From the 1970s, a number of European governments had been working, through the European Experimental Vehicles Committee (EEVC), on the development of procedures and equipment for assessing various aspects of car secondary safety. By the early 1990s, this research had resulted in the development of full scale crash test procedures, for protection of car occupants in frontal and side impact, and a component test procedure for assessing the protection of pedestrians, hit by the fronts of cars.

 

At that time, the only full scale crash test required by European legislation, was a full width rigid block impact. This test was intended to control intrusion of the steering column. No test dummy was present in the car. There were no requirements for either side impact or pedestrian protection.

 

In the United States and elsewhere, legislation also used a full width block impact test and here test dummies were used to assess protection. In 1979, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) started the New Car Assessment Programme (NCAP), where cars were frontal impact tested at the higher impact speed of 35 mph. Much later, an NCAP programme was started in Australia and one was being developed for Japan.

 

In Europe, the German motor club, (Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil-Club) ADAC, and the motoring magazine Auto Motor und Sport, started to commission offset rigid wall frontal crash tests and to publish the results, as consumer information. A single series of frontal tests, using the EEVC offset deformable frontal impact test procedure, was published by European consumer groups. These tests were jointly funded by the UK Department of Transport and International Testing. Despite the lack of modern crash tests requirements, in European legislation, the beneficial effects of consumer information programmes had now become clear.

By 1994, proposals for the adoption in European legislation of the EEVC test proposals were being strongly resisted by the car industry. Partly as a consequence, in June 1994, the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) proposed to the UK Department of Transport that it should consider starting an NCAP in the UK, which could later expand across Europe. This proposal outlined the benefits seen elsewhere from such programmes, proposed that this programme should be more comprehensive and that it should be based on the test procedures developed by the EEVC. The Department of Transport reacted positively to this proposal and initial work was started.

 

The industry was informed about the work and representatives were invited to discuss the proposal at a meeting, the following month. At the meeting, it was explained that the intention was to assess cars using the EEVC Frontal, Side and Pedestrian tests procedures and publish the results as consumer information. The industry’s views were sought. At the meeting, the manufacturers’ response was very negative.

 

In April 1995, the Department of Transport contracted TRL to start development of a new car assessment programme. Immediately, discussions were held with other interested parties, to see how the programme could be expanded across Europe. In July 1995, those interested met at the European Commission to discuss how this might be taken forward. Over the following year, whilst these discussions continued, development of the UK programme continued.

 

From the beginning, the programme was ambitious. It was more comprehensive than those carried out elsewhere and there was the hope to involve more parties. With the research knowledge available to the programme, there was also a determination to ensure that full advantage was taken to ensure that the testing and assessment was as scientifically based as was possible. In order to benefit from the experience of others, visits were made during November 1995, to those involved in similar programmes elsewhere in the world. 

For the first phase of tests, seven supermini sized cars were chosen and the manufacturers were asked to supply information about those cars. For one manufacturer, the existence of the programme had an immediate effect. They asked when the test cars would be purchased, so that they could decide what improvements they could make to their car, before it was purchased. Subsequently, they revealed that they had only had time to increase the steel thickness of some parts of the structure and that the effect was somewhat limited.

 

By May of 1996, all of the first phase tests had been completed and a presentation was made to the Fifteenth International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV), in Melbourne. In the presentation, the programme was outlined and a report was made on the current state of development. Although, at this stage, all of the tests had been carried out, the assessment, rating and presentation procedures had still to be completed.

 

For comparative testing, it was clear that the testing had to be carried out to a higher standard than was necessary for legislation, product development or research. In such cases, it is adequate to pass the requirements or interpretation of the results can be supported by engineering judgement. However for comparative testing, the precise, absolute value of the results is important. Because of this, a detailed test protocol was developed and for the test laboratories, it was necessary for some improvements to be made.

 

For the development of the Assessment Protocol, access to the latest research and personal contacts with most of the World’s experts proved invaluable. The European consumer groups, through International Testing, provided support to allow Vehicle Safety Consultants to help with the development of the Assessment Protocol. Their experience in the fields of in-depth accident research and child protection were particularly useful. During this period, further meetings were held with representatives of the car industry regarding the development of the assessment and rating procedures.

 

A unique feature of the assessment procedure related to the inclusion of information from an expert inspection, carried out on each car. The prime purpose of the inspection is to extend the validity of the assessment to cover a wider range of car occupant sizes, seating positions and impact situations. For the frontal impact, inspection modifiers were incorporated to take account of these factors. Subsequently, modifiers were added for some of the other tests.

In November of 1996, the Swedish National Road Administration (SNRA), the Federation Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) and International Testing were the first organisations to join in with the programme. This resulted in Euro NCAP being formed. Its inaugural meeting was held in December 1996.

 

In February 1997, the first results were presented at a press conference and exhibition, at TRL. With the formation of Euro NCAP, the results were presented as Euro NCAP ratings. The release of these first results caused considerable media interest, which was fuelled by the strong negative response of the car manufacturers. On the same day, the car manufacturers held their own press conference, at an exclusive London restaurant, where they heavily criticised Euro NCAP, its tests and its ratings. One of the many claims was that the assessment criteria was so severe that no car could achieve four stars, for occupant protection.

 

In July 1997, the results from the second phase of tests were published and Euro NCAP was pleased to be able to announce that the Volvo S40 had become the first 4 star car, for occupant protection.

From the formation of Euro NCAP, the FIA took the lead in promoting the programme and in discussions with other potential members. As a consequence, more European governments and the ADAC joined. Support for the programme was also provided by the European Commission. Much more recently, Thatcham has joined the programme, on behalf of British Insurers. As Euro NCAP’s influence grew, new batches of test results were reported, about twice each year, and car manufacturers started to sponsor the testing of their own cars.

 

As new car models replaced those already tested, the improvements in their occupant star ratings could be clearly seen. Unfortunately, improvements were far slower to emerge for pedestrian protection.

 

In 1999, operational control of Euro NCAP moved from the UK to a full time Secretariat based in Brussels. This provided greater independence for Euro NCAP, although the experience gained from the early stages was not lost. In that same year, with encouragement from the FIA, Australian NCAP signed a memorandum of understanding with Euro NCAP and aligned its protocols with those of Euro NCAP.

 

In June 2001, a further milestone was reached when the Renault Laguna became the first car to be awarded 5 stars for occupant protection. Although other cars were awarded 5 stars later, it was suggested that the requirements were too severe for a supermini. However in November 2004, the Renault Modus became the first supermini to gain 5 stars. Standards have now risen so much that it is common for cars to achieve this rating and increasingly manufacturers see 5 stars as the goal for all their new models.