National Transportation Safety Board releases preliminary report on fatal self-driving Uber crash
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Federal investigators say the autonomous Uber SUV that struck and killed an Arizona pedestrian in March spotted the woman about six seconds before hitting her, but didn't stop because emergency braking was disabled.
In a preliminary report on the crash, the National Transportation Safety Board said Thursday that emergency braking maneuvers are not enabled while Uber's cars are under computer control, "to reduce the potential for erratic vehicle behavior."
Instead, Uber relies on a human backup driver to intervene. The system, however, is not designed to alert the driver.
In the crash, the driver began steering less than a second before impact but didn't brake until less than a second after impact, according to the preliminary report, which does not determine fault.
A video of the crash showed the driver looking down just before the vehicle struck and killed 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg in Tempe, Arizona.
An Uber spokeswoman would not comment immediately on the report. She said the company is a party to the NTSB investigation and cannot release information.
Sensors on the fully autonomous Volvo XC-90 SUV spotted Herzberg while the car was traveling 43 miles per hour and determined that braking was needed 1.3 seconds before impact, according to the report.
Herzberg was pushing a bicycle across a boulevard in the darkness of March 18 when the crash occurred on a part of the road that had no crosswalk and was not lighted, the report said.
She was wearing dark clothing and did not look in the direction of the vehicle until just before impact. A toxicology report showed that she tested positive for methamphetamine and marijuana, according to the NTSB.
Also, the bicycle had no side reflectors and the front and back reflectors were perpendicular to the Uber SUV.
Click here to read the full release from the NTSB.
Tags
Who is online
138 visitors
Kind of does away with that "autonomous Uber SUV" they promoted.
Calling any vehicle autonomous is a sure way to get sued by either the owner or a victim when they are injured or killed when the autonomous sensors can't keep up and the car hits something. They should properly be called driver assist systems and not autonomous vehicles.
I'm all for doing away with all the "driver assisted" crap and force people to learn how to drive.
Most people are not good drivers and they want advanced driving assistance technology of automated emergency braking, lane keeping, vehicle stability systems and traction control.
We could have an improved public transit network but most people want to keep their autonomy and the convenience of car ownership.
There are approximately 10 million vehicle accidents a year resulting in between 30,000 to 40,000 fatalities a year.
Despite all of the automotive safety improvements, 2016 was a "record high" with 40,200 fatalities.
Perhaps we should do away with cell phones, hands free built in phones and GPS monitors & map programs built into the dash.
Let's face it, lot's of people don't pay attention; an autonomous car, assisted by by distracted, bored "driver" hit and killed an impaired pedestrian,
wearing dark clothes at night, crossing a busy main thoroughfare with a bike missing it's wheel reflectors. A perfect storm, as it were.
Change any one factor and she would be alive today.
Is that a reason to halt all progress & development? I'm sure there will be changes to the software and hardware on these SUVs.
Cell phone use behind the wheel is a huge problem. Hands-free phones aren't the answer because the person is distracted from the road by the conversation, even when they aren't holding the device in question.
Then they should learn how to drive.
Cops in the US are only interested in speeding and DUI. Poor drivers, as long as you don't have a serious accident get a pass.
My first car in 1961 had no heater and no radio - we had a hand held transistor radio for when we were parked or reached our destination.
Driving was a relationship with the car, I could eventually tell when the #6 plug needed to be replaced or the distributor needed a good internal scraping
or the points needed to be filed and readjusted - we listened to what the car was telling us and it was very talkative.
Now, the passengers & drivers are almost completely cut off from any external environmental stimuli and they are bored - they need music and texting.
They are helpless if the car doesn't start as expected.
It's more of an attention deficit disorder than learning how to drive.
Yep and when we didn't listen close enough soon we didn't go anywhere for awhile. lol
My first car was a 66 rambler ambassador classic (my father's choice) it soon was replaced by a 64 impala that I rebuilt.
yep if we didn't listen to our cars we didn't go bye bye back then, now I dont even change my own damn oil.
I changed the front rotors and brakes on our Toyota a few months back.
Now the remaining box with the rear brakes and rotors keeps staring at me - trying to make me feel guilty lol.
Maybe next weekend ....Ha !
We took it a few months back where we always get our oil changed and state inspections.
After a few weeks we asked each other if we thought the oil light was coming on when we turned. It was.
Checked the oil.... none - added 4 quarts - then the filter started to drip very lowly - like one drop per night - the filter was loose.....
WtH ?
I'd change it myself if it was easy to get rid of the used oil.
I agree. When you do it , you know it's done right. That part I miss.
You can take your used oil back to the auto parts store where you bought it. They are required to allow you to recycle it there. (at least here in Cali) Usually they have a big tank in the back where you can dump it.