SecurityDriver News

1979 Volvo Ad

Cleaning out my garage the other day and I found an old ad I did for Volvo. I’m sure most of the people reading this do not remember the Volvo 242 GT; it was a hell of a performance vehicle. In the late 70’s Volvo had the reputation of a stogy old man’s car (kind of like today’s Volvos) – at the time my school was sponsored by Volvo – we were asked to conduct a  product testing and comparisons program for the Volvo engineers and some people from their ad agency. We were testing the 242 GT against vehicles like the brand new (at that time) BMW 3 Series.

The results of the tests and some comments I made, brought about this ad, the ad appeared in all the Car Magazines. It even made it into the News Weeklies and some other none automotive publications. The ad came out in 1979.

 When the ad guys and engineers were driving through the Lane Change most of the cars were having a difficult time getting through without hitting anything, and were breaking loose at speeds that the 242 GT had no trouble with. Just as we do today (31 years later) we measured the other vehicles handling numbers and compared them to the measured numbers of the Volvo GT. The GT’s numbers were 13 to 15 % higher than all the other cars being tested.

 One comment made by an ad agency guy was “These other cars are exciting to drive”.  My comment was “If you think that’s exciting – drive a Pinto through the Lane Change” My other comment was “ When compared to the BMW the Volvo GT handles better than cars that are known for handling ”. That’s where the tag line came from. It was a classic case of mistaking adrenalin for handling. Just as today when students drive around a race track or through a lane change, without being tested and measured, they mistake adrenalin for education. 

 By the way for all you old racers the picture and test were done at Bridgehampton Raceway on Long Island.

The problem with Unintended Acceleration has brought about discussions on brakes and braking. The following is some quick hits on braking. Some of this is repetitive from a previous post, but it is worth repeating.

The most powerful control on the vehicle is the brakes. Basically the brakes produce larger changes in speed than the gas pedal.

Our school cars – police packaged Ford Crown Victoria’s – can accelerate from 0 to 60 in about 9 to 10 seconds. With a trained driver – the vehicle can stop from 60 to 0 in an average of 3.5 seconds. The Crown Vic can stop from 60 MPH in about one third of the time it takes to accelerate to 60 MPH.

Because the brakes have an enormous potential, they can be the producer of both good and evil. According to the Society of Automotive Engineers most accidents start out with improper braking techniques.

 A small increase in speed will produce a large increase in stopping distance.

The fact is that if you double your speed you increase your stopping distance by a factor of four.

 If you increase your speed from 40 to 50 mph, speed has increased by 25 % but stopping distance has increased by 50 %.

The above is true even if you have ABS brakes. ABS cannot repeal the laws of physics, make you immune to road conditions, and most important, cannot overcome stupidity.

It makes no difference if a driver brakes with their left foot – threshold brakes – or uses a parachute to stop. If the speed is doubled the stopping distance increases by a factor of four.

 A major component of braking to avoid an emergency has nothing to do with braking, its all about where you look while the emergency is unfolding. Simply stated – your hands go where your eyes look.

 As soon as the emergency presents itself look for a place to put the vehicle. Look where you want the vehicle go and your hands will follow your eyes.

 Many times the driver’s eyes fixate on the object they are trying to avoid, and the result is they drive into it.

 SUMMARY

 Be careful about increasing speeds – for every 10% increase in speed it is a 20% increase in stopping distance.

 When confronted with an emergency press the brake pedal as hard as possible.

 Look where you want to put the vehicle.

 Bottom line you cannot arbitrarily increase your speed, it’s literally deadly.

Read it and feel free to comment – you can comment here on the Blogs or contact Frank at fg0321@gmail.com

What is leadership today? What has happened to the so called leaders of the industry? Who really makes the decisions that affects the lives of the people that we protect? Has the profession sold out?

As a former Recon Marine, I make all decisions pertaining to the daily operations of any protection detail predicated upon 2 principles:

1. Accomplish the mission
2. Look out for the welfare of my men

Seems pretty easy to me. How do I keep the principal from getting hurt or embarrassed and how do I keep my team from getting hurt?  So far, my track record is pretty good. I’ve had zero casualties for VIP’s and zero for my team. I’ve done protection operations in 46 countries. Some extremely high threat, some nearly zero threat. I have taught protection in another dozen extremely high threat countries. None of the people that I have taught have ever had a VIP injured. There have, however, been some casualties amongst the protection teams. Not to be unexpected, as the areas that they are working in are not vacation areas. Of course, we would not have been there if they did not need real help.

The points that I am going to make seem like no brainers to me, but there is something intrinsically flawed in our profession today. Or I wouldn’t be writing this. As usual, I have all the questions and very few of the answers.

40 years ago, being a protection guy meant one of 2 things – either you were a knuckle dragging Neanderthal with an IQ of 80 or you were an ex cop, ex football player, weight lifter, etc that was related to somebody who knew somebody. Your job was to look intimidating and be ready to kick some ass if your principal found themselves in a bad spot. We were professional fighters. Brain not required nor desired. The profession was viewed as a less than honorable one.

30 years ago, this perception began to change as world events put more people in harm’s way.

Major corporations, entertainers, politicians, etc realized that by virtue of being well known or controversial that they needed to make sure they did not become a statistic. Visionaries like Dr. Richard Kobetz (Executive Protection Institute) and Bob Duggan (Executive Security International) saw what was happening and started programs to make the profession honorable. They made people realize that planning and being presentable (not ogres) was the way of the future. We learned that the keys to success lay in never having problems by planning properly and not by having to beat the crap out of miscreants. Of course, the lawyers were pleased to have a new breed of protection specialist that they did not have to represent in court nearly as often.

Others like Tony Scotti realized that getting our VIP’s from point A to point B without getting killed on the road required a different set of driving skills. He saw that just having a driver’s license was not enough to help keep the VIP’s safe. That defensive driving and evasive skills were as important to the VIP’s as planning. That being able to see bad things unfolding on the road ahead of us gave a chance to avoid problems. Again, the lawyers were ecstatic.

Forward thinking corporations, families, entertainers (and their legal staffs) soon realized that our profession could keep them safe, not get them embarrassed and not sued in court as regularly as they used to be. CEO’s and their board of directors even realized that they had a fiduciary responsibility to their clients and share holders NOT to get hurt, killed or sued. And these folks were hiring the graduates of these specialized training courses and seeing them as assets not liabilities.

All of this progress was a good thing for the industry. BUT, like all things, change is not embraced by all. Where did the protection guys fit in the hierarchy of the corporate, family pyramid? Who did we answer to? What was the chain of command? Who did the director of security report to? Who did our reviews? Who decided who was good and should be retained and who should be let go?

Some reported to the CFO, some to the director of human resources, some to the secretary of the boss, some to house manager of the family. No big deal, right?

WRONG! This is where the wheels start to come off the train and where the leadership guys fall far short of their responsibilities to their men and their VIP’s. How can someone judge what we do and how do it if they have never done it? They can’t. And never will be able to. It is up the team leaders, the security directors, detail leaders (choose your term) to enlighten these so called “bosses” and look out for the members of their teams. Unfortunately, today, this does not happen.

Since when did being a house manager, wife of a CEO, butler, human resource director, or anybody else automatically qualify them as security experts? Sure, they can comment on looks, weight, verbal abilities, demeanor, clothes, but they know nothing about the industry. Never have, never will. Why do they have this power? Who gave it to them?

All of this has come to pass because the leadership guys have sold out. They are more concerned with keeping their jobs than doing the job correctly. They don’t have the balls to tell anyone outside their team that they do not know what they are talking about. They don’t tell them to stay in their lane. As a result, the protection of the principal has been compromised as the protection team guys are now asked to cook breakfast, hang up coats, walk the dogs, take the maid to the train station, this list could go on forever. Instead of doing advances, running routes, working out, etc – the protection team is seen sitting around eating donuts by the other worker bees and we quickly are labeled as lazy and probably not needed. True leaders know this and make sure their team is always working, not seen feeding their faces or sleeping in the command post.

This has become a huge factor in our industry and why we are losing the respect that we earned a few short years ago. Combine this with all the PSD (personal security detail) guys returning from the Middle East that are now trying to find state side work and we have serious problems.

Here’s a news flash – PSD work in Iraq does not translate to executive protection in the US. Apples and oranges. You may have been the cock of the walk in Iraq, but in the US, the rules are different. You need to attend a school and learn the realities of state side work. Leave the 511’s in the foot locker and buy some real khaki pants and Polo shirts.

Why do I bring this up, you ask? I have worked in both arenas and I know the differences. I had 60 guys working for me in Iraq and have worked anywhere from 1 man details to 12 man details in the states. The philosophy is the same, the skill sets are different. Too many times, I have seen guys from the war zone work in the states and attempt to hammer square pegs into round holes. It doesn’t work. But, it all comes back to leadership. The heads of any and all details have to be able to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of their team and make sure that they never put their people in a position to fail. We all get painted with the same brush if and when a mistake is made.

More importantly, the detail leaders have to make sure that the principals understand what our jobs are and push back when ridiculous requests are made of our people. No, we don’t cook dinner. No, we don’t hang up coats. We are protection specialists. The leadership has to spend the time and energy to make sure that the other employees know what we do. We have to look out for the welfare of our team or we become man servants or woman servants.

Yes, we are in a service industry. Our service is to allow our principals to live as normal a life as possible free from worry. We need to make sure that we always present a professional image. We need to keep our people (both the VIP’s and the team) out of the line of fire.

How do we undo this trend of house managers, wives, whomever from directing our day to day activities? First and foremost, never put your team in a position to look anything other than professional. When comments are made by people not qualified to make them, take them the time to educate them. Be polite, but be firm.

Have a meeting with VIP and explain to him or her how and why you are directing your people to do things a certain way. A lack of respect from the VIP or his family will quickly encourage others to treat you the same way. Don’t let it happen.

Establish a real chain of command. Make sure that everyone knows to come to the head of the detail with issues, problems, requests, etc. Make sure these folks are not going directly to your team. Only the head of the detail should be tasking his team with work to be done. Make sure your team tells anybody asking them to do things to run it through you first.

Get rid of the guys or gals on your team that seem to have their agenda ahead of yours. Beware of those that will try and eat their way to the top. Be firm, but fair. Once somebody has undermined you, they have to go.

Lead from the front. Never ask anyone to do something that you wouldn’t or couldn’t do.

This will be a painful war. Guys will lose their jobs as we attempt to put Pandora back in the box. Is your job more important to you than your reputation or self esteem? It seems in an awful lot of cases that this is true. We need to get back to the basics of being good at what we do and how we do it. While we protect the principals, we also need to protect our teams. I’d rather have the respect of my peer group than kiss the ass of the house manager any day of the week. But, that’s just me.

Frank Gallagher

Whether driving to the mall, driving the boss to work or driving in a high risk environment most driving is done in the Comfort Zone. The Comfort Zone is a combination of speed – steering and/or braking where the vehicle reacts as the driver expects it to. The Red Zone is a combination of speed – steering and/or braking that creates big changes in the way the vehicle responds, changes that are not expected, and create anxiety. Unless it is a race, the Red Zone is not a place a driver would go to on purpose, it is a place visited only when bad things are happening.

 It  may be difficult to think of a 10,000 lb armored Suburban as “sensitive”, but a car’s controls are very sensitive to speed, the faster you go, the more sensitive the vehicles braking and steering become. This area of sensitivity is the Red Zone.

 Research indicates that going from the Comfort Zone to the beginning stages of the Red Zone, happens with an increase of a fraction of an inch on the steering wheel, and/or an increases of speed as little as 2 MPH. To complicate the issue research has also shown the driver gets into their own personal Red Zone way before the vehicle does. As the driver enters Red Zone the vehicle will send feedback that makes the driver feel uncomfortable (the researcher’s way of saying scared). At this stage of the Red Zone the vehicle is still controllable, but the level of skill needed to keep the vehicle under control has gone up dramatically, and the window of opportunity to maintain control is extremely small.

 Look at it as the vehicle has a limit and the driver has a limit. The drivers limit is much lower than the vehicles limit. Basically the driver is uncomfortable with a combination of speed – steering and/or braking that are below the amount of speed – steering and/or braking the vehicle can take. 

 It is the transition from Comfort to Red that creates a training challenge. In an emergency a driver will be required to quickly transition from their Comfort Zone, into the Red Zone, there can be no hesitation. Common sense dictates that a driver has to be trained to recognize and manage this transition. In our opinion this transition is the essence of driver training. One of the goals of a driver training program is to raise the amount of steering, braking and speed a driver is comfortable with.

First this is a rare occurrence, but it can and has been fatal. One of the fatal incidents happened in my home town – Medford MA.

 If this event happens there are two things you want to do quick – real quick. Slow the car down and disconnect the engine from the drive wheels.

 Here are some things you can do; Press on the brake pedal – brakes can and will overpower the horsepower created by the engine. In a test done by Car and Driver magazine here is what they found “With a Camry’s travelling 70 mph, the brakes easily overcame all 268 horsepower – and stopped the car in 190 feet—that’s a foot shorter than the performance of a Ford Taurus without any gas-pedal problems and just 16 feet longer than with the Camry’s throttle closed.”

 Also from the same  Car and Driver  article – “If this is a concern, in the future look for vehicles with electronic throttle control since the advent of electronic throttle control, many automakers have added software to program the throttle to close—and therefore cut power to the engine”.

 Shift into neutral this will disconnect the engine from the drive wheels – don’t worry about the engine revs going crazy – most cars have rev limiters. But if your gas pedal is stuck and you are travelling 60 MPH or 90 Feet in a second, the least of your concerns is the engine revs.

 Keep in mind where you are. If you are on a major highway you don’t want to stop in the passing lane, the people behind you will get cranky. Once the car is in neutral you can control the speed of the car with the brake pedal. Get the car safely to the side of the road and if you can, off the road. DO NOT shut of the engine while the car is moving. Shutting off the engine will make the car hard to steer, just adding more excitement to your life.

 Once the car is stopped shut off the engine, take a deep breath.

All vehicles are supported by a cushion of air contained in four flexible rubber tires.  If you could place a car on a glass floor and look at it from below, you would see four patches of rubber, most folks are surprised at the size of these four patches, depending on the vehicle – each patch a little smaller than a hand.  These are the only points of contact between the vehicle and the road.  Each of these four small patches of rubber is known as the “contact patch”. It is these four patches that create the traction which makes the vehicle – go – stop and turn. It is these four patches that send the feedback back to the driver, and it is these four patches the driver has to manage. Consider them to be the source of information needed to control the vehicle.

 How Much Rubber Do You Have?

If you conduct training and want to know the size of the contact patch your vehicle creates, jack up your vehicle, put ink on the bottom of the tire, and let the car down on a piece of paper (we use finger print ink). Have someone keep their foot on the brake as you let the vehicle down, it keeps the tire from rolling, and lower the tire on the paper – the tire will leave a mark on the paper that represents the tire contact patch. The paper should be outline paper dived in one inch blocks, it makes measuring the contact patch easier.

 Once done you have a “picture” of the tire contact patch, and can easily measure the size of the patch in square inches (width of the patch times the height of the patch). If you take that number multiply it by four that is how much rubber is on the road.

 In our vehicles, police package Crown Vics with P225/60R16 tires with 32 PSI, we have 36.75 square inches per tire and all four tires will give us of contact area of 147 square inches of rubber touching the road.

A good article/outline about motorcade accidents, although I do think the authors may have an axe to grind.

We have developed an iPhone Application on Distracted Driving. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) driver distractions are the leading cause of most vehicle crashes and near-crashes.  The App came about when we looked at a study released by the NHTSA and the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI).  The study discovered that 80% of crashes and 65% of near-crashes involve some form of driver distraction – and the distraction occurred within three seconds before the vehicle crash!   For those in High Risk Security that number “three seconds” is familiar. It is the “Kill Zone”.

The Kill Zone Concept is used to train our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to avoid a vehicle ambush. Our iPhone Application uses the same theory to explain and avoid the dangers of Distracted Driving.

The theory is simple; a Kill Zone is a time-distance relationship. How much time does the driver have and how close is the problem (distance)?  The Kill Zone is directly related to the speed of the vehicle when the incident occurs.

An example of how Kill Zones relate to Distracted Driving look at the following scenario – You are 300 feet from a traffic light moving at 40 mph which is 60 feet per second. You get a text message; it takes 3 seconds to read the message – that means you drove 180 feet (3 seconds x 60 fps) without looking at the road. 

You were 300 feet from the traffic light, but as you were reading the text message, you moved 180 feet. When you looked up from the text message, you are 120 feet (300 -180) from the traffic light that has now changed from yellow to red.

You are 120 feet in front of the red light and closing in at 60 fps.  You are in the Kill Zone, a time distance relationship, the distance is 120 feet and some quick arithmetic tells you that you have two seconds to react. And you are driving deeper into the kill zone.

If you can get you foot on the brake in a half-second (that’s fast), you will travel 30 feet (half of 60 fps).  So at the point of applying your brakes, you are 90 feet from the traffic light (the initial 120 feet minus the 30 feet it took to reach for the brake). 

You will have to stop a car moving at 40 MPH (60 feet a sec) in 1.5 seconds. Life is going to get terribly exciting.

Our App uses case studies in the form of presentations, similar to the one above, and offers lessons learned.  The objective is to keep you out of the kill zone. 

You can direct any questions or comments to

tonyscotti@securitydriver.com

lawrence.snow@sjcwebdesign.com

In the process of a putting together an iPhone Application about vehicle attacks I came across this You Tube video. It is a re-enactment of the 1978 Moro kidnapping.  At the time, the kidnapping of the highly respected elder statesman of Italian politics, Aldo Moro, shocked the world. This incident would be similar to the kidnapping of one of our former Presidents. Although the Moro attack occurred more than 30 years ago it is still a lesson learned scenario.  

This event (plus the Schleyer ambush) had a profound effect on the security community. To gain an understanding of the historical significance of this attack we need to examine the security industry the 70’s.

Some History – During the 1970’s these types of attacks had been occurring often in South America, the prevailing attitude was that it would never spread beyond those borders.  Although the terrorism experts at the time (there were maybe three of them), had all been predicting this type of attack was going to spread, and become prolific. No one paid much attention to them, and the general feeling was that the terrorist were not that good – and that if you put a guy with gun sitting next to the chauffer, and maybe some guys with more guns in a vehicle following the boss the problem is solved. At the time the general thinking of the non security community was that the enemy was not that smart.  The following is an actual comment from an executive “After all we are dealing with unsophisticated rabble”.

 Lessons –  Moro was one of the attacks that brought to light that terrorist actually plan what they do. You can see from this re-enactment that these guys, and girl, had their act together.

This was one of the attacks that made the “powers to be” come to the conclusion that –

 Having guys with guns with the boss doesn’t solve the problem – it creates a different problem

 We ought to train those guys that are protecting the principal – drivers and shooters should be trained to drive and shoot

Armored cars are a good thing – we are talking about 1970’s armored cars that were a lot less sophisticated than they are now.

The protection team was expendable

 This is a question – not a comment – have things changed that much in thirty years?  What do you think?

By Joe Autera

One of the many challenges that corporate security professionals face is maintaining adequate security for their executives and other key personnel as they go about their daily business. Often times, these challenges are far greater when those folks are traveling beyond the umbrella of protection that has been established for them in and around their residence, their workplace and while moving between these familiar locations. But what happens when they are visiting an out-of state (or overseas) facility? Or attending a meeting in a city where the company has no presence? We’ve all heard the stories of executives getting in the wrong car at some unfamiliar airport or, worse yet, hailing a cab when they can’t seem to find the driver hired to take them to that meeting and, on more than one occasion, listened as a corporate pilot or personal assistant recounts how some executive was picked-up ramp side by some nefarious looking character in a vehicle that was better suited for the scrap pile than carrying passengers.

When issues like this arise, they aren’t necessarily the fault of the person who was responsible for arranging the transportation, though they often bear the brunt of it. Larger transportation companies often boast of how many cities they cover, when in reality they sub-contract a large portion of their work out to independent operators, especially in cities with low volumes of business. Now, with the advent of the internet and pre-packaged web sites it’s all too easy for someone, say the independent driver with a single twelve year old sedan, to portray themselves as something other than what they are, like a high end, professional car service with modern cars and equipment. Complacency also plays a part in some of the problems that arise with ground transportation, particularly in smaller companies as they tend to rely on vendors simply because they’re the ones they have always used, even though the company’s needs may have changed dramatically.

Today, finding the right transportation provider is becoming even more complicated as a shifting economy and negative media attention have raised the profile and increased the security risks for many corporations and their executives while, at the same time, budgets are being cut and cost saving measures are being implemented across the board. All of this places an even greater importance on ensuring that contract ground transportation providers are not the weak link in your security program and that your company is getting what it pays for.

Regardless of whether risk management (security) or cost effectiveness is the driving factor in the decision making process, given what’s at stake – the safety and security of some of the company’s valuable assets – the need for a formal vetting process for transportation providers has never been greater. When properly documented, the results of such a process will prove useful in identifying which provider truly offers the better value, as opposed to the best price.

The framework for a ground transportation provider vetting process, that has proven to be useful for corporate security decision makers and satisfies most basic due diligence requirements is outlined below.

1. Verify vendors financial standing through third party service (Dunn & Bradstreet, Hoover’s, etc.)
2. Verify vendor holds proper operating licenses – transportation, security or both – for all locales they will be providing service in.  
3. Verify insurance (require that their broker provide ACORD certificates of insurance directly to you).
4. Establish contractual requirements for minimum coverage levels, require notification of any change in status or coverage
5. Check for and review current and past civil or criminal case filings in all locales where vendor operates – not just those where they will be servicing your account (use data mining service such as LexisNexis, Choicepoint, etc.)
6. Check with Better Business Bureau, or similar agency, for complaints in all locales where vendor operates – not just those where they will be servicing your account
7. Review vendors hiring practices (minimum qualifications, requisite experience etc. Require proof of compliance (i.e. sampling of documentation/credentials of new or recent hires as well as long term employees).
8. Review vendors training requirements (type of programs, frequency of training). Require proof of compliance (again, a sampling of documentation pertaining to current employees)
9. Review vendor’s maintenance and vehicle replacement program or policies, require proof of compliance (i.e. sampling of documentation for specific vehicles). For example, we are aware of at least one transportation provider that replaces all vehicles at 30K miles and has a strict maintenance schedule
10. Ensure vendor  has capability to fully support your security needs (i.e. drivers with specialized security training – not just off-duty police officers) through client references and review of appropriate documentation

As with any other vetting process the operative phrase is “trust, but verify”. When it comes to documentation and references, you want to take every step possible to ensure the accuracy and legitimacy of the information provided by contacting references directly, getting documentation directly from the source (i.e. the insurance broker), and establishing a contractual right to request further documentation, updated information or to perform periodic inspections, at your discretion.

While there is a lot to be said for dealing with larger, more established vendors there are some downsides as well (high turnover, less clout for your company, less emphasis on customer service, etc.) and if you happen to be in need of more specialized services – like experienced security drivers or drivers with BLS/AED certification, specially-equipped vehicles or the like – dealing with a smaller company with a shorter track record may be the only option available. If security is the deciding factor you may be best served by dealing with one of the few local or regional companies that provide a bona fide secure ground transportation service. Of course, regardless of how large or small the service providers business may be, a thorough vetting process will help guard against costly and embarrassing problems further down the road.