Slashdot Mirror
Black Box in Speeder's Car Helped Conviction
sessamoid writes "This article in Newhouse News tells the story of a man who was recently convicted of two counts of manslaughter and vehicular homicide each, partially on evidence obtained from the Electronic Data Recorder (EDR) in the car. EDR's are found in all cars with airbags to measure the performance and effectiveness of the airbags and the conditions in which they are used. In this case, the EDR revealed that the driver was not travelling at 60 mph, as he claimed, but actually peaked at 114 mph (in a residential neighborhood) just seconds before the collision. Could this be the forerunner of many such cases in the future, where our cars tell the unadulterated facts, rather than subjective personal accounts?"
Well, a number of manufacturers would love to be able to get these kinds of data for the purposes of designing better cars and some companies (namely Volvo) have had accident investigation teams for years that actually go out to the accident scene to investigate. However, like any data that is accumulated there is the potential for abuse particularly in these times of Total Information Awareness......Oh, excuse me Terrorist Information Awareness. Seriously though, forensic investigation depends upon data and if it is available, it will be examined.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
he gets it from this paragraph in the article
"While all vehicles with air bags use EDRs, other automakers have not been as quick to increase the amount of information recorded. Some are worried that consumers may resent having such personal information collected and they're waiting to see what happens to GM, Haseltine said."
emphasis added...
Assuming that you're pulling some Dukes of Hazzard style bridge jumping, this might be a problem, but the acceleration of your tires when not on the ground will be substantially higher than that of your tires on the ground. Thus, it can easily be ascertained whether your car was in contact with the road, by actually analyzing the data.
They don't have robots figuring this stuff out, they have forensic experts.
Changing tire sizes does change the accuracy of your speedometer, that's why tires with shorter sidewalls are generally used when upgrading to bigger rims. The speedometer can be recalibrated, but it's a very expensive process from what I gather. I'm not sure about the malfunctioning gauge law, but lots of modded cars aren't street legal anyways.
Information is stored at 1 second intervals, and the last five seconds before airbag deployment or near-deployment are saved in non-volatile memory. The information saved typically includes:
There's also post-crash data, which is useful for deciding whether airbag deployment should have occured. (That's actually why the data is recorded and why the NTSB analyzes it for collisions where airbag deployment was unnecessary.)
When you see this data graphed over time, it tells you quite a bit about the accident. There's more than speed information. Seeing throttle and brake inputs for five seconds before the collision gives a good indication of what the driver was doing. In this case, press reports say "Court records show the recorder in Matos' 2002 Pontiac Trans Am measured his speed at 114 mph five seconds before the crash in Pembroke Pines. The device detected he was pressing the gas pedal at 99 percent of its maximum capacity. A second before the crash, he was still doing 103 mph." Any questions?
But this is primitive compared to the Eaton VORAD radar system on some heavy trucks. That collects enough information to show what the other vehicles were doing.
This is a good post. My roommate is a speeder/racer and has been in at least 15 accidents that he has told me about (he's 21). On the other hand, I am a decent driver (one that generally rides 5 over the speed limit and attempts to stay with the flow of traffic) and have never been in an accident when I was the driver. I am also fairly perceptive and actually slow my vehicle when I sense a bad driving which could lead to an accident. For some reason most of the people that I ride with don't seem to notice possible accidents. It kind of freaks me out. Anyway, I don't understand why so many out there seem to think that they have to race to get from point A to point B all the time. Why not drive safer so you can travel tomorrow?
Agreed Not everything is recorded including software hardware glitches /begin true story /end true story
While driving in my own residential street my car decided to rev >7000 rpm lift foot off the accelerator and brake - no effect - drop into neutral the electronically controlled automatic gearbox refuses and the brakes are working against the engine so i turn the engine off. Come to a stop call mechanic and he finds nothing turn the car back on and everything is normal except the burning smell from the transmission - 3 weeks later the same thing only while in neutral and stopped, this time it stops on its own after 15 seconds or so and the cause was the secondary fuel pump
The point here is the only sensor on the pump said it was working not that it had a glitch and when it stopped working the computers still said it was working so can you trust all the equipment in your car ??
Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
Why can't he? The government already did. Congress recommended some time back that speed limits be set to the 85th percentile speed for a given stretch of roadway if no other major factor dictated that the limit be less (ie, engineering surveys show that a certain turn cannot be safely negotiated over XXmph for the average car). In that vein, surveys are regularly taken showing the speeds for roads. Almost unilaterally, the 85th percentile speed is above the posted limit. Why is that? I'll give you an example. Interstate 405 going through eastside Seattle metro area (Kirkland, Bellevue, Renton) is 60mph. The most recent numbers I've seen from Washington state surveys (2001, I believe) showed that the 85th percentile was approximately 71mph (or so -- you can find the reports on Washington's DOL web site). Just driving that interstate will back up those numbers -- most people on that road drive around 70mph except when approaching known speed traps. Shouldn't the speed limit be around 70mph then, if Washington was trying to follow Congressional guidelines and not attempt to line their pockets with speeding fines?
Yes, there's the occassional bonehead that thinks he needs to speed like a moron. However, studies have shown that these extreme speeders are more likely to actually drive the speed limit when that limit is closer to a speed they're comfortable driving (the difference between 60mph and 80mph is much more than the difference between 70mph and 80mph, so the guy going 80mph would be more likely to drive at 70mph than 60mph). On the flip side, there are those that aren't comfortable going that fast, and that's fine. There's a reason there are multiple lanes. Follow the standard "Keep right unless passing" rule (or "keep middle", since you probably shouldn't block on-/off-ramp access), and you'll do fine. As well, reducing the difference in speed does a whole lot more than just reducing speed. I'd rather get hit by an 80mph car while I'm also doing 80mph than get hit by the same car while I'm only doing 60mph. Obviously this only pertains to wide, divided highways. Residential areas or two-lane non-divided highways are much more dangerous.
Let's examine the facts:
A teenage girl pulled out into traffic and was hit
If the speeding car had been going 30 mph, they most likely would have still collided. Would it have killed both occupants? Perhaps severly injured or killed one of them if they were unlucky. Either way, the girl was AT FAULT for pulling into moving traffic.
The article headline could very well be "Black Box In Red-Light Jumper's Car Proves She Pulled Out Into Traffic". Would have been a different spin, no?
114 mph in a residentual zone
This guy's an asshat. What the hell was he thinking? The only time he should be going that fast is on a track, after he's signed the right paperwork. He's AT FAULT. I'm also impressed his car saved his life in a 100+mph head-on collision.
Conclusion:
All things being equal, the only thing the black box proves is that the speeder should share the blame 50%, instead of the girl being 100% at fault.
As such, I'm in two minds about his punishment. It obviously wasn't premeditated murder, but the sentence of 22 to 30 years seems pointless punishment to ruin his life since he wasn't 100% at fault. He'd be in his 50's before he's out. If he was a sound, moral character, I'd be tempted to give him 5 years and never allow him to drive a motor vehicle again - ever. But he lied about his speed, which could mean he's a bit of a weasel. Hmm.. difficult problem.
I'm fine with having a black box in my GM car. I already try not to speed because I don't want my insurance premiums to go up and I'm happy to have a box monitoring me if it helps me to not take risks. What is the problem with that? It's a smart move by GM.
General Motors: 1994
Buick Commercial LF side under dash
Buick Roadmaster LF side under dash
Cadillac Commercial LF side under dash
Cadillac Fleetwood
Chevrolet Caprice LF side under dash
Chevrolet Commercial LF side under dash
Pontiac Grand Prix Under RF seat
General Motors: 1995
Make Model Module Location
Buick Commercial LF side under dash
Buick Le Sabre Under RF seat
Buick Park Avenue Under RF seat
Buick Regal Under RF seat
Buick Roadmaster LF side under dash
Cadillac Commercial LF side under dash
Cadillac Concours Under LF seat
Cadillac Deville Under LF seat
Cadillac Eldorado Under LF seat
Cadillac Fleetwood LF side under dash
Cadillac Seville Under LF seat
Chevrolet Caprice LF side under dash
Chevrolet Impala LF side under dash
Chevrolet Lumina Under RF seat
Chevrolet Metro Under center console
Chevrolet Monte Carlo Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Eighty Eight Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Ninety Eight Under RF seat
Pontiac Bonneville Under RF seat
Pontiac Grand Prix Under RF seat
Pontiac Firefly Under center console
Saturn All Models
General Motors: 1996
Make Model Module Location
Buick Commercial LF side under dash
Buick Le Sabre Under RF seat
Buick Park Avenue Under RF seat
Buick Regal Under RF seat
Buick Riviera Under RF seat
Buick Roadmaster LF side under dash
Buick Skylark Under RF seat
Cadillac Commercial LF side under dash
Cadillac Concours Under LF seat
Cadillac Deville Under LF seat
Cadillac Eldorado Under LF seat
Cadillac Fleetwood LF side under dash
Cadillac Seville Under LF seat
Chevrolet Astro Under LF seat
Chevrolet Camaro Under center console
Chevrolet Caprice LF side under dash
Chevrolet Cavalier Under RF seat
Chevrolet Express Under LF seat
Chevrolet Impala LF side under dash
Chevrolet Lumina Under RF seat
Chevrolet Metro
Chevrolet Monte Carlo Under RF seat
Geo Tracker
GMC Safari Under LF seat
GMC Savana Under LF seat
Oldsmobile Achieva Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Aurora Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Eighty Eight Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Ninety Eight Under RF seat
Pontiac Bonneville Under RF seat
Pontiac Firebird Under center console
Pontiac Firefly
Pontiac Grand AM Under RF seat
Pontiac Grand Prix Under RF seat
Pontiac Sunfire Under RF seat
Saturn All models Under center console
General Motors: 1997
Make Model Module Location
Buick Century Under RF seat
Buick LeSabre Under RF seat
Buick Park Avenue Under RF seat
Buick Regal Under RF seat
Buick Riviera Under RF seat
Buick Skylark Under RF seat
Cadillac Commercial Under LF seat
Cadillac Concours Under LF seat
Cadillac Deville Under LF seat
Cadillac Eldorado Under LF seat
Cadillac Seville Under LF seat
Chevrolet Astro Under LF seat
Chevrolet Camaro Under center console
Chevrolet Cavalier Under RF seat
Chevrolet Corvette Behind accessory trim plate,
under heater and AC control
Chevrolet Express Under LF seat
Chevrolet Lumina Under RF seat
Chevrolet Malibu Under RF seat
Chevrolet Metro
Chevrolet Monte Carlo Under RF seat
Chevrolet Silverado Under LF seat
Chevrolet Suburban Under LF seat
Chevrolet Tahoe Under LF seat
Chevrolet Venture
Geo Tracker
GM1 EV1 RF side of battery pack tunn
GMC Safari Under LF seat
GMC Savana Under LF seat
GMC Sierra Under LF seat
GMC Suburban Under LF seat
GMC Yukon Under LF seat
Oldsmobile Achieva Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Aurora Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Eighty Eight Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Regency Under RF seat
Oldsmobile Silhouette Under RF seat
Pontia
The COF of a tire is merely the function of the weight applied to the tire converted into tractable force. In other words, a function of weight vs acceleration that the tire will sustain. The highway patrol already has this information for a large number of tires.
You can also test the tire, and this is where the information comes from in the first place. You test what fraction of forward and side loads a tire will sustain before slipping. All of this is covered in automotive texts on racing and design.
As for the crumple factor, they can measure the amount of crumple applied to each car, get the NHTSA data for tests done on the car by the manufacturer, then determine how much force is absorbed by the crumple effect. All manufacturers must submit several cars for destructive testing before they can be sold. This information is retained by the NHTSA for this exact reason. They have data on side impact collisions, frontal offset, and others.
All of the information gathered from measurements at the scene of the accident can be used to reconstruct the exact path and speed of each vehicle, it's something they've been doing for years.
It is true that they will use the simplest methods available to them to ascertain the speed and trajectory of a vehicle. Skid marks are the simplest means in many accidents. In this case, it was a double homicide with obvious impropriety on the part of the driver, thus they can pull out all the stops to reconstruct the accident.
Many cities already have cameras on traffic lights to catch people running the red light. I know, Baltimore sent me a nice picture of my car heading through the red light 0.3 seconds after it turned, complete with a close-up of my license plate. In return, I sent them $75. As much as I was annoyed at the time, it's a damn good idea, given the number of people that run the stupid things. Especially those in the left turn lane that keep turning 10 seconds after the light's changed. I got in an accident that way, a guy just turned right into me without even looking to see if I was there.
I'm all for government keeping out of private lives unless there's a darn good reason.
There's never a darn good reason.
But this isn't a privacy issue. It records 5 seconds. The only way it could be a privacy issue in prosecuting someone would be if it's wireless and it could be accessed by cops driving near you. But that's what radar guns are for, so big freakin' deal.
In its current form, it can't be used to issue speeding tickets or anything like that unless it's for the five seconds before you slam into someone else. Unless the cop slams into you and makes your airbag go off while you're still speeding, its information is useless.
Expanding this to do other things or record longer logs would be a very bad thing, but the thing in this guy's car is a good thing. The only time it's ever going to be useful is if you hit something, and then you've either destroyed someone's property or had your property destroyed, and knowing fault is a good thing.
And if the insurance company won't pay for your massive spinal injury because you weren't wearing your seatbelt, then good. Wear your damn seatbelt if you don't want to pay for a massive spinal injury.
I'm not saying it's infallible or always a good thing to use in court, and I don't support a law to make them mandatory or anything, I'm just saying it's not a privacy issue.
Actually most police cars aready have these chips. These chips started out in fleet vehicles(ambluances, police cars and the like) and just now are moving to consumer cars. Also many cop cars have video cameras that they turn on when they're pulling cars over or persuing a car. The cameras not only gather evidence, but should they be involved in an accident (Well we can see on the camera that the cruiser cross into the opposing lane.)
*Not a Sermon, Just a Thought
*/
And yet even something like red light cameras, which seem so obviously beneficial, can actually be used in unsafe and counter-productive ways.
60mph sounds reasonable to most people because they drive that fast about every day. This guy was traveling almost twice as fast as he was willing to admit. That is 84mph over the speed limit. Look at it this way, whatever the stopping distance of his car is (was) at 30mph, he was traveling almost 4 times faster. His stopping distance isn't increased 4 times, it would be closer to 16 times as far as his 30-0 braking distance.
Check here and here for some braking distances up to 100mph. Note the measured 30-0 versus the 100-0 stopping distances. A 2002 Corvette Z06 takes 108feet (60 - 0 mph) and 312feet (100 - 0 mph), 114mph would take the vette over 400feet.
This equates to the two drivers having 1/16th of the time and distances to react and make corrections. He was traveling at
114*5280/60/60=167.2 feet per second. His car weighed over 3600lbs with him inside, convert weight to mass, 3600/32.17=111.91lb
(167.2^2)*111.91/2=1,564,269
He was wielding a kinetic energy of over 1.5 million ft/lb, more than enough to destroy a school bus or go through a house, etc.
In my opinion, he wasn't even close to being accountable by admitting to 60mph.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
The mistake you made was a common one, and is my explanation of why speeding kills.
You were speeding irresponsibly.
Yes folks, there is a way to speed responsibly and it can be accomplished by following some basic guidelines.
1) Know your speed. If you don't know your speed, how can you possibly know how long it will take you to stop the car?
2) Know your road. What may seem like a small and shallow pit in the road when you drive at 55mph can act as a ramp when you drive at 100mph and send you hurling in the air without any control over life or limbs. Can one expect animals to cross the road suddenly?
3) Know your car. Will it start to swerve at a certain speed? Are the brakes OK? How much pressure to the brake pedal will cause the tires to lock? Is the ABS in perfect working condition? What's the condition of the shock absorbers, the brakes, the tires? Will it hydroplane on small puddles of water? How long will it take for you to put the car at a complete stop at X mph on a wet road, dry road, concrete road, asphalt road, gravel road?
AND number 4 which really should be common sense (which by itself usually isn't all that common)
Never EVER drive faster than you can actually SEE the spot where you will come to a full stop, should it be necessary to hit the brakes NOW, preferably with some distance to spare.
There is also a number 5 which is also pretty basic. If you happen to pass a cop and the cop decides to engage in a pursuit. By all means, STOP. It's better to have just the reckless driving on your record than reckless driving + resisting arrest (which I believe is what you're doing if you decide not to pull over). Also remember that if you decide to make a run for it you're not going to be as focused on the driving with the cops behind you, as when you're just driving all by yourself. That lack of focus is likely to be the prime factor in accidents caused by reckless drivers.
Speeding by itself doesn't kill, it's the idiots who speed recklessly and irresponsibly that do.
In Europe, or at least Germany, they already test if you haven't been wearing your seatbelt. Not by any fancy technologies recording that fact, they simply cut off a portion of your seatbelt and analyze the fabric, they can tell whether it has been worn or not that way..... and if it wasn't worn the insurance company won't pay your medical bills.
These systems would probably be wired in so that the electronics of the car would not work if the black box were malfunctioning in any way.
It is kinda funny that this story came up on /. today, just as I was reading a story in a swedish newspaper about the black box in SAAB cars and how the data can be used.
Based on this story, it seems that anyone can use the data from the black box in any way they see fit --- in the US.
In Sweden, this would break a law called PUL. For the Police and/or insurance companied to be able to use the data from the black box, the owner of the car must agree to the data being used. The owner of the car can simply refuse and say that no-one is allowed to use the data, in which case it shouldn't affect the owner in any way.
I guess the data can be useful, and it is good that it is there, but I do like the fact that I get to choose wether or not the data should be used.
As there is no law saying the box must be working, if I was in the US, I'd disconnect mine for sure!
Just an FYI: A cop has no obligation to put on their sirens or emergency lights when doing the things you describe. It's merely an option for them--and they should use those tools whenever possible for their own safety.
In a sense, they are, "above the law" in regards to the rules of the road. The reasons for this are obvious: secretive persuit, getting to a crime scene without alerting the perpetrators, etc
However, they *CAN* get in trouble if they're just roaming around like a maniac without a good reason. Feel free to report any cop that does this (I've done it, though, I can't say that they were punished for it). One complaint probably won't do much, but it goes on their record for quite some time, so if that cop ever causes an accident or whatever, it could come up in court. Actually, now that I think about it, this probably varies from state to state or perhaps even county to county.
Unfortunately, the only way to complain is to write a written letter to the sherrif's dept. or state police dept. Make sure to include the time and his car number.
-Riskable
"Those who choose proprietary software will pay for their decision!"
Even if the silly licence plate cover is on the wrong plate, doesn't affect viewing from any angle, doesn't stop reflected laser light or radar, or looks stupid. (Why a ticket if the cover doesn't affect viewing? If state law says nothing can cover the plate, what else can you expect? Like people who put red neon decorative lights on a car in a state which reserves red and blue lights for police cars.)
Yep. Except that it can't be used for these cases. It only records five seconds of data, and only stops wiping the older stuff when the airbags inflate.
In other words, you have to have been in an accident for there to be any useful data collected. If you're doing 140 km/h on the highway, that record will be gone before the cop is finished pulling you over. There will only be a useful record if while speeding you crash into something.
~Idarubicin
Police in this state (Missouri) apparently ARE above the law. They do not give each other speeding tickets, period. We actually had a reporter riding with a Highway Patrolman on the interstate last year doing a story. They stopped a car, gave a ticket, stopped another, gave a ticket. Then, stopped a car that was going WAY faster (87 if I recall correctly) than either of the first two. No ticket. Turns out he was an off duty patrolman just on his way somewhere for personal reasons. They have a 'policy' that they don't have to give each other tickets. And this was all caught on tape that they showed on TV. (Springfield, MO)
People don't speed, or are usually very selective/careful about speeding for 1 or more of 3 main reasons, in my view. 1. It is against the law. 2. They don't want to have to pay the fine. 3. The biggie: they don't want to have much higher insurance rates for a LONG time after getting a ticket.
I don't care if they or anyone else speeds a bit, it's a fact of life people do. I also don't think the state will go broke because an officer gets out of a $50 ticket cost now and then. But what I *DO* find unacceptable is that these people who are supposed to set the example don't have to pay, or even have to worry about paying, the much higher insurance premiums like the rest of us do simply because they scratch each others backs.
(Stolen sig) Remember: it's a "Microsoft virus", not an "email virus", a "Microsoft worm", not a "computer worm
Have you seen OnStar? People are paying for this technology them selves already! GPS, check. Map, check. Satellite communications, check. Sure, your not going to catch people running stop lights, but you can get them at stop signs, it's not a large leap to catch them with the stop lights and you sure can track when and where a car has been, and how fast they are moving.
"Your Honor, I was here at 5:45 and I was there at 6:30"
"Your Honor, This evidence from OnStar says he was here at 6:00 and there at 6:15"
"Guilty!"
How long 'till the police are tapped in to OnStar or other similar systems. We've already seen the case of black boxes used by car rental places to monitor the drivers for speeding. That one was overuled, but only because it wasn't the government who got to collect.
For a few years people have been doing research in to automated trafic control where central computer systems control the cars on the road. They will know where your car is and has been.
Darthtuttle
Thought Architect
Wrong wrong wrong! A seatbelt does in fact help other drivers ...no seat belt...hangs on to the bottom of the steering wheel turns, car strikes another car in oncoming lane (no serious injuries but lots' of autos (yes "s"!!) damaged.
true accidents (I'm also an EMT)
--low speed (5mph) side impact that tossed the driver to the right
--low (20mph) speed rear impact, driver pushed back into seat and then forward by the impact, out of position to control the car (the breaks or steering wheel) run into car crossing intersection.
True, neither driver was really "at fault" but both would have avoided off loading their hardship onto other people if they had just been in position to control their cars.
And to address your second part, your personal choice to wear or not wear your seatbelt is tired to your insurance company's responsibility to have to pay your claim. Many insurance companies tie their rates to a promise to wear your seatbelt (I do... as does everyone I know in the public safety business). If you check a box that says that you refuse to use your seatbelt (remember, it's your personal choice) then they can change you a higher rate because, odds are, you are going to cost more to treat after your accident.
The people on Slashdot should be good enough at physics to know that only a freaking idiot doens't wear a seatbelt because it's a personal choice....it's about as smart a choice as walking at night with sunglasses on. There just isn't a reason.
-- What? Another
A seatbelt holds you into a secure driving position
No, gravity holds me to the seat in a secure driving position.
also aids you bringing your vehicle back under control
If the vehical is so out-of-control that it would move me from the bucket seat I'm sitting in, then a seatbelt won't matter- my body may be kept in place, but my arms and legs will be thrown around, resulting in broken bones.
Besides, you left out the part where the seatbelt jams and you die a slow and horrible death in a "a secure driving position" as the flames eat your flesh.
If your 2-year old gets hit by a car doing the 30MPH residential speed limit, your 2-year old is very likely just as dead. Even at the 15MPH "alley" speed limit (that's the legal limit in alleys in IL, anyway), your kid's probably pretty badly hurt.
Kids appear pretty durable when they fall down, but dropping 30 lbs a distance of 2 feet or so isn't quite the same as smacking a kid into a moving car...
That said, this guy admitted to speeding by more than 30 over the limit, so the big-brother device *should* be irrelevent.
Just because you are too stupid to wear a seatbelt doesn't mean everyone else should see their medical insurance premiums go up. Why should valuable and limited medical resources be expended on morons who do not buckle up? Why should those of us who buckle up pay for those who don't? Now, if we were to pass a law that states that anyone who is injured in an automobile accident and who is either the driver or a passanger over the age of 18 and not wearing a seatbelt will be denied medical care (basically left to die on the side of the road) I'd be all for repealing seatbelt laws. Please do everyone a favor and involve yourself in a one car, fatal accident before you breed.
between the greater and lesser infinities sleep the dreams undreamt
>I'm not saying that women are better drivers, or- ten -people
>have fewer accidents total - they just seem to
>be more able to avoid the serious just-totalled-
>three-$40,000-cars-and-paralyzed
>kind of accidents.
You're looking at the wrong things here.
Women typically cause less accidents not because they're better drivers, but because they DRIVE less.
Do a little unscientific research: look at the cars around you on the road next time you're driving somewhere.
Of the vehicles with a man and a woman in them, see which of them is driving.
I ASSURE you, the man will be driving a LOT more often.
-l