Halaman

    Social Items

Showing posts with label Safety. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Safety. Show all posts
New cars are tested for crash worthiness as we know. They are usually rated from zero to five stars and people are greatly influenced by the results. Potential buyers may shy away from anything less than a five star rating.
My personal view is that too much is read into the system. Of course, a newly released car getting two or three stars today would be unacceptable but the difference between a four and five star rating may not be as people think. The reason is that it is very difficult to replicate all the nuances of 'real world' accidents when testing cars in controlled environment.
Now a new overlap test that puts only 25% of the front of a car into an object (at 40 kph) as opposed to say 40% has been carried out. It was done by the The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, and the results were sobering. It seems that many manufacturers that trumpet safety, are simply very good at making their cars pass existing tests. This new test showed how few cars are made to stand up to a smaller object impact, such as would happen with a tree of power pole.
Poor: Mercedes C Class, Lexus IS and ES350 and Audi A4.
Marginal: Acura TSX, BMW 3 Series, Lincoln MKZ and VW CC.
Good: Acura TL and Volvo S60.
The above models are premium, the next batch of tests will be every day models, and it won't be pretty I suggest. Yet even some reputable models as listed above had unacceptably poor results. The IS and C-Class had sufficient structural deformation to trap the dummies feet while the door of the VW CC came off!
It seems that five stars can be achieved if you study standard tests and engineer cars to meet those. A common accident like hitting a power pole is for some reason not in existing tests. So car makers generally don't worry about making them safe for that scenario. That is cynical to me. One of the brands tested builds cars not just to get five stars but to make safe cars, and that is Volvo.
So if someone says they won't buy a four star car, well maybe it failed a technicality on the existing test, whereas a five star car might in fact be worse in certain accidents. If you are very concerned about safety, buy a Volvo.

The Limitations Of Car Crash Tests



Many car makers in Brazil apparently don't make vehicles that are very crash worthy. Legally they do what is necessary to pass the laws and that is all that matters to some of them. I ask the question "is it cynical" as I wonder who is really responsible.

Are the authorities to blame for not having higher standards? Can the manufacturers be blamed when if made better - hence more expensive - they could lose customers to cheaper, less safe models? Should the consumer find out which ones are safer and then support them? In other words are customers indifferent?

There is an article that analyses the situation that can be found here. It is quite long, but seems well researched. As for whether car makers could do better, I wrote an article (click here) about cars tested in more affluent markets. It doesn't cover many brands and those omitted cannot be judged; but for those mentioned, it's concerning.

Car safety is important. Manufacturers who go beyond what is required by law to protect their customers are to be applauded. For those do the minimum to maximise profit, I'll let you decide.


Also, the driver must  take responsibility to be careful for the safety of all road users. Drive to the conditions. 

Check your vehicle keep it well maintained. Make sure each journey is as safe as you can make it.

Cynical Car Makers?


Toyota is trialing the Mitigate Impact System, or M.I.S. for short. Of course it is better if the other car does MISS you, but if there is a crash this system mitigates - or lessens - the impact. Some say visually it isn't attractive, but as the manufacturer says "Do you want to protect your precious paintwork or not?"

If the trial is successful - and I cannot see how it wouldn't work - then they will gradually start appearing on new models in 2014. I applaud the initiative, but question whether the tyres should be colour matched to the car. Apparently au naturel means impacts won't require any touch up to the tyre. Smart thinking.

Toyota Trial Mitigate Impact System (M.I.S.)

2013 has gone and 2014 lies before us. Predicting future trends is a sure way to get egg on your face. Despite that, I will give a few ideas of what I see happening as a broad overview.

The Future? 


1) That petrol or diesel will remain the way we power our cars - for now.
This will stay that way until they become too expensive, as reserves dwindle. Until fossil fuel gets too costly - or incentives are offered by governments - nothing will change for the current mode of fuel in our cars. We can talk about the environment and the benefits of other types of propulsion for our vehicles, but....



2) The shift in car buying power from Europe to Asia to go on.

Growth continues to be driven by Asia. North America recovered well with car sales in 2013, while Europe was very subdued. The hoped for revival in Europe hasn't materialised, for reasons I won't go into here. Those reasons will, however, continue to diminish Europe's importance for car makers.

3) There are big changes ahead in personal mobility.

Beijing Traffic! Enough said.
When you see the big cities of the world clogged with congestion and pollution, the benefits of driving ourselves around are being outweighed by the reduction in health and the quality of life. 

Technology to have cars drive themselves would help traffic flows and reduce accidents, even road deaths. Hydrogen or electric propulsion would be clean(er). Still, people like what the car gives them as it is now. Nevertheless, how much longer will it go on as it is?

4) Co-operation between car makes will increase.

The cost of vehicle R & D is ever growing. As car makers work together more to share these costs, it will make the purchase price of cars even more affordable. It makes no sense for everyone to be duplicating costs developing the same things. Those that share costs the best - both within company groups and with other car makers - will more likely survive and prosper.

Cycle Route In Denmark. I like it.


In summary: Change is a constant reality, and should always be improving how things are done. Therefore, personal mobility need to be managed well, adding to the efficiency and quality of our lives.

Personal Mobility And The Future

The driverless - or automated - car is considered a future reality. I have asked people about it and everyone has said "No way. I want to be in control". It may in fact show that people enjoy driving anyway, and they prefer that independence. They also may lack confidence in technology to deliver them safely to their destination.

Some benefits: 1) Fewer traffic accidents in basic driving conditions such as motorways. 2) A relaxed journey for the driver. 3) Age, disabilities and intoxication would not be issues in using cars. 4) Reduced traffic police and less insurance. 5) An automonous car could come to pick you up or drive to a garage for servicing without any passengers.
Maybe you prefer a driverless pod

Some drawbacks:
1) People wanting to be in control as mentioned above. 2) A driver losing driver sharpness when constantly being driven around then having to suddenly take the wheel when necessary.
3) Litigation against the car maker if the system fails to stop an accident. 4) Cyber security and communication issues.
5) When the system breaks down, then being able to take over and drive' for example a disabled person. 6) Having the ability to negotiate more difficult road conditions. In other words, computers cannot think. How will they handle sudden, unpredictable situations? 7) With a road obstruction, knowing whether to wait or reverse and take another route.

In summary: On motorways and town roads, I could see the automated car coping. I don't on open roads such as we have in New Zealand that are challenging. The ability for the human brain to suddenly make a decisions for something that could not be predicted is something a computer cannot do. It has to be preprogrammed or it won't know what to do.

Frankly, I see this as a possibility in certain situations but for all scenarios a long time away, perhaps never. There is no doubt more to this than I know, but even a layman's overview shows up the complexity of the subject, both technically and emotionally.

But what about twisty back roads and sudden challenges?

The Driverless Car - A Layman's View


I was just talking to a lorry driver who goes between Picton and Christchurch, NZ. That is nearly 350 kms (just over 200 miles). North Island drivers deliver their load to the ferry in Wellington, it crosses the strait and another driver takes it south. In this way the driver stays on his home island and time isn't wasted on a ferry.

If you have ever driven in New Zealand you will know the country isn't connected by motorways, but everyday roads, often quite twisty. As the road south from Picton approaches Kaikoura, there are some narrow tunnels. For a large lorry to enter them, they have a to take a wide berth to enter the tunnel straight. There are signs saying 'No Overtaking' the truck as he attempts this manoeuvre. The driver was telling me that cars still do and he has to watch out and often brake to avoid squashing them against a wall.

He also said the the truck speed is monitored in various ways and for example, if they enter a 50kmph (30mph) zone, from a higher speed, the lorry has to be doing the 50 when they reach the sign. If he doesn't do that then he incurs demerit points as it will be detected. Many car drivers flash their lights and honk their horns in anger at the truck driver for slowing too soon, in their opinion.

In behalf of these fine professional drivers, I would like to say something. If you are the sort to try to overtake large vehicles without due care, do you want to be scrapped off a wall or road by emergency services? If you honk and flash your lights because the vehicle in front slows to the speed limit as it is entering a town, who do you think you are? For such drivers, the sooner self-drive cars come the better, because you are not wanted on the road driving yourself. You should be driven by Google. Why? Because a mindless machine could drive so much better than your egotistical efforts.

They know what they are doing. Do you?
For all others (and I assume you are the majority), well done for your patience and your understanding that professional drivers go as fast as they can safely. You realise that getting to your destination relaxed and safe is more important than a few minutes saved. Also a big thank you to the lorry drivers for the quality of your work and for putting up with poor car drivers and still being so obliging to other road users.

Lorry (Truck) Drivers



One song says love changes everything, and so does money. Corruption is rife in the world today and money is so often the motivation. Even human life can be a secondary consideration in the quest to gain or protect money.

Cars are convenient but also dangerous. Safety features are important to consumers and modern cars are full of  such life saving features. I find some such as lane departure warning as quite laughable but most are welcome additions. I must say as one who has always used seat belts I thought airbags were for Americans too lazy to buckle up (no offense intended). However, they do add to occupant safety so I've been won over.

 Which leads to the point of the article. Japanese firm Takata changed the main ingredient for its airbags from tetrazole to ammonium nitrate in 2001. Ammonium nitrate provides more bang in a smaller volume than other propellants, which allows the company to offer a more compact device to manufacturers. It was also cheaper to make. However, they have in a few cases caused death by exploding and sending pieces of the device into the car's occupants.

 Employee emails show that there were “dire warnings about safety and quality lapses years before Takata Corp would fully acknowledge the threat posed by its defective airbags,” according to a report by the Senate Commerce Committee. Senator Bill Nelson, a Floridan Democrat, says it now appears that Takata was aware of “serious safety and quality control lapses” in its factories as early as 2001.

 Company officials debated the data regarding the product and testing of the inflator was manipulated to cover the issues. Nissan, BMW of North America and Ford have accused their airbag supplier Takata of fraud in a lawsuit to cover losses they incur because of its faulty inflators that have been linked to at least 17 deaths worldwide. Court documents filed in United States claim five automakers were aware of potential defects but continued using Takata’s airbags because they were less expensive. The allegations involve Ford, Honda, Nissan, Toyota and BMW.

 All in all a sad tale of a business trying to get a competitive edge but getting it wrong and trying to cover it over. Did they really think they would get away with it? The cost of owning up would have been huge. It got worse by not coming clean. Money changes everything.

Takata

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)