slo007

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government should require data recorders in all passenger vehicles, federal safety officials said Tuesday in a recommendation arising from the investigation of a car crash that killed 10 people and injured 63.

National Transportation Safety Board investigators concluded the 86-year-old driver had stepped on the gas instead of the brake and plowed into a farmers market in Santa Monica, California, on July 16, 2003.

They came to that determination without testimony from the driver, George Weller, who refused on his lawyer's advice to talk with the investigators.

The board concluded investigators could have gained a better scientific understanding of Weller's behavior had his 1992 Buick LeSabre been outfitted with an event data recorder, or "black box."

"We believe very strongly that vehicles should have a black box," NTSB chairman Ellen Engleman Conners said

In the Santa Monica crash, investigators came to their decision on Weller's actions after ruling out mechanical failure, weather, fatigue, alcohol or drugs. Weller hired a lawyer to help him fight vehicular manslaughter charges and civil lawsuits.

The NTSB recommended black boxes two months after the top federal auto safety agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said it saw no need to require them because automakers are adding them voluntarily to more models.

Flight data recorders, which despite the black box characterization are bright orange, are aboard all commercial aircraft. They can collect more than a thousand pieces of data about an airliner that investigators can review to determine the cause of a crash.

Proponents of black boxes in passenger vehicles say they could provide investigators with an exhaustive database that could highlight flaws in auto and road designs.

Critics worry about who would get access to that information. Privacy advocate David Sobel said millions of drivers on the road now have no idea that their vehicles are collecting data.

"They certainly don't know what's being collected, how long it's being retained and who can get access to it under what circumstances," said Sobel, general counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

AAA, the nation's largest auto club, would support requiring black boxes only if protections were in place to ensure the data are used just for safety research and can't be traced to specific drivers, spokesman Mantill Williams said.

The highway safety agency says between 65 percent and 90 percent of 2004 vehicles have some sort of recording ability. About 15 percent of vehicles have data recorders. Different models collect different amounts of data. Some record nothing more than how fast a vehicle sped up or slowed down, while others collect a range of information about the driver's actions and the condition of a vehicle's mechanical systems.

Data have been used by the highway safety agency in safety research and by law enforcement officials investigating car crashes.

In Massachusetts, crash data have been used to bolster evidence in several prosecutions. And in California, a law took effect on July 1 that requires manufacturers to tell buyers when their new cars have black boxes. In most cases, the law requires an owner's permission before authorities can get access to the data.

The NTSB has the power only to investigate and recommend. Any requirements would have to be imposed by NHTSA.

The highway safety agency said in June that requiring black boxes was unnecessary but proposed that by 2008 the auto industry should outfit their vehicles voluntarily with recorders that would collect 42 pieces of accident data, including speed, braking, seat belt use and the time required for air bags to deploy.

The NTSB said black boxes could help explain accidents caused by "unintended acceleration" in which a vehicle suddenly speeds up. This can be caused by a driver sitting in the wrong position or mistakenly stepping on the accelerator rather than the brake, as the NTSB contends the Santa Monica driver did.

Those who believe older drivers should have to prove their driving ability cited the accident as an example of the tragedy that can result when people are too old to drive safely. The safety board could not determine whether Weller's age played a role in the accident, focusing instead on the need for stronger barriers at regularly recurring outdoor events such as street fairs and farmers markets.

Engleman Conners said the safety board maintains its interest in the issue of older drivers. The board decided to send an investigation team to Santa Monica because it hoped to learn whether the driver's age contributed to the accident.

Dan Martin

Not in my car.

slo007

The NTSB has no power in this country. Why do we have this agency again? Might as well let the other agencies (i.e. FAA, NHTSA, etc.) run the investigations.

sauceman

No way in hell. My car is not a public vehicle, and hence no need to have Big Brother looking into our habits.

The easier solution (and much less costly) is to revise the regulations allowing 86-year olds drive their cars.

bbbradley

It's not so much that the NTSB is pushing for this as the number of cars that are already equipped with this. If I had a car with a "black box" (which I don't think I do) I'd yank it out. It is a logical step to take that a court could subpoena your "black box" and make note of your driving record for however long the device records for.

/bill

biker

I would assume that the TSX engine ECU records some stuff. I guess the trick is to find out how much and if there is a way to get at it. I would also guess that the newer the model and the more expensive the more likely it will record more stuff. If I knew for sure I was guilty in a serious vehicle accident I would either take a hammer to the ECU or take it out of the car.

bbbradley

As the thread on the dealer pulling the code on a high RPM romp to cause warranty issues attests, the ECU can log some things. How much, and how easily it can be obtained as well as will it stand up to a legal challenge...who knows.

IIRC many GM vehicles alreadyhave some sort of datalogger, I'd love to see a list of what cars have this, and how to disable it. If the car companies told you about it, that's one thing, but to slip the babysitter in, that bugs me!

/bill

biker

I wonder what that Cali notification entails.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Hmm...I'm not totally against the idea of a black box if its only purpose is to record vehicle speed and orientation data. This would allow certain accidents to be investigated in a more timely and effective manner.

However, in now way should these boxes be given GPS or locator ability. That could be used in the wrong way too easily.

As for someone's suggestion that they just reevaluate allowing older individuals to drive, there is not way the AARP (the largest and most influential special interest group in the country) would allow that. Personally, I think that mandatory re-certification of licensing should be done every 5-10 years and that it should entail more than just writing a check (such as possibly including a written exam and on-road drive test). I'm sure there are lots of people who would fail this miserably after 10 or 20 years of driving because they build up these horrible driving habits. Plus, this would allow for regular testing of older drivers as well to determine when their abilities have reached a point where they will be dangerous to other drivers on the road.

Helicobacter Pylori

Black box or not, old drivers make me It's not about discriminating but I think there should be a more strict law for old drivers too. I remember seeing some news (probably not local news) back in Vancouver several years ago. A old men hit a pregnant laby and drag her under the car for a couple blocks to her miserable death. In another case, a old guy drove into park and hitting a bunch people. And both of them claimed that they were not "aware" of the accidents.

If I were old, I would appreciate someone to examine my driving ability once a while, because my vision and judgement are for sure deteriorating, whether I like it or not. If I don't have the capability to drive safely, why would selfishly I want to put others in danger?

Funny thing is, I have never heard about elders driving into a wall and killing themselve...

Helicobacter Pylori

And I haven't written anything longer than a few sentences for a long while

biker

Helico with a fairly long, inteligent, serious and usefull post - there's something you won't see too often

TSX 'R' US

heh.... "lets see if you were REALLY speeding or not," said the judge.. :shakehd:

slo007

The way I see it, only the guilty should be concerned. If you are a good driver, what's to worry?

The GPS thing might be a little freaky, but it could help solve a lot of crimes, "Was TSX 'R' US really at home on Friday at 8:39pm?" asked the detective. Let's see what his car says about it... :sqnteek:

Dan Martin

It's all about privacy. Privacy is very easy to give up but very hard to get back.

First they install black boxes that record 10 seconds of data which can be summoned in a court case or investigation. Then after a few years of black boxes they decide to "upgrade" them to a model with 100x the recording capacity and wireless communications to the nearest authorites so they can "dispatch help if you are in trouble". Then someone will come up with the bright idea "hey we don't even need police patrols because we can just fine whoever is breaking the law which we can see nicely on our handy dandy black box". Ad nauseum until we are all robots working for "the corporation".

Ok that's probably a little too sci-fi, I know. But, if you think about it, it's not really that far fetched. When was the last time you heard of a law being passed that would give the public more privacy? That's because it never happens. Rights are often revoked but seldom created. Privacy is not a right anymore.

biker

TSX CSI

Actually, they do have certain instruments like that in most GM cars, It help in accident reconstuctions, they are turned on by gravitational changes that are significant enough to make the computer think there was an accident (like OnStar knows when you have a rapid decrease in speed). Its all in milliseconds and it records engine speed, actual mph, change in velocity, and most importantly if you were belted in. Its called CDR (crash data retrieval system) I am pretty sure it is made by Vetronix. I have used it in a few cases.... pretty sick

biker

Out of the 2005 G35 owners manual:

Your vehicle is equipped with a variety of
computers that monitor and control a
number of systems to optimize performance
and help service technicians with
diagnosis and repair. Depending on the
equipment on your vehicle, some of the
computers monitor emission control systems,
braking systems and air bag systems,
just to name a few. Some data
about vehicle operation may be stored in
the computers for use during servicing.
Other data may be stored if a crash event
occurs. For example, air bag readiness,
air bag performance, and seat belt use by
the driver or passenger may be recorded,
depending on vehicle equipment. These
types of systems are sometimes called
Event Data Recorders.
Special equipment can be used to access
the electronic data that may be stored in
the vehicle's computers (sounds are not
recorded). INFINITI and INFINITI dealers
have equipment to access some of this
data; others may also have this equipment.
The data may be retrieved during
routine vehicle servicing or for special research.
It might also be accessed with
the consent of the vehicle owner or
lessee, in response to a request by law
enforcement, or as otherwise required or
permitted by law.