| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Ricky
Advanced Member
USA
352 Posts |
 Posted - 05/14/2001 : 4:15:16 PM
|
Did anyone else realize that today marked the 13th anniversary of the Kentucky school bus crash in which several people were killed and many others injured when the 1977 Ford Superior bus they were riding in caught on fire after being hit head on by a drunk driver going the wrong direction on the interstate? I just thought I would mention that because I don't want those people or that accident to be forgotten. School bus safety has came along way since then with the addition (on most buses) of emergency push out windows, roof hatches, fire retardent seat material, and all of the federal safety standards of 1977.
Stephen R. Adamson |
|
|
cowlitzcoach
Advanced Member
USA
325 Posts |
Posted - 05/14/2001 : 7:50:23 PM
|
What is so sad about that accident is no one should have died. Not one person in the bus had a life threatening injury due to the accident itself. Those that were killed died as a result of the smoke from the fire. It points up the importance of making sure the aisle is kept clear at all times and the emergency exits are not blocked.
The other really sad thing is the man who was the drunk driver has been out of jail several years already.
It doesn't seem right that someone who through their own reckless disregard could kill so many people and be out of jail almost before the civil action has been completed.
Mark O.
|
 |
|
|
Phil4747
Top Member
USA
695 Posts |
Posted - 05/14/2001 : 8:47:34 PM
|
Well, there are a lot of things wrong with our criminal "justice" system. But that's not what we're here to discuss...
What you said about making sure the aisle was clear and the emergency exits weren't blocked--good idea now, but back then, school buses didn't have nearly as many exits. From what I've heard, that bus had 1 service door, which was right in line with the crash and unusable, and 1 rear emergency exit door. No side doors, no push-out windows, no roof hatches.
I don't think anyone will disagree that having only 2 ways off the bus for up to 90 passengers is idiotic. Unfortunately, it took a tragedy like this to make the federal government realize that.
|
|
|
|
1983WardFord
Top Member
USA
1345 Posts |
Posted - 05/14/2001 : 9:06:35 PM
|
Did you all know there's a book that recounts the story of this tragedy? I believe it's called Reckless Disregard by James S. Kunen. I read this book a few years ago, and was really into it. Some parts of it were a little dry, but all in all, it made for some great reading. If anyone is interested or has the time, go look for it and read it. It should be available through your library.
|
|
|
|
JK
Top Member
USA
6857 Posts |
Posted - 05/15/2001 : 01:14:11 AM
|
quote:
Did you all know there's a book that recounts the story of this tragedy? I believe it's called Reckless Disregard by James S. Kunen. I read this book a few years ago, and was really into it. Some parts of it were a little dry, but all in all, it made for some great reading. If anyone is interested or has the time, go look for it and read it. It should be available through your library.
The book, Reckless Disregard, is out of print. The best places to find this book is at libraries and used book stores.
The book is too revealing for the naive or most bureaucrats to digest, though it is worth the effort where shocking the bus driver back to reality is the goal.
Most bus drivers are let to believe that state and federal agencies and the school bus industry were the wonderful folks that put childrens safety first. Here again, the changes toward improving school bus safety came first from parents, not government agencies and not the industry.
27 died in that Fiery Kentucky school bus crash, many more were left with permanent scaring from burns. Most of the families settled. Two families, the Fairs, parents of Shannon, 14, and the Nunnallees, parents of Patty, 10, went after the industry.
According to a review I read, "Ford Motor Company (and Sheller-Globe, which assembled the school bus for Ford) was sued for "consciously disregarding" the danger they were creating by placing an unshielded fuel tank next to the front door of a bus that had "flammable seats, inadequate emergency exits and a too-narrow aisle."
Ford's response at the trial? The school bus, according to Ford's defense attorneys, detailed in the book, attempted to present the school bus as a truck: "that a school bus is a "truck," not a "bus," and therefore not subject to the safety standards of passenger vehicles."
This is one of the reasons I flat insist that school bus drivers declare they transport precious lives and not precious cargo, as the industry so blatantly and wrongfully promotes.
It might be well, where appropriate, to ask administrations, school boards and state safety instructors where all these safety features on school buses came from? Those that know what they are talking about will own up that PARENTS have played an important role toward what is now one of the safest vehicles to ride in this country.
When you talk about school bus safety, remember to honor the Moms and Dads, and the precious lives lost -- these that helped make our school buses a safer ride for kids these days. (jk)
Edited by - jk on 05/15/2001 10:41:21 AM |
|
|
|
vaoverland
Advanced Member
USA
225 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2004 : 02:45:07 AM
|
| As of 12/9/2004, a website check revealed that both Barnes and Nobles and Amazon are showing new copies in stock of James S. Kuen's Reckless Disregard: Corporate Greed, Government Indifference, and the Kentucky School Bus Crash. The book was published in 1994 by Simon & Schuster: New York, NY, U.S.A. (ISN 0671705334). There are also used copies available on the Internet. |
Wayne's Lifeguard in 1973 was a safety design and building concept ahead of its time and regulation. I am proud to have helped bring over 2,000 of them into Virginia during my career. I know they saved some lives.
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/WayneBusEnthusiasts/
Mark Fisher, semi-retired school bus driver, pupil transportation supervisor, contractor, and school bus body dealer, Williamsburg, VA |
|
|
|
Thomas Ford 85-16
Top Member
USA
3862 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2004 : 03:25:24 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by JK
According to a review I read, "Ford Motor Company (and Sheller-Globe, which assembled the school bus for Ford) was sued for "consciously disregarding" the danger they were creating by placing an unshielded fuel tank next to the front door of a bus that had "flammable seats, inadequate emergency exits and a too-narrow aisle."
This is something I don't understand... Ford was not legally bound to provide the caging and such until a week later, so on what basis can they be sued? We know now that the cage probably wouldn't have helped, but in the event that Ford did go "above and beyond" and started building buses with the cage a week before the standards went into effect, but then the accident took place a week earlier than it really did, would they still be sued? Where do you draw the line? Are companies expected to comply the day that new standards are released? What was the outcome of this lawsuit? |
Mike's Bus Yard - http://buses.zwebpages.com - Since 1999
|
|
|
|
vaoverland
Advanced Member
USA
225 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2004 : 2:57:15 PM
|
I believe that the answer to that question lies in our tort system for civil suits and juries. In a civil proceeding, the test of proof beyond reasonable doubt does not apply; rather, a majority of the totality of evidence is the criteria. As a case nears and when it is in trial, the two sides will be weighing the odds, even to the point of hiring professional jury watchers to try to help weigh the odds. Especially a large "deep pockets" defendant will be considering bad publicity and future lawsuits when weighing the odds. The emotional factors weigh heavier on the "victims" side of such a lawsuit. I believe most of us here on the SBF forum can appreciate both points of view.
I am not an attorney. However, over a period of 25 years, I have participated on the defense side of several civil suits and trials. Of 4 which went to a trial, 1 was dismissed by the judge before it went to the jury, (due to Virginia's rather unique laws about contributory negligence), 1 very weak case went to the jury and they found against the plaintiffs, and 2 were settled while the jury was out deliberating.
In the Carollton case, Ford and Sheller-Globe each technically complied with the legal requirements of NHSTA, etc. However, there was evidence that Ford had resisted the implementation of the fuel tank standards for at least several years. By the time the ill-fated bus' chassis was officially produced at the Kentucky Truck Plant on March 23, 1977, they already had cages piled up at the plant and the assembly line actually drilled 8 mounting holes in the chassis frame rails. An argument could be made that Ford didn't use the holes and the in-stock cages although it knew a hazard existed (earlier NTSB warnings) to save about $80. per bus. In court, Ford's past experience with the many fires and fatalities involving its infamous Pintos could be used, as well as all the horrific details of Carollton.
To make matters worse for Ford in the case with the Fair and Nunnallee families, in the few weeks following the accident, Ford made substantial settlements with all the other families. One number I have heard was $700,000 per fatality. I cannot recall the injury and family suffering amounts, but the amounts covered 65 of the 67 souls aboard the bus.
There was (and is) much evidence to indicate that the Fair and Nunnallee families were desirous of more than just a financial settlement. Both mothers and at least one father became very involved with MADD and continued long after their case was settled. Even though the ultimately agreed to settle, it is clear that their grief and desire for future prevention continues to the present day.
As I have said elsewhere, many individuals involved with the investigation and the aftermath, whether they could or did speak out, or just quietly worked behind the scenes, have expressed hope that such a tragedy not happen again. Some are also still concerned that, despite all that has changed, that it could happens again. I am in that last group. That is partially why I compiled the Wikipedia article on church bus and school bus safety. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_bus_and_school_bus_safety).
If you read it, and want to help improve it, I would be grateful for the help. My thanks to all of you folks who also care.
|
Wayne's Lifeguard in 1973 was a safety design and building concept ahead of its time and regulation. I am proud to have helped bring over 2,000 of them into Virginia during my career. I know they saved some lives.
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/WayneBusEnthusiasts/
Mark Fisher, semi-retired school bus driver, pupil transportation supervisor, contractor, and school bus body dealer, Williamsburg, VA |
|
|
|
vaoverland
Advanced Member
USA
225 Posts |
Posted - 12/13/2004 : 01:33:10 AM
|
Just to update, Wikipedia has split the Bus Accident at Carollton, Kentucky in 1988 and church bus and school bus safety articles into 2 separate ones, with some expanded links in each.
The new articles are now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_Accident_at_Carrollton%2C_Kentucky_in_1988
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_bus_and_school_bus_safety
New and used copies of the book Reckless Endangerment are available starting at $2.58 used,a nd about $20. new.
|
Wayne's Lifeguard in 1973 was a safety design and building concept ahead of its time and regulation. I am proud to have helped bring over 2,000 of them into Virginia during my career. I know they saved some lives.
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/WayneBusEnthusiasts/
Mark Fisher, semi-retired school bus driver, pupil transportation supervisor, contractor, and school bus body dealer, Williamsburg, VA |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
May 14, 1988---Kentucky School Bus Crash
