SWIFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@ otherhalftw thank you.

 

They are still using some of the data from the old system to better evaluate the numbers.

 

It absolutely has everything to do with the number of miles driven.

 

Like I said maybe I read it wrong it said as of before june, 2011.

 

The safety experts in the industry (as opposed to the morons at FMCSA) will argue that the only viable way of expressing crash data in a way that you can actually compare one carrier to another is in crashes per million miles of operation. What I posted above is valid.

The result is that Swift is a safer carrier than Watkins.

 

So, to be on par with Swift, W/S should have only 54 accidents, 51 towaways and and 17 injuries/deaths.

Swift is 26% safer in property damage accidents, 31% safer in major property damage requiring towing, yet 24% less safe with regard to accidents including injury or death. Those are the hard numbers. Even I will not qualify them.

That said, it does not specify whose injurues or deaths. I would be curious to find out whether these injuries and deaths are team members (more common in Swift trucks than W/S) or people in other vehicles. Broken down, I would suspect the numbers would show co-drivers being the victims here more than the general public.

Looks like we have something to work on.

 

I think my best homework assignment in any high school math class was the time I drew tiny little pictures of airplanes and motorcycles all over the paper and handed it in without answering ANY of the questions.

However even I understand that you can only compare carriers of different sizes by looking at how many accidents they had per million vehicle miles driven by the carrier in any given time period.

 

Each mile on the road carries the potential to be in a crash. When that potential becomes reality, it is a mark against that million miles of potential. Therefore, with .88 crashes per million miles, Swift has avoided the potential for a crash more often than W/S, with 1.11 crashes in the million miles traveled.

Put another way, take a cross section of 769 units from Swift and compare them to W/S's 769 units. Take each of these fleets (the 769-unit cross section of Swift. Not the entire 16K+ company) and have them drive 10 million miles. Swift has a record of having 9 accidents in 10 million miles, if its fleet were the same size as W/S, who would have 11 crashes in the same mileage, with the same number of trucks.

I have no idea how else to explain crashes-per-million-miles.

 

Not bad... not bad at all!

 

There is no better way to explain it.