I used to be a volunteer firefighter and I see some of the fatalities (but not all) on this map. Looking at one of them some of the information is quite accurate (type of accident, what caused it, age of person) while other information is not at all accurate (number of people in the car, if a seatbelt was in use). It's curious how some fairly important pieces of data can be quite wrong.
The data here is processed from NHTSA's FARS database. When someone dies in an accident, it gets input into a STATE reporting system, and FARS is manufactured by analyzing each state's individual record system. The feds consolidate all this data and publish a unified dataset annually. They say it's "a lot cheaper and just as good as collecting it themselves"
Additional errors are potentially produced from my own processing of the federal data, but those will be rooted out over time. Project being OS will hopefully help with that.
> It's curious how some fairly important pieces of data can be quite wrong.
I was nearly killed by a driver who disregarded the law and the police officer intentionally disabled his bodycam when interviewing a key witness, never questioned me, let the driver off with no tickets for his violations, and submitted a report with factual inaccuracies. Crooked cops don't have an interest in reporting the truth.
There's an Austria paper that looked into the accident cause "speeding" (nicht angepasste Geschwindigkeit) means across the german-speaking countries. The results boiled down to "it depends" on the officer typing in the data as there aren't any reviews or such. There's good data on other accident aspects like the seat-belt-usage you mentioned (and it's shocking how many people die because they are too lazy to use their seat-belt) but those aren't down to subjective judgement on the spot.
Good data is needed as a few accident causes do tend to be common in certain road/location conditions and those can be fixed. For example while the total number of accidents on train crossing is low (15~20 fatalities per year) in Austria, all of them are the driver's fault and almost all (except for massive idiot drivers) can be fixed by installing automatic gates on all crossings.
I was looking at an incident in my neighborhood. In our city, we have frequent incidents of elderly drivers killing pedestrians in motor vehicles. The incident in our neighborhood did not show a driver age but did show the pedestrian age. I cannot imagine why the driver age would not have been recorded in an incident like that (but their height and weight were).
I used to scrape the calls for service for my local PD, and the inaccuracies were considerable. Of course there were typos in addresses or cross-streets, but there were also inaccuracies with how the incident was classified (for example, a former coworker and friend said his neighbor called the cops on him in the middle of the night one day- I looked it up and it was classified as a domestic disturbance rather than a noise complaint).
Some records, like those involving child abuse, don’t show on their calls for service website at all, so that’s an entire group of data that we the public just don’t get to know about.
Government data is notorious for being dirty and inaccurate.
I had a similar, awful curiosity. Looked up the death of a friend. All of the details I ever learned (speeding, ran off road, jumped curb, hit a tree) are listed accurately here.
The claim that only 1 out of 5 deaths is even recorded on this map is sobering.
Any idea what spicifly might be the possible causes for data errors? Like is every state using the exact same form? Are are people who filled them out trained how to do so correctly?
Yeah, I checked one near me and it said EMS arrived 1 minute after being notified and victim was transported via EMS air. Time to arrive at hospital seems reasonable for an air transport from that spot though. So I guess the helicopter just happened to be idly hovering over the van at the time it went off the embankment?
Looks like where I live, deaths are more closely associated with big, wide, fast roads.
It's ironic that drivers get frustrated by smaller, narrower streets as not feeling very safe, but that uncomfortable feeling 1) slows people down and 2) keeps them on their toes in terms of looking out for hazards rather than feeling ok with driving fast and not paying as much attention.
Traffic calming measures like lane narrowing have successfully been used in Europe for safety.
Drivers don't follow traffic rules. They follow the rules that appear to make sense for the scenario they're in.
No matter how many 15 mph speedlight signs you put up on a wide street, the driver will subconsciously speed through a wide street because the brain is stupid like that.
Want drivers to stop before the footpath, raise it up. It'll make them feel like they're off-the-road and they'll slow down.
Everything about cars is associated with perceptions.
Families buy heavy cars for the perception of safety, but instead have a vehicle that is harder to turn and is more likely to end up in a ditch. They buy taller vehicles to feel safe but have instead purchased a massive blindspot notorious for trampling over your own children. Unprotected bike lanes look like shoulder lanes you can serve into, and that's how drivers treat them.
You're absolutely correct about the feeling of discomfort when driving through narrow lanes.
The biggest lie we tell is that cars are safe. No, you're wielding the most lethal murder weapon in the country, with almost zero training and 1 mistake is all it takes to get a prison sentence.
We have what are called “stroads” in North America, which are very much what you’re describing.
I remember when I was a kid, they took Pershing Road on the Stickney-Berwyn (Illinois) border and changed the commercial parking from diagonal to parallel and increased the traffic flow from two lanes to four. I have no firm data, but I’m pretty sure that this increased accidents on the street as well as effectively killed the Stickney CBD on Pershing Road (I would guess at least a third of the storefronts are currently vacant and that’s ignoring buildings that were demolished and never replaced). And I’m not entirely sure what traffic benefit came out of increasing the flow along the street as it’s not really a good connector of anything in that stretch.
A road where traffic moves at 30mph can be poorly designed and lead to lots of accidents, but so long as those accidents are not a vehicle hitting a pedestrian they're unlikely to be fatal.
A road where traffic moves at 70mph is another story.
One of the big ironies of all this is car insurance.
If you keep getting your car dinged on narrow roads, your insurance payouts will be larger than if you run over someone. Dings add up to a lot, but hitting a pedestrian maxes out the payout before the guy makes it out of the emergency room.
This is why Massachusetts drivers have a bad rep. Lots and lots of minor accidents in dense traffic. But MA itself it one of the safest places in the US
Speed kills, but slowness eats lives in another way.
Which is worse, having a 1% chance of dying in a car accident, or spending an extra hour/day stuck in traffic? I think I might take the first option; it delivers a higher expected number of hours of life not stuck in traffic.
Speed and convenience also matters. I like big, fast, and wide roads because they let me and many others get to where we want to go quickly. It’s a trade off. We shouldn’t let “think of the children” safetyism decide what the balance is, since that line of thinking is extremist and does not consider what is at stake on the other side of the argument. Efforts to eliminate every last death on streets are a waste of time since we’ll never achieve perfection and roads are very safe already. The road diets made under that unrealistic goal are simply making everyone’s lives worse by causing us to spend more time on the roads in traffic.
Not to sure how your backend is set up, but it looks like you're generating GeoJSON on the fly and the JSON serialization for this amount of data can be slow.
In typical HN fashion, I would suggest looking into using Tippecanoe to generate some vector tiles of the data and host that on S3. Then the DB can fall back to performing simple lookups via the accident ID. Filtering by time will need to move to the frontend, but that should be fine (if not, look into clustering the data at further zoom levels).
You’ve had some other recommendations already but I’d suggest also looking into FlatGeobuf [0] for this use case. Have a look at the MapLibre example with a 12GB example [1]. You don’t need a server at all (unlike MBTiles) and will be able to load far more points at once than your current solution. Can easily generate it with QGIS/GDAL/PostGIS. Not sure what your plans are for the project but would be happy to donate some time to get something like that working.
Apologies for the shameless plug but do checkout https://geobase.app We built it with such use cases in mind and solves the scaling issues with geo data driven apps. We are in private beta but happy to give you early access if you hit us up.
I was trying out different time periods (comparing 2003-2013 to 2013-2023, to see a rough trend), and I noticed that every click to change the year by one seemed to generate a refresh. Perhaps it would help to lower the load if you change the date selector widget to only refresh after the date selector is closed.
Strong work. Looking forward to / dreading the update with the 2023 and 2024 data that I've been more involved with. RIP to all of the young people in their late teens and 20s who made the mistake of using a road for anything other than driving. RIP to the older folks who got smoked just crossing the street. RIP to everyone else who didn't deserve to go. Hopefully there is traffic calming and reliable, frequent public transit in heaven.
Unfortunately this dataset doesn't include the, probably more frequent, severe TBIs. Surely wouldn't take many patients for the cost of a hemicraniectomy, 2 week neuro-ICU stay, trach/peg, and long term acute care stay to equal the cost of a few measures to slow drivers down. Not to mention lost earning/tax potential. Too bad it's not from the same budget.
Wear your seatbelt and a helmet and hopefully you can avoid the pain of your family having to have a surprise end-of-life discussion with me.
The number #1 cause of car crashes is the presence of cars.
Walkable communities have less cars, therefore, less car crashes.
The city grid is mainly to blame. The city grid of most American cities is uniquely bad - filled with streets which run at right angles to each other.
Take a look at Brussels vs Queens New York. Brussels had 5 road deaths in one year. Queens New York averages 75/year. That's almost a 7x difference adjusted for population.
Brussels has as an extremely irregular and walkable grid. Queens, like Manhattan, is full of dumb dangerous straight-lined roads and 90 degree angles.
The more irregular the grid the lower the traffic fatalities (assuming you're in a high-income country).
Why do suburbs have cul-de-sacs? They have curves, and They are useless as roads. They force cars to slow down, and disincentivize automobile traffic. Ergo, less cars, and your kids might get away with playing in the street without getting hit.
Rip up the grid and build a walkable community. It won't be cheap. Upzone and lower property taxes for any private developer that builds affordable housing on a walkable grid in your city.
There's only one place in the United States that's trying - Culdesac Tempe in Arizona. Northeast/California NIMBYs won't let you dare try to fight off their localism. They vote. Do you vote?
Culdesac might work ok if you allow bike and pedestrian thoroughfare at the end point. Otherwise they are impossible to walk or bike due to long distances to get anywhere
Maybe I missed an alternative mode that's already present, but this feels like it would benefit enormously from a heatmap view, so that one could see where fatality hotspots are at a higher level before zooming in to examine specific locations.
For example, I can see the death in front of my house from a year ago, which was the driver suffering a heart attack while driving. He was the only victim and it wasn’t the crash that killed home.
Would love to be able to compare areas for things like:
- DUI - speeding/reckless driving - cycling victims - pedestrian victims - multiple vs single vehicle - medical cause
I high recommend people get into NHTSA's FARS database. It's an old school GSA type database, so it's format is a little unusual, but you can hoist into an SQL table without much difficulty, and then you can ask and answer all of these questions.
They often include things like "path of accident" so you can even run queries and ask questions like "how many vehicles flipped over before crashing" or "how many passengers get ejected from the vehicle before dying" or even "how often are snow banks involved in crashes?"
Odd things last I checked in 2015:
More people die in Texas than California. In total. Not per capita.
Most people in Florida die between 7pm and 9pm which is far later than most other states.
Not loading right now, but if it doesn't already include it, would love to see this data normalized by the amount of vehicle traffic each location has, to get a better sense for which locations are dangerous vs just busy.
I don't think that's right. We shouldn't think of death in terms of "deaths per mile" because human costs aren't amortized per mile. Every death is a death. Killing someone then driving in circles shouldn't make you a less dangerous driver.
I'm not sure the intention here but in an addition to being an outstanding project it's also a hideous indictment of 21st century transportation. So much life lost as a result of apes clumsily manoeuvring heaps of metal across painted lines of asphalt.
The problem I'm seeing is that when I move or resize the map, it makes requests to *.tile.openstreetmap.org, but not to roadway.report/accidents_by_location_geojson. I checked with desktop Firefox and Chrome.
I get an error from that site too ("reporting engine is down!"). Is the site posted here directly querying the DOT database and knocking it offline, or just a coincidence?
One thing that's striking at is that the fatality locations do nor correlate with the "highest crash rate" locations hardly at all.
The intersection where you are most likely to get hit has a high pedestrian volume and often (in theory) low speed traffic.
While the fatalities here are more likely to happen on high speed streets, sometimes in locations where no one expecting a pedestrian.
Put another way: if we were try to fund "fixes" for the locations with fatalities, it would be mostly locations with a single fatality at those locations, while we have plenty of locations that have several pedestrian-involved crashes per yet.
Someone needs to Tufte-fy this. I don't know if it's the hug of death or not but when I zoom out, I don't see (what I assumed would be) a distribution of deaths, a sort of heatmap of occurences. Then if you add a time dimension with color or some other parameter, it could give us a sense of what areas are most dangerous to avoid. At the moment the pins / tooltips are not very ergonomic and they obscure more than they reveal.
Must be hug of death. Anyway, I recently made a video visualization of every fatal accident in 2022 by timeline and it ended up being over 8 minutes long because there were so many (over 39,000 events). It's sobering to realize how many people are losing their lives on the roadways each year. There's a fatal crash about every 10 to 15 minutes in the US alone.
Hey — this is really cool — though looks like it’s being hugged to death right now.
Assuming the data is being updated less often than hourly it should be relatively straight forward to generate a pmtiles tileset of the accident points, using either tippecanoe or planetiler — stick on something like s3, and have it basically scale infinitely.
Congrats, I wish I had this data over the years to avoid roads. I saw Waze had a feature for intersections that had higher accident rates.
Is there a way to use the data to get a percentage or score for how dangerous a freeway is between 2 points on a map or something? Suggest an alternate freeway or intersections?
Thank you for putting this together. I live in an area that has terrible traffic patterns for pedestrians and I always suspected it had a higher than usual fatality density. Now I know for sure!
My friend, Josh, died the day before he should have started 9th grade. His brother got into partying and eventually hard drugs, I suspect at least partly because of Josh's death. He died of a heroin overdose in 2018. I've known several other people who've died on the roads around my hometown but I don't see them on the map.
Very interesting. I can imagine this map would benefit from a different kind of visualization. Maybe a heatmap would better accentuate problematic areas.
It would be useful to be able to filter for season such as winter vs rest of the year and time of day. Quite sobering to look at clusters of deaths in your home area that you wouldn't have predicted. Love to know which roads to avoid in bad winter weather or when driving in the early AM hours.
I live in Los Angeles, and anytime there’s a hit and run on the news, they nearly always use footage OF the footage. That is, the news cameraman will simply film the screen of the computer or TV playing back the footage. It drives me crazy that they never use the source material.
What was your toolset for the analysis? Can’t see now because of HOD? Excited to see your data! I haven’t seen it yet but I imagine this is will be similar to the private actuarial structured data of a any car insurance company. By no means am I diminishing your efforts.
I have been looking for something like this. To clarify it doesn't show pedestrians or bikes hit by cars? ( I live near a stretch of road that I know has several white bike memorials but this does not see to not have them there..)
There's a pedestrian fatality on the map near me. Might be a problem with data gathering/consolidation - apparently data collection is done by individual states (and of course they're themselves distributing it out to a huge number of different counties/municipalities/PDs).
Thanks for this, it’s a helpful visual that I deeply appreciate. It was weirder than I anticipated to see a best friend’s death reduced to an incident report.
PS you may need to explicitly search to get results returned (I did)
Very cool. It would be awesome if you could lift some of the major contributors of the accident/death up to the top (wet conditions, driver was drinking, driving too fast, etc).
this is super fascinating. I'm sitting here with my kids going through accident after accident in our neighborhood and piecing together what happened for each one. Every report tells a detailed story. We can't stop.
Elsewhere, someone here linked to the national crash data set. Sounds like they used PostgreSQL/Postgis for the backend here to store the data. The web server grabbed it as GeoJSON and displayed with a mapping web framework like Leaflet.
I did a crash analysis locally using the QGIS desktop software for some display and analysis, as well as Node.js and the Turf.js library when custom code was needed for spatial analsyis:
I live in a similarly sized city to San Francisco in Northern Europe and San Francisco has almost two orders of magnitude more traffic deaths each year.
US 287 between Fort Collins, CO and Laramie, WY is notoriously dangerous and your map certainly bears it out. Click on any random stretch and it is absolutely full of pins :( Crazy because it is a wide open rural highway for the most part where you can see for miles. But it's only one lane on either side which leads people to try to pass recklessly. Plus there are some sudden turns and changes in elevation. Connecting two college towns probably doesn't help, either.
Thanks for sharing (and good luck keeping the site up). It's the definition of morbidly interesting.
is it just me, or 101 is 2-3x more dangerous than 280 per this map in Bay Area? definitely more density of pins on 101 (you have to click to the center in between these 2 highways to see pins on both). It makes sense, since 280 is a bit less loaded, and built better, has full shoulder in most places.
The split to 85 going south on 101 is a very bad place - 7 pins very close together.
Am I the only person who spent a minute trying to scroll, trying to click, switching to a different browser, thinking the site was broken, checking back at HN to see what people said, and only then happening to mouse over the title and seeing that it got an underline and was a link?
Yeah, it's that weird thing where someone will put an enormous amount of effort into a piece of work, then skimp on the "presenting this to the world" part because maybe they don't find that bit interesting.
Some comments were deferred for faster rendering.
bigtoe416|1 year ago
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
Additional errors are potentially produced from my own processing of the federal data, but those will be rooted out over time. Project being OS will hopefully help with that.
kevin_thibedeau|1 year ago
I was nearly killed by a driver who disregarded the law and the police officer intentionally disabled his bodycam when interviewing a key witness, never questioned me, let the driver off with no tickets for his violations, and submitted a report with factual inaccuracies. Crooked cops don't have an interest in reporting the truth.
TomK32|1 year ago
Good data is needed as a few accident causes do tend to be common in certain road/location conditions and those can be fixed. For example while the total number of accidents on train crossing is low (15~20 fatalities per year) in Austria, all of them are the driver's fault and almost all (except for massive idiot drivers) can be fixed by installing automatic gates on all crossings.
dclowd9901|1 year ago
throwaway2037|1 year ago
ekianjo|1 year ago
gymbeaux|1 year ago
Some records, like those involving child abuse, don’t show on their calls for service website at all, so that’s an entire group of data that we the public just don’t get to know about.
Government data is notorious for being dirty and inaccurate.
chao-|1 year ago
The claim that only 1 out of 5 deaths is even recorded on this map is sobering.
tonetegeatinst|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
Falkon1313|1 year ago
davidw|1 year ago
It's ironic that drivers get frustrated by smaller, narrower streets as not feeling very safe, but that uncomfortable feeling 1) slows people down and 2) keeps them on their toes in terms of looking out for hazards rather than feeling ok with driving fast and not paying as much attention.
screye|1 year ago
Drivers don't follow traffic rules. They follow the rules that appear to make sense for the scenario they're in.
No matter how many 15 mph speedlight signs you put up on a wide street, the driver will subconsciously speed through a wide street because the brain is stupid like that.
Want drivers to stop before the footpath, raise it up. It'll make them feel like they're off-the-road and they'll slow down.
Everything about cars is associated with perceptions.
Families buy heavy cars for the perception of safety, but instead have a vehicle that is harder to turn and is more likely to end up in a ditch. They buy taller vehicles to feel safe but have instead purchased a massive blindspot notorious for trampling over your own children. Unprotected bike lanes look like shoulder lanes you can serve into, and that's how drivers treat them.
You're absolutely correct about the feeling of discomfort when driving through narrow lanes.
The biggest lie we tell is that cars are safe. No, you're wielding the most lethal murder weapon in the country, with almost zero training and 1 mistake is all it takes to get a prison sentence.
They should feel uncomfortable.
Davidzheng|1 year ago
dhosek|1 year ago
I remember when I was a kid, they took Pershing Road on the Stickney-Berwyn (Illinois) border and changed the commercial parking from diagonal to parallel and increased the traffic flow from two lanes to four. I have no firm data, but I’m pretty sure that this increased accidents on the street as well as effectively killed the Stickney CBD on Pershing Road (I would guess at least a third of the storefronts are currently vacant and that’s ignoring buildings that were demolished and never replaced). And I’m not entirely sure what traffic benefit came out of increasing the flow along the street as it’s not really a good connector of anything in that stretch.
bkjelden|1 year ago
A road where traffic moves at 30mph can be poorly designed and lead to lots of accidents, but so long as those accidents are not a vehicle hitting a pedestrian they're unlikely to be fatal.
A road where traffic moves at 70mph is another story.
ocschwar|1 year ago
If you keep getting your car dinged on narrow roads, your insurance payouts will be larger than if you run over someone. Dings add up to a lot, but hitting a pedestrian maxes out the payout before the guy makes it out of the emergency room.
This is why Massachusetts drivers have a bad rep. Lots and lots of minor accidents in dense traffic. But MA itself it one of the safest places in the US
gcanyon|1 year ago
cperciva|1 year ago
Which is worse, having a 1% chance of dying in a car accident, or spending an extra hour/day stuck in traffic? I think I might take the first option; it delivers a higher expected number of hours of life not stuck in traffic.
bigbacaloa|1 year ago
[deleted]
blackeyeblitzar|1 year ago
newZWhoDis|1 year ago
This is sort of like saying “most child p*rn is transported by undersea fiber optic cables!”
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
et-al|1 year ago
In typical HN fashion, I would suggest looking into using Tippecanoe to generate some vector tiles of the data and host that on S3. Then the DB can fall back to performing simple lookups via the accident ID. Filtering by time will need to move to the frontend, but that should be fine (if not, look into clustering the data at further zoom levels).
https://github.com/mapbox/tippecanoe
carderne|1 year ago
[0] https://github.com/flatgeobuf/flatgeobuf
[1] https://flatgeobuf.org/examples/maplibre/large.html
sabman|1 year ago
We were also recently featured on the motherduck blog https://motherduck.com/blog/pushing-geo-boundaries-with-moth...
munch117|1 year ago
ppbjj|1 year ago
winrid|1 year ago
NwtnsMthd|1 year ago
Is your server on that list?
j/k, I’m sorry, I’ll see myself out XD
kazinator|1 year ago
jac241|1 year ago
Unfortunately this dataset doesn't include the, probably more frequent, severe TBIs. Surely wouldn't take many patients for the cost of a hemicraniectomy, 2 week neuro-ICU stay, trach/peg, and long term acute care stay to equal the cost of a few measures to slow drivers down. Not to mention lost earning/tax potential. Too bad it's not from the same budget.
Wear your seatbelt and a helmet and hopefully you can avoid the pain of your family having to have a surprise end-of-life discussion with me.
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
CalRobert|1 year ago
astral303|1 year ago
iftheshoefitss|1 year ago
RIP fr fr
johnnybzane|1 year ago
The city grid is mainly to blame. The city grid of most American cities is uniquely bad - filled with streets which run at right angles to each other.
Take a look at Brussels vs Queens New York. Brussels had 5 road deaths in one year. Queens New York averages 75/year. That's almost a 7x difference adjusted for population.
Brussels has as an extremely irregular and walkable grid. Queens, like Manhattan, is full of dumb dangerous straight-lined roads and 90 degree angles.
The more irregular the grid the lower the traffic fatalities (assuming you're in a high-income country).
Why do suburbs have cul-de-sacs? They have curves, and They are useless as roads. They force cars to slow down, and disincentivize automobile traffic. Ergo, less cars, and your kids might get away with playing in the street without getting hit.
Rip up the grid and build a walkable community. It won't be cheap. Upzone and lower property taxes for any private developer that builds affordable housing on a walkable grid in your city.
There's only one place in the United States that's trying - Culdesac Tempe in Arizona. Northeast/California NIMBYs won't let you dare try to fight off their localism. They vote. Do you vote?
nothercastle|1 year ago
systemtest|1 year ago
Number of traffic deaths in Brussels in strangely fluctuating, one year it's 6, the other it's 20+. Might be a COVID thing. Still less than Queens.
blincoln|1 year ago
acchow|1 year ago
massung|1 year ago
For example, I can see the death in front of my house from a year ago, which was the driver suffering a heart attack while driving. He was the only victim and it wasn’t the crash that killed home.
Would love to be able to compare areas for things like:
- DUI - speeding/reckless driving - cycling victims - pedestrian victims - multiple vs single vehicle - medical cause
akira2501|1 year ago
They often include things like "path of accident" so you can even run queries and ask questions like "how many vehicles flipped over before crashing" or "how many passengers get ejected from the vehicle before dying" or even "how often are snow banks involved in crashes?"
Odd things last I checked in 2015:
More people die in Texas than California. In total. Not per capita.
Most people in Florida die between 7pm and 9pm which is far later than most other states.
Pedestrians usually die at night.
Anyways, a great database last I used it: https://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data/fatality-analysis-report...
lukasb|1 year ago
Karrot_Kream|1 year ago
jorgesborges|1 year ago
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
fantasybuilder|1 year ago
and
``` ncaught (in promise) SyntaxError: Unexpected token '<', " <!doctype "... is not valid JSON ```
lordswork|1 year ago
jonahx|1 year ago
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
kranke155|1 year ago
Zak|1 year ago
kart23|1 year ago
zippergz|1 year ago
markstos|1 year ago
https://mark.stosberg.com/the-most-dangerous-intersections-f...
One thing that's striking at is that the fatality locations do nor correlate with the "highest crash rate" locations hardly at all.
The intersection where you are most likely to get hit has a high pedestrian volume and often (in theory) low speed traffic.
While the fatalities here are more likely to happen on high speed streets, sometimes in locations where no one expecting a pedestrian.
Put another way: if we were try to fund "fixes" for the locations with fatalities, it would be mostly locations with a single fatality at those locations, while we have plenty of locations that have several pedestrian-involved crashes per yet.
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
WarOnPrivacy|1 year ago
Please enjoy complimentary load death. Would you like that mapped?
youssefabdelm|1 year ago
liminalmilenial|1 year ago
mikeocool|1 year ago
Assuming the data is being updated less often than hourly it should be relatively straight forward to generate a pmtiles tileset of the accident points, using either tippecanoe or planetiler — stick on something like s3, and have it basically scale infinitely.
Happy to help if needed!
Gigachad|1 year ago
sizzle|1 year ago
Is there a way to use the data to get a percentage or score for how dangerous a freeway is between 2 points on a map or something? Suggest an alternate freeway or intersections?
gwbas1c|1 year ago
owlbite|1 year ago
nasseri|1 year ago
zoklet-enjoyer|1 year ago
https://roadway.report/accidents/2003380044/
scrame|1 year ago
kgeist|1 year ago
system2|1 year ago
danglingptr|1 year ago
nullhole|1 year ago
_kb|1 year ago
jfoutz|1 year ago
At the moment it's very very slow.
I was able to eventually load and click through to see broad details about a crash.
Pretty impressive collection of data.
doublegreat|1 year ago
rmason|1 year ago
mtgentry|1 year ago
lawgimenez|1 year ago
cool-RR|1 year ago
keepupgudwrk|1 year ago
irjustin|1 year ago
Things that makes this difficult:
- Roads change overtime. Added stoplights, more lanes, added roundabouts. Dramatically change the rate.
- Volume of traffic. Deaths per cars would be interesting.
hrdwdmrbl|1 year ago
postscapes1|1 year ago
daemonologist|1 year ago
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
waldothedog|1 year ago
PS you may need to explicitly search to get results returned (I did)
runjake|1 year ago
https://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data/fatality-analysis-report...
ProAm|1 year ago
aeuropean12|1 year ago
The splash photos on that website says it all.
hahahacorn|1 year ago
Any plans to add search/filter functionality?
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
bonestamp2|1 year ago
can16358p|1 year ago
dkga|1 year ago
fitsumbelay|1 year ago
timzaman|1 year ago
ray_v|1 year ago
xyst|1 year ago
edit: while u fix it, what’s the source of the data? Did you get it from all of the state DoTs or is there a single set from the fed?
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
hahamrfunnyguy|1 year ago
xk3|1 year ago
jppope|1 year ago
miduil|1 year ago
lukeasch21|1 year ago
anothernewdude|1 year ago
tamimio|1 year ago
encom|1 year ago
dheera|1 year ago
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
colordrops|1 year ago
nsriv|1 year ago
y-curious|1 year ago
markstos|1 year ago
I did a crash analysis locally using the QGIS desktop software for some display and analysis, as well as Node.js and the Turf.js library when custom code was needed for spatial analsyis:
https://mark.stosberg.com/the-most-dangerous-intersections-f...
BaudouinVH|1 year ago
pseudoshikhar|1 year ago
cheschire|1 year ago
Put another way, what are you imagining would replace the current X/Y axis and still be relevant to this project?
macrolime|1 year ago
macrolime|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
jdwithit|1 year ago
Thanks for sharing (and good luck keeping the site up). It's the definition of morbidly interesting.
emsign|1 year ago
hm-nah|1 year ago
Bencarneiro|1 year ago
yalok|1 year ago
The split to 85 going south on 101 is a very bad place - 7 pins very close together.
gcanyon|1 year ago
_kb|1 year ago
Without this comment I would have had zero ability to discover that interaction was required.
worksonmine|1 year ago
nilsherzig|1 year ago
dtech|1 year ago
divan|1 year ago
stevage|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
onlyperson|1 year ago
[deleted]
FredPret|1 year ago
dhosek|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
38|1 year ago
[deleted]
bhjgjy|1 year ago
[deleted]