Aggressive driving involves deliberate, unsafe driver actions (UDAs) such as driving over the speed limit, following too closely, and unsafe lane changing. Aggressive driving has been recognized as a major contributing factor to freeway crashes. In an effort to reduce aggressive driving, the Maryland State Police (MSP) - in collaboration with the Maryland State Highway Administration (MDSHA), the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), and the U.S. Army Aberdeen Test Centre (USATC) - embarked on an effort to develop the Aggressive Driving Video And Non-Contact Enforcement (ADVANCE) system. ADVANCE is an integration of off-the-shelf technologies - which include video, speed measurement, distance measurement, and digital imaging - to detect UDAs in the traffic stream and subsequently provide information to notify violators of their UDAs by mail. Between 1997 and 2000, the MSP conducted an operational evaluation of the ADVANCE system along the Maryland portion of Capital Beltway. This portion of the Capital Beltway is a 42-mile, limited access, divided highway with mostly four lanes in each direction. The traffic using the Capital Beltway is composed of interstate, regional, and local travellers. The annual average daily traffic (AADT) in most sections is more than 200,000 vehicles. The focus of this operational evaluation included three areas. The first was to assess the motorists' perception on the aggressive driving problems in the region and their opinions on the use of non-contact enforcement technologies. This was accomplished through a random survey of drivers of private and commercial vehicles who used the Capital Beltway. The second was an assessment of the violators' reactions to the UDA warning notices. This assessment was made using the data collected by ADVANCE from February 19 to April 2, 2000. The ADVANCE vehicle was used for a total of 38 hours to monitor UDAs, which yielded 789 detections (or on average about 20.7 detections per hour). Based on the detected vehicle information, violation-warning notices were sent to the registered owners. Shortly after the mailing of the notices, either a questionnaire or a telephone survey was conducted with randomly selected recipients of the UDA warning notices. The third area was to assess the economic and operational feasibility of the ADVANCE system in detecting UDA violators. This was accomplished by comparing the productivity and operational features of the ADVANCE system against those of the patrol enforcement method. The purpose of this paper is to describe the findings of the evaluation of the ADVANCE system.
Samenvatting