Skip to main content

Ignoring deadly defects in autonomous cars serves no one, say auto safety advocates

The US Center for Auto Safety, Consumer Watchdog and former National Highway Traffic Administration (NHTSA) administrator Joan Claybrook have told NHTSA administrator Mark Rosekind that "you inexcusably are rushing full speed ahead" to promote the deployment of self-driving robot car technology instead of developing adequate safety standards "crucial to ensuring imperfect technologies do not kill people by being introduced into vehicles before the technology matures." In a letter to Rosekind in response
July 29, 2016 Read time: 2 mins
The US Center for Auto Safety, Consumer Watchdog and former National Highway Traffic Administration (NHTSA) administrator Joan Claybrook have told NHTSA administrator Mark Rosekind that "you inexcusably are rushing full speed ahead" to promote the deployment of self-driving robot car technology instead of developing adequate safety standards "crucial to ensuring imperfect technologies do not kill people by being introduced into vehicles before the technology matures."

In a letter to Rosekind in response to his recent assertion that NHTSA cannot "stand idly by while we wait for the perfect" before self-driving robot car technologies are deployed, the advocates called it a ‘false dichotomy’.

"The question is not whether autonomous technology must be perfect before it hits the road, but whether safety regulators should allow demonstrably dangerous technology with no minimum safety performance standards in place, to be deployed on American highways."

The letter said the advocates were "dumbfounded” that the fatal crash of a Tesla Model S in Florida that killed a former Navy SEAL did not cause Rosekind to slow the introduction of autonomous cars on to US roads.

"Instead, you doubled down on a plan to rush robot cars to the road," the letter said.

The advocates agreed that autonomous technologies can save lives someday. However, they stressed the self-driving autonomous technologies should only be implemented after thorough testing and a public rulemaking that sets enforceable safety standards.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) preliminary report on the Tesla crash revealed that the driver was using the advanced driver assistance features Traffic-Aware Cruise Control and Autosteer lane keeping assistance. According to system performance data downloaded from the car, the indicated vehicle speed was 74 mph just prior to impact, and the posted speed limit was 65 mph. The car was also equipped with automatic emergency braking that is designed to automatically apply the brakes to reduce the severity of or assist in avoiding frontal collisions.

Related Content

  • June 2, 2014
    Crash prevention systems improving rapidly says IIHS
    According to its latest report, less than a year into a new Insurance |Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) ratings program for front crash prevention, auto manufacturers are making strides in adopting the most beneficial systems with automatic braking capabilities and are offering the features on a wider variety of models. Twenty-one of 24 cars and SUVs, all 2014 models unless noted, earn an advanced or higher rating in the latest round of IIHS evaluations. "We are already seeing improvements from automaker
  • March 27, 2015
    US Wi-Fi Innovation Act could hamper V2V
    The US government is looking into opening up wi-fi space for the public, but it could impact on vehicle-to-vehicle communication (V2V) technology developed to prevent up to 80 per cent of car crashes, according to a discussion on CBS News. After more than a decade in development and more than a half-billion dollars in taxpayer money spent, the technology aimed at making roads safer and saving an estimated 1,083 lives every year may now be sidelined to make room for wi-fi. Dr Peter Sweatman, director
  • December 11, 2020
    Safety campaigners offer 'GPS' for AVs
    USDoT criticised by lobby groups for 'hands-off approach to hands-free driving'
  • October 27, 2016
    The downside of driverless vehicles
    Driverless cars will have a detrimental effect on congestion and security while the road safety benefits can be achieved sooner and cheaper using ADAS, argues Colin Sowman. Many Governments are consulting about the introduction of driverless vehicles and even running trials. As 70% or 80% of crashes are caused by human error, the promise of a crash-free future of driverless, self-driving or autonomous vehicles (call them what you will) is alluring, as are the claims of reduced congestion and lower emissions