occasion, I may say that mileage-based compensation systems for drivers are unlawful in Europe.

The European Tachograph law and its enforcement induces the driver to a safer driving style by avoiding speeding and drowsy driving, and this effect is shown in the German accident statistics.

Here we have a graph showing the accident development in Germany. In 1975, personal injury happened every 790,000 travel kilometers for trucks. In 1985, there was only one accident every 1.2 million kilometers. This means an increase of the distance traveled per accident of more than 54 percent.

This time interval was chosen, 1975-1985, because it represents the first decade after the full Tachograph penetration. With passenger cars in the same period, we have an improvement of 22 percent only. This figure shows that the recording equipment contributed to a very large extent to improved road safety.

Let me now come to the Accident Data Recorder. I would like to invite you, if you are interested in more detailed information about this product, to come to our booth where Eric Kent and Tony Reynolds, my colleagues from VDO North America, have prepared some papers for you.

I want to concentrate on one accident analysis in order to make you familiar of with the system. I have chosen a very simple accident: An intersection accident where the driver coming from the right had an accident data recorder on board. He was accused by the driver coming from the left having entered the crossing at a too high speed and having set the direction indicator to the right and thus causing the driver coming from the left to enter the junction.

So, what does the analysis show? Unfortunately, we have no time to explain the graph in detail, but this example shows that the driver with the accident data recorder was able to prove that he was braking before he was entering the junction, and that he did not use the direction indicator. He could prove that he was not responsible for this accident.

I admit this is a very simple accident. If you are interested in more complicated situations, please read the papers.

This device also has an accident preventive character. In the five years of experience, which we got in Europe, we have some fleets where the accidents were reduced by between 20 and 30 percent. Also about this success you can read more in the papers.

Please let me now come to the U.S. experience with On-Board Computers. Which U.S. experiences with on-board computers are available? The regulatory background is that since 1988, highway recording systems are allowed in lieu of handwritten records of duty status. One may use highway recording systems, but it is estimated that only 300,000 such devices are installed in U.S.A. Compared to the number of large trucks which is seven million, this is a low rate of fitting.

Furthermore, no comprehensive overview of usage of the recording system is available. Therefore it's difficult to report on U.S. experiences with such devices, but we have a nice example that is related to Bridgeport fleet of Laidlaw, Incorporation. Laidlaw is the largest contractor-operator of school bus fleets. They equipped 50 percent of the Bridgeport fleet with on-board computers and made a field trial of six months. The result was that buses without on-board computers accounted for 72 percent of the accidents.

This induced the operator to equip all buses with that device. As important as that is, that the fleet management control was restored. Drivers with registered shortcomings can be counseled. These corrective interviews are the tool in the feedback loop to the required modifications of driver behavior. I think these results show that the investment is paid back twice. Firstly, by reducing accidents and costs, and, secondly, by the improvement of the fleet management.

Now, let me come to the last point: Which recommendations could be given to the U.S. transportation policy? Concerning the situation of accidents with trucks involved in U.S.A. it has to be pointed out that most of the truckers and truck companies are safe. But there are always operators and drivers on the margins who make the roads unsafe.

In 1997, the number of people killed in truck-related accidents rose to a new high for the decade with 5,355 fatalities. 90 percent of the accidents were caused by driver errors. This is to say one needs to change the driver behavior in order to get the roads safer.

I want to mention that the National Transportation Safety Board is now requiring in its "most wanted list" automated and tamper-proof on-board recording devices, such as Tachographs or computerized logs, to identify commercial truck drivers who exceed hours-of-service regulations. There is a political move to mandate such devices.

I know very well that there are also resistances to do so, but maybe we can talk about this later on in our discussion.

I want to close with saying that the contribution of highway recording systems to road safety is proven in many countries, and this effect is based on three mechanisms:

First: give the driver a feedback on his driving style. Second: give the management a tool to train, to educate drivers. And last but not least: give the authorities a means for enforcement. The equipment to do so is available, as you have seen.

Thank you very much for your attention.