Table of Contents

6.16.2 Evaluation

An evaluation of the various EVP technologies was reported in Austroads (2007f). Table 6.15 summarises the results.

Table 6.15: Evaluation of emergency vehicle pre-emption systems

EV priority measures and technologiesObjectiveQuantitative impactsQualitative impacts
Route pre-emption planReduce travel time to incident sites by improving progression on designated routes with pre‑determined signal linking plans.95% of respondents to a survey of operators in Adelaide expressed moderate to high satisfaction in improvement in travel speed and safety. 65% of operators found that loading the pre-emption plan was of moderate difficulty (Baskerville 2006).
Detection at signalsClear traffic at an intersection before the arrival of an EV with a green phase by detecting its arrival before reaching the intersection.Reduce response time by 14% to 23% and road crashes by 90% (Federal Highway Administration 2006a).An infrared system was able to activate a signal at a distance up to 500 m in a Melbourne trial with no misses. Response time, stress and public safety were significantly reduced (Bean & Studwick 2006).
GPS tracking with an in‑vehicle GPS unit and another at an intersectionPredict the arrival time of an EV and provide a green phase before and during its passage through the intersection.Reduce response time by 20% in a trial in Illinois, USA (Proper et al. 2001).
Route guidanceProvide shortest path to incident site based on traffic information en route.Reduce response time by 10% to 15% in New Mexico, USA (Proper et al. 2001).Route guidance.

Source: Austroads (2007f).