QC Rep. Winnie Castelo pushes underride rear guards for trucks

**chua_riwap** · April 2nd, 2012 05:11 AM

finally, a much better one than the anti planking bill.......

it's about time na malagyan nga mga trucks ng ganito.

Lawmaker pushes underride rear guards for trucks

MANILA, Philippines - An administration lawmaker called for the enactment of a new safety law that requires the compulsory installation of underride rear guards for trucks, trailers, and other heavy motor vehicles to prevent fatal accidents arising from collisions between heavy and light motor vehicles.

Quezon City Rep. Winston Castelo has filed House Bill 5930, or the Truck Rear Underride Safety Act of 2012, which prescribes motor vehicle safety standards by requiring heavy motor vehicle manufacturers to install cheap underride rear guards to protect smaller vehicles from adverse effects of at least 40 kilometer per hour crashes.

The bill seeks to mandate the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) to provide the implementing technical guidelines for the design of what the bill has described as “cheap, lightweight, and economical” underride rear guards for heavy motor vehicles.

Justifying his bill, Castelo said these vehicular accidents could have been avoided had manufacturers installed those “effective, economical, and lightweight” underride rear guards on heavier vehicles. “New regulations should consider as permissible guard height above the ground to be within 16 to 18 inches to prevent smaller vehicles from decapitation,” he said.

The guard’s strength requirement should be beyond the minimum collision rate of at least 40 kilometers per hour, he said, adding that the point of impact should prevent light vehicles from going underneath a heavy motor vehicle.

Castelo said the compulsory installation of rear underride guards is urgent – from about 3,000 road accidents in 1998 the number rose to over 10,000 in 2003.

At least 72 percent of those road accidents happened in Metro Manila, he said, adding the enactment of the proposed safety standard law could reduce the number of such road accidents.

**vinj** · April 2nd, 2012 10:29 AM

Finally, something with sense. Isnt this already mandated in other countries?

This should have been in the making a long time ago with the LTO since its very obvious that no matter how modern the vehicle is with its safety cell and all, if its a small vehicle versus a high vehicles like a truck (with no lights) the crumple zone isnt that effective anymore.

**niky** · April 2nd, 2012 11:09 AM

I've always wondered why it isn't a requirement yet, myself.

**loidch** · April 2nd, 2012 12:05 PM

16 to 18 inches above the ground, is to low for the average 10 wheeler. i wanna see what happens when an under ride equipped truck approaches and climbs a bridge or goes out from an elevated warehouse towards the street

**niky** · April 2nd, 2012 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by loidch

16 to 18 inches above the ground, is to low for the average 10 wheeler. i wanna see what happens when an under ride equipped truck approaches and climbs a bridge or goes out from an elevated warehouse towards the street

Funny how cars get around with merely 5-6 inches of ground clearance...

It's high enough, considering the guard will be just two to four feet or so behind the rear-most tire on an 18 wheeler. Should provide about 25-35 degrees of rear clearance... any steeper and you won't want to drive an 18 wheeler up it, anyway, as you'll have problems with the articulation point.

It might also be a good idea to start mandating side-guards, as well.

**oj88** · April 2nd, 2012 01:37 PM

I'll support that law... along with strict compliance with appropriate vehicle lighting/indicators/markers on trucks and trailers.

**chua_riwap** · April 2nd, 2012 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by oj88

I'll support that law... along with strict compliance with appropriate vehicle lighting/indicators/markers on trucks and trailers.

agree. & dapat yung rear guard eh yung as per design talaga. hindi yung "mukhang rear guard" lang.
sa ibang countries, lahat ng truscks may ganyan na.

**Ry_Tower** · April 2nd, 2012 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by loidch

16 to 18 inches above the ground, is to low for the average 10 wheeler. i wanna see what happens when an under ride equipped truck approaches and climbs a bridge or goes out from an elevated warehouse towards the street

and in the provinces where roads are like the face of the moon, craters will scrape those off.

**yebo** · April 2nd, 2012 06:57 PM

e how about those san miguel beer trailers that were made very long, longer than a 40-foot container trailer. sabit yun sa pataas pag kinabitan nyan. there should also be a law against those very long trailers. and they should make it a major violation (like cancellation of license for 6 months plus a big fine) for those trailers to go on convoys. mabagal na nga takbo magdidikit-dikit pa sila di na maka-overtake ang ibang sasakyan.

**vinj** · April 2nd, 2012 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by yebo

e how about those san miguel beer trailers that were made very long, longer than a 40-foot container trailer. sabit yun sa pataas pag kinabitan nyan. there should also be a law against those very long trailers. and they should make it a major violation (like cancellation of license for 6 months plus a big fine) for those trailers to go on convoys. mabagal na nga takbo magdidikit-dikit pa sila di na maka-overtake ang ibang sasakyan.

Infamous dyan yung mga Fortune Tobacco na convoy dati (hanggang ngayon ba?).

There are cons to this which truck owners/operators will protest on but for me, the safety to the general public is of primary concern.