ATSIP Homepage
Discussion Board Home Discussion Board HomeProject DiscussionANSI D16 Public Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 3 Classification
  Help Help  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Welcome to the ATSIP Discussion Board!  If you are an ATSIP member, you have already been registered!  Your username is your first initial and last name (IE: John Doe = jdoe), your password is the same that you use to log in to the membership site.
If you don't know your password you can reset it by clicking here.
After you log in for the first time, please take a minute and go to the member control panel to update your profile and set your preferences.
If you are not an ATSIP member, please register to join the discussion!
If you need help, go to the discussion board help forum.  You can download a detailed users manual or ask a question in the questions and comments topic.  You can also get help by clicking the help link in the menu at the top of the screen, sending a private message to an administrator, or by sending an email to manager@atsip.org.


3 Classification

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Kellee_TSASS View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Board Administrator

Joined: Mar/24/2016
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 58
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kellee_TSASS Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: 3 Classification
    Posted: Apr/18/2016 at 1:06pm
3 Classification 
Back to Top
jhall1213 View Drop Down
ATSIP Member
ATSIP Member


Joined: Apr/14/2016
Status: Offline
Points: 34
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jhall1213 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2016 at 1:24pm
ANSI classifies crashes separately, while MMUCC classifies in groups, i.e; Collision with Person, Motor Vehicle or Non-fixed object. Which works best - individual or grouped classifications? I would also suggest that we generally replace the use of the word "accident" with the word "crash". The federal transportation legislation, MAP-21 uses both terms and seems to use them interchangeably. Its time that we do the same, but we can say, we choose to replace the accident terminology with crash.
Back to Top
james.pol View Drop Down
New User
New User


Joined: May/10/2016
Location: McLean, VA
Status: Offline
Points: 2
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote james.pol Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/10/2016 at 1:29pm
Can distracted driving be captured?
Back to Top
mthompson View Drop Down
ATSIP Member
ATSIP Member

ANSI D16 Panel Member

Joined: May/19/2016
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mthompson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Nov/21/2016 at 10:03am
From a field reporting and data analysis perspective, I would suggest group classifications provide a better means of crash identification. One large drawback of individual classifications is the inherent need to include an additional category when any definition or element changes or additions occur. The current group is growing so large that nearly every crash might fall into a different category, though there is only a slight deviation in incident details.  This opens a new challenge when data analysis is conducted. If grouping is used, care must be used ensure that group classifications are not so broad that all individuality of crash incident details are lost. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.107 seconds.