ReportWire

Tag: Road safety

  • US probes whether Tesla Autopilot recall did enough to make sure drivers pay attention

    US probes whether Tesla Autopilot recall did enough to make sure drivers pay attention

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — The U.S. government’s auto safety agency is investigating whether last year’s recall of Tesla’s Autopilot driving system did enough to make sure drivers pay attention to the road.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says in documents posted on its website Friday that Tesla has reported 20 more crashes involving Autopilot and since the recall. The crashes and agency tests raised concerns about the effectiveness of the remedy. The recall involved more than 2 million vehicles, nearly all the vehicles that Tesla had sold at the time.

    The agency pushed the company to do the recall after a two-year investigation into Autopilot’s driver monitoring system, which measures torque on the steering wheel from a driver’s hands. In the probe, the agency was looking at multiple cases in which Teslas on Autopilot ran into emergency vehicles parked on freeways.

    The recall fix involves an online software update to increase warnings to drivers. But the agency said in documents that it has found evidence of crashes after the fix, and that Tesla tried to address problems with additional software updates after the recall fix was sent out. The updates may not have worked.

    “This investigation will consider why these updates were not part of the recall or otherwise determined to remedy a defect that poses an unreasonable safety risk,” the agency wrote.

    A message was left early Friday seeking comment from Tesla.

    NHTSA said that Tesla reported the 20 crashes in vehicles that had received the recall software fix. The agency has required Tesla and other automakers to report crashes involving partially and fully automated driving systems.

    NHTSA said it will evaluate the recall, including the “prominence and scope” of Autopilot’s controls to address misuse, confusion and use in areas that the system is not designed to handle.

    It also said that Tesla has stated that owners can decide whether they want to opt in to parts of the recall remedy, and that it allows drivers to reverse parts of it.

    Safety advocates have long expressed concern that Autopilot, which can keep a vehicle in its lane and a distance from objects in front of it, was not designed to operate on roads other than limited access highways.

    The investigation comes just one week after a Tesla that may have been operating on Autopilot hit and killed a motorcyclist near Seattle, raising questions about whether a recent recall went far enough to ensure Tesla drivers using Autopilot pay attention to the road.

    After the April 19 crash in a suburban area about 15 miles (24 kilometers) northeast of the city, the driver of a 2022 Tesla Model S told a Washington State Patrol trooper that he was using Autopilot and looked at his cellphone while the Tesla was moving.

    “The next thing he knew there was a bang and the vehicle lurched forward as it accelerated and collided with the motorcycle in front of him,” the trooper wrote in a probable-cause document.

    The 56-year-old driver was arrested for investigation of vehicular homicide “based on the admitted inattention to driving, while on Autopilot mode, and the distraction of the cell phone while moving forward, putting trust in the machine to drive for him,” the affidavit said.

    The motorcyclist, Jeffrey Nissen, 28, of Stanwood, Washington, was pronounced dead at the scene, authorities reported.

    Authorities said they have not yet independently verified whether Autopilot was in use at the time of the crash.

    On Thursday, NHTSA ended its investigation of Autopilot, citing the recall and the investigation of its effectiveness. The agency said it found evidence “that Tesla’s weak driver engagement system was not appropriate for Autopilot’s permissive operating capabilities.”

    Tesla, the leading manufacturer of EVs, reluctantly agreed to the recall last year after NHTSA found that the driver monitoring system was defective.

    The system sends alerts to drivers if it fails to detect torque from hands on the steering wheel, a system that experts describe as ineffective. Although many newer Teslas have cameras that can watch the driver, they can’t see at night, and independent testing shows that Autopilot can still be used even if the cameras are covered.

    The Associated Press reported shortly after the recall that experts said the fix relied on technology that may not work.

    Research conducted by NHTSA, the National Transportation Safety Board and other investigators show that merely measuring torque on the steering wheel doesn’t ensure that drivers are paying sufficient attention. Experts say night-vision cameras are needed to watch drivers’ eyes to ensure they’re looking at the road.

    Michael Brooks, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety, said NHTSA is looking into where Tesla allows Autopilot to be used.

    The company doesn’t limit its use, even though it was designed to operate on limited access freeways. Tesla, he said, appears to rely on computers to decide whether Autopilot can operate rather than maps that show a vehicle’s location.

    “When you hit that point where you’re in the area where Autopilot wasn’t designed to operate and the car knows it’s in that area, why is it still allowed to engage?” he asked.

    Brooks said NHTSA could seek civil fines and additional fixes from Tesla.

    Government documents filed by Tesla in the December recall say the online software change will increase warnings and alerts to drivers to keep their hands on the steering wheel.

    NHTSA began its Autopilot crash investigation in 2021, after receiving 11 reports that Teslas that were using Autopilot struck parked emergency vehicles. In documents explaining why the investigation was ended, NHTSA said it ultimately found 467 crashes involving Autopilot resulting in 54 injuries and 14 deaths.

    Tesla offers two partially automated systems, Autopilot and a more sophisticated “Full Self Driving,” but the company says neither can drive themselves despite their names.

    In investigative documents, NHTSA said it found 75 crashes and one death involving “Full Self Driving.” It’s not clear whether the system was at fault.

    CEO Elon Musk for several years has said “Full Self Driving” will allow a fleet of robotaxis to generate income for the company and owners, making use of the electric vehicles when they would have been parked. Musk has been touting self-driving vehicles as a growth catalyst for Tesla since “Full Self Driving” hardware went on sale late in 2015. The system is being tested on public roads by thousands of owners.

    In 2019, Musk promised a fleet of autonomous robotaxis by 2020 that would make Teslas appreciate in value. Instead, they’ve declined with price cuts, as the autonomous robotaxis have been delayed year after year while being tested by owners as the company gathers road data for its computers.

    Tesla says neither system can drive itself and that drivers have to be ready to take control at all times.

    Neither Musk nor other Tesla executives on Tuesday’s earnings conference call would specify when they expect Tesla vehicles to drive themselves as well as humans do. Instead, Musk touted the latest version of “Full Self Driving” and said that “it’s only a matter of time before we exceed the reliability of humans, and not much time at that.”

    Musk went on to insist that “if somebody doesn’t believe that Tesla is going to solve autonomy, I think they should not be an investor in the company.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US opens investigation into Ford gasoline leak, saying automaker’s remedy doesn’t fix the problem

    US opens investigation into Ford gasoline leak, saying automaker’s remedy doesn’t fix the problem

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — The U.S. government’s auto safety agency has opened an investigation into a Ford recall for gasoline leaks from cracked fuel injectors that can cause engine fires, saying in documents that the remedy doesn’t fix the leaks.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said in the documents posted Friday on its website that the probe will “evaluate the adequacy and safety consequences of the remedy” that Ford specifies in the recall.

    The agency moved with unusual speed, posting documents detailing the “recall query” just two days after the recall was made public.

    The recall covers nearly 43,000 Ford Bronco Sport SUVs from the 2022 and 2023 model years, and Escape SUVs from 2022. All have 1.5-liter engines.

    NHTSA said that fuel injectors can crack, causing gasoline or vapors to leak at a high rate onto hot surfaces in the engine compartment.

    The Associated Press reported Wednesday that Ford’s remedy for the leaks is installation of a drain tube to send the gas away from hot surfaces, and a software update to detect a pressure drop in the fuel injection system. If that happens, the software will disable the high pressure fuel pump, reduce engine power and cut temperatures in the engine compartment. Owners also will get a “seek service” message.

    But the safety agency said that Ford’s fix lets fuel drain from a cylinder head hole to the ground below the vehicles. “The recall remedy does not include replacement of the cracked fuel injector,” the agency said.

    Ford said Friday it is working with NHTSA on the investigation.

    The company said in documents that it has reports of five under-hood fires and 14 warranty replacements of fuel injectors, but no reports of crashes or injuries.

    In an email on Wednesday, Ford said it is not replacing fuel injectors because it is confident the recall repairs “will prevent the failure from occurring and protect the customer.” The new software triggers a dashboard warning light and allows customers to drive to a safe location, stop the vehicle and arrange for service, the company said. NHTSA documents filed by Ford say the problem happens only in about 1% of the SUVs.

    The company also said it will extend warranty coverage for cracked fuel injectors, so owners who experience the problem will get replacements. Ford said repairs are already available, and details of the extended warranty will be available in June.

    Ford said the recall is an extension of a 2022 recall for the same problem. The repair has already been tested on vehicles involved in the previous recall, and Ford said it’s not aware of any problems.

    The company also said it isn’t recommending that the SUVs be parked only outdoors because there’s no evidence that fires happen when vehicles are parked and the engines are off.

    NHTSA said in documents that in the 2022 recall, which covered nearly 522,000 Bronco Sports and Escapes, Ford had the same remedy as the latest recall.

    Michael Brooks, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety, called Ford’s remedy for the fuel leaks a “Band-aid type recall” and said the company is trying to avoid the cost of repairing the fuel injectors.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NLEX launches ‘Ang Bida ng Kalsada’ child road safety picture book

    NLEX launches ‘Ang Bida ng Kalsada’ child road safety picture book

    [ad_1]

    In its mission to promote road safety awareness and prevent road-related incidents, NLEX Corporation launched a picture book at the National Library of the Philippines entitled “Ang Bida ng Kalsada” to educate kids on the importance of responsible road usage through a creative story and illustrations.

    “The ‘Ang Bida ng Kalsada Picture Book’ is our modest contribution and response to UNICEF’s call to action to protect our children who use the road as pedestrians, as passengers, and as responsible members of the community. The story of Danny and Dexter, the main characters in the book, is rich with invaluable road safety lessons that children can easily connect with,” said NLEX Corporation president and general manager, J. Luigi L. Bautista

    This full-colored book written in Filipino and English helps children appreciate road safety by understanding the context behind different traffic rules and regulations in a story covering a child’s journey from the house. The book will be distributed to Grades 3-6 public school students in 20 schools within NLEX, SCTEX, and NLEX Connector’s host communities.

    Director Marilyn Siao of DepEd’s Bureau of Learning and Delivery extended her gratitude towards NLEX, as the book not only teaches safe road practices but also good values. 

    “In the pages of this beautifully illustrated book that we launched today, children embarked on a journey filled with important lessons about being responsible pedestrians, about being conscientious passengers, and active members of the community. Through captivating storytelling and vibrant imagery, they not only learn the rules of the road, but also embrace values of caution, obedience, compassion, and cooperation,” she said.

    In November 2021, the Metro Pacific Tollway Corporation, the mother company of NLEX Corporation, entered a multi-year agreement with UNICEF, pledging support for its Child Road Safety Program under the United Nations’ Second Decade of Action for Road Safety. Under the partnership, NLEX has committed to assisting 100 schools in identified high-risk areas.

    “It is our hope that initiatives like these will contribute to the reduction of road accidents. As parents who trust our children to venture beyond the safety of our homes, and as teachers who bid farewell to students at day’s end, we hold onto the hope of seeing our children become responsible road users. We also hope this picture book can bring about positive change in the lives of children, parents, and teachers alike,” said Bautista. 

    ‘Ang Bida ng Kalsada’ is just one of NLEX’s efforts to contribute to UNICEF’s goal to reduce road traffic fatalities by fifty percent (50%) by the year 2030. Dr. Angel Umali, UNICEF Philippines’s Health and Nutrition Officer thanked NLEX for its commitment to the advocacy and urged the tollway company to continue its efforts in organizing and implementing programs that will enhance children’s welfare.

    “Sa lahat ng ating mga proyekto at gawain, kailangan nating tignan ang kapakanan ng mga kabataan sapagkat kapag ginawa nating ligtas ang ating mga kalsada para sa mga bata, ito ay ligtas na rin para sa lahat,” Dr. Umali said.

    Prior to the agreement with UNICEF, NLEX has already been at the forefront of promoting road safety through various initiatives like Kaligtasan sa Daan (KalSaDa), Biyahero Road Safety Caravan, and Usapang Drayber. All of these aim to instill the value of road safety and responsible road usage.

    Aside from these road safety awareness initiatives, NLEX recently established a Road Traffic Safety Hub and Park in Mabalacat, Pampanga. The said park facility provides an educational avenue for its stakeholders, including children, to be exposed to and educated on safe road practices.

    With the success of the opening of the RTS Hub and park and the recent launch of the ‘Ang Bida ng Kalsada’ child road safety picture book, NLEX pledges to continuously work with different organizations and government agencies in initiating programs that will benefit young road users. 

    NLEX Corporation is a subsidiary of the Metro Pacific Tollways Corporation (MPTC), the toll road arm of the Metro Pacific Investments Corporation (MPIC).

    [ad_2]

    Gadgets Magazine 17

    Source link

  • Police: Fairfax Co. crashes down after return of ‘Road Shark’ safety campaign – WTOP News

    Police: Fairfax Co. crashes down after return of ‘Road Shark’ safety campaign – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Fairfax County police and Virginia State Police are keeping up with their campaign to discourage dangerous driving by upping enforcement and driver education.

    A campaign launched in 2023 to discourage dangerous driving ended up decreasing the number of fatal crashes in Fairfax County, Virginia, police say. Now, they are hoping to continue bettering roadway safety this year.

    Fairfax County police and Virginia State Police are keeping up with their “Road Shark” campaign in 2024, which hopes to discourage dangerous driving by upping enforcement and driver education, according to a Monday news release.

    “Sharks can be dangerous in the water,” Deputy Chief Bob Blakley said at a news conference Monday. “Road sharks are dangerous on our roadways.”

    Part of the campaign is upping enforcement — especially on the roads with the most crashes. Officers will look for dangerous drivers, such as those who are speeding, distracted or driving under the influence.

    Most drivers want to arrive at their destination safely, but Blakley said distractions can sometimes get in the way. The campaign hopes to educate drivers about best practices on the roads, and part of that education involves officers heading into schools and other community events.

    The joint campaign was originated in 1999 to reduce crashes while deterring distracted and aggressive driving. Safety on the roads improved and the program went away, Blakley said.

    “Then through the COVID time, we started to see some of these bad habits come back,” Blakley said.

    In response, the campaign was brought back in 2023 and nearly 25,000 citations and warnings were issued over four waves. Blakley said it achieved “great results.”

    “We saw a 36% reduction in the number of fatal crashes that occurred in Fairfax County, and a 63% reduction in the number of pedestrian related fatalities,” Blakley said.

    That’s why the campaign is back again this year, Blakley said.

    “What we want is, the patrol officer working in the neighborhoods to also pay special attention on traffic offenses, and they’re coming in on the regular neighborhood streets, not just out on the big roads,” he said. “But on the main thoroughfares, you’ll see our motor officers and other dedicated traffic units concentrating in some of the more dangerous spots.”

    WTOP’s Neal Augenstein contributed to this story.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2024 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Jessica Kronzer

    Source link

  • Most automated driving systems aren’t good making sure drivers pay attention, insurance group says

    Most automated driving systems aren’t good making sure drivers pay attention, insurance group says

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — Most electronic systems that take on some driving tasks for humans don’t adequately make sure drivers are paying attention, and they don’t issue strong enough warnings or take other actions to make drivers behave, according to an insurance industry study published Tuesday.

    Only one of 14 partially automated systems tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety performed well enough to get an overall “acceptable” rating. Two others were rated “marginal,” while the rest were rated “poor.” No system received the top rating of “good.”

    “Most of them don’t include adequate measures to prevent misuse and keep drivers from losing focus on what’s happening on the road,” said IIHS President David Harkey.

    The institute, Harkey said, came up with the new ratings to get automakers to follow standards, including how closely they watch drivers and how fast the cars issue warnings if drivers aren’t paying attention.

    It also says it is trying to fill a “regulatory void” left by inaction on the systems from the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Harkey said the agency needs to do more to set standards for the systems, which are not able to drive vehicles themselves.

    A message was left seeking comment from the agency.

    IIHS safety ratings are closely followed by automakers, which often make changes to comply with them.

    The 14 systems, which include several variations from single automakers, are among the most sophisticated now on the market, Harkey said.

    Only one of the systems, Teammate in the Lexus LS, earned the adequate rating. General Motors‘ Super Cruise in the GMC Sierra and Nissan’s Pro-Pilot Assist with Navi-Link in the Ariya electric vehicle were rated marginal.

    Other systems from Nissan, Tesla, BMW, Ford, Genesis, Mercedes-Benz and Volvo were rated poor.

    Harkey said the driving systems initially were combinations of safety features such as automatic emergency braking, lane departure warnings, lane centering and blind-spot detection. But now they give drivers the chance to not pay attention for some period of time, raising safety risks, he said in an interview.

    “That’s why the focus is on how do we make sure that the driver remains focused on the driving task,” Harkey said.

    Some automakers, he said, market the systems in a way that drivers could think they are fully autonomous. “The one thing we do not want is for drivers to misinterpret what these things can or cannot do,” he said.

    The systems, IIHS said, should be able to see if a driver’s head or eyes are not directed on the road, and whether their hands are on the wheel or ready to grab it if necessary.

    The institute also said if a system doesn’t see a driver’s eyes on the road or hands aren’t ready to steer, there should be audible and visual alerts within 10 seconds. Before 20 seconds, the system should add a third alert or start an emergency procedure to slow down the vehicle, the institute said.

    Automakers should also make sure safety systems such as seat belts and automatic emergency braking are activated before the driving systems can be used, it said.

    None of the 14 systems met all the driver monitoring requirements in the test, but Ford’s came close, the group said.

    Lexus’ Teammate system and GM’s Super Cruise met the warning requirements, while systems from Nissan and Tesla were close.

    Harkey said automakers already are responding to the tests and preparing changes, many of which can be accomplished with software updates.

    Toyota, which makes Lexus vehicles, said it considers IIHS ratings in setting up safety standards, while GM said the IIHS ratings are important. Nissan said it will work with the institute.

    Mercedes said the company said it takes the findings seriously, and it relies on the system collaborating with the driver.

    BMW said it respects IIHS’s efforts, but it differs philosophically about how systems should monitor drivers. One BMW system evaluated by IIHS is not intended for drivers to take their hands off the wheel and only considers input from steering wheel sensors. BMW tests have not found a clear advantage in turning on the driver monitoring camera, the company said. Another more sophisticated system intended for drivers to take hands off the steering wheel uses a camera to watch drivers, the company said.

    Ford said its Blue Cruise system monitors drivers and sends repeated warnings. The company said it disagrees with IIHS’ findings but will consider its feedback in updates.

    Other automakers did not immediately comment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Outgoing leader says US safety agency has the people and expertise to regulate high-tech vehicles

    Outgoing leader says US safety agency has the people and expertise to regulate high-tech vehicles

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — In the past 15 months, no one has been more responsible for safety on the nation’s roads than Ann Carlson. For much of that time she has served as acting administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, where she started as chief counsel in 2021.

    But on Wednesday, Carlson’s time running the agency and as its chief lawyer will come to an end. She’s returning to Los Angeles to resume teaching at the UCLA School of Law.

    During her tenure, the agency known by the acronym NHTSA has made autonomous vehicle companies and automakers report crashes involving automated systems, creating a large database.

    In an interview with The Associated Press, she talked about a recall to address safety problems with Tesla’s Autopilot partially automated driving system, the agency’s quest to get ARC Automotive Inc. to recall 52 million air bag inflators that can explode with too much force, and other issues.

    The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

    Q: Last month you pressured Tesla into recalling 2 million vehicles with Autopilot because it doesn’t make sure drivers are paying adequate attention to the road. There have been numerous crashes. Two motorcyclists were hit and killed in 2022 by Teslas apparently on Autopilot driving on freeways. How closely will NHTSA look at Tesla’s software update to fix the problem?

    A: We’ll look at everything. If you take a look at what we have made available, there are crashes both on and off highway. And they’re both of concern. We need to make sure that drivers are attentive and that they’re not assuming the system is actually sufficient to operate without driver attentiveness. One of the big messages we want to stress over and over again is that drivers need to keep paying attention, but also that a vehicle needs to be designed in a way that doesn’t lull a driver into believing that that car can take care of every situation.

    Q: Consumer Reports and others that have tested Tesla’s remedy say it increases the number of warnings that drivers get if they don’t put hands on the steering wheel. But they say steering wheel sensors aren’t enough to make sure drivers are watching, that the recall doesn’t limit Autopilot’s operation to freeways where it’s designed to work, and cameras in the cabin can be covered up so they don’t look at drivers. Does the remedy do enough to keep drivers from relying too much on the car?

    A: I can’t really comment yet on the sufficiency of the remedy. NHTSA has the authority to evaluate the remedy and ensure that it’s adequate. We have in the past sometimes required a second recall if the remedy is inadequate. The burden is on the manufacturer to remedy the unreasonable risk to safety.

    Q: The agency made an initial finding that ARC Automotive Inc. should recall 52 million air bag inflators because they can explode and hurl shrapnel. The company doesn’t want to do the recall, and several automakers are opposing it. You’ve held a public hearing, and the next step could be seeking a court order. What’s the status of that?

    A: It is very unusual for us to be in a position where we hold a public hearing. The purpose is for us to take evidence and then to make a determination about whether our initial finding is, in fact, correct. The public comment period closed. We’re in the process of evaluating those comments.

    Q: Are you confident that NHTSA has the right people in place to evaluate automobile software? Critics say the agency lacks expertise compared with car companies.

    A: I’m highly confident in the NHTSA team. Some of the recalls that we’ve engaged in recently are evidence of that. It is true that vehicles are increasingly sophisticated. They’re essentially computers on wheels. We’ve really benefited from the bipartisan infrastructure law, which infused a lot of new resources into NHTSA. I started in January of 2021. We’ve increased our hiring by about 150 people. So the agency is devoting a lot of resources to questions of automation. We have a new Office of Automation Safety. We have these incredibly sophisticated interdisciplinary teams. It does not just take software expertise. It also takes engineering expertise. It takes legal expertise to make sure that we are conducting our oversight in a way that is consistent with our statutory authority and our regulations.

    Q: We’ve seen the issues with Tesla, and now there are problems with General Motors’ Cruise automated vehicle s. Are federal standards needed to make sure self-driving vehicles are safe?

    A: NHTSA has authority to issue vehicle safety standards. But we also need to do it in a way that actually recognizes the rapidity of change and technology. We have a standing general order that requires pretty immediate reporting of crashes. We act immediately if we know that there’s a problem. We’re also considering a new program called AV step. That would combine the opportunity for manufacturers to deploy automated vehicles with a process that would allow NHTSA significant access to information about redundancy and safety systems,

    Q: Roadway deaths are starting to go down after rising since the pandemic. Are you confident that will continue?

    A: A real lesson about traffic fatalities is that there is no single answer to drive them down. We need to do everything we can. That means we need safer people, we need safer vehicles, we need safer speeds, we need safer roads, and we need improvements in post-crash care. All of those things are crucial to driving fatalities down, and we are using every tool we have to try to do so.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tesla recalls nearly all vehicles sold in US to fix system that monitors drivers using Autopilot

    Tesla recalls nearly all vehicles sold in US to fix system that monitors drivers using Autopilot

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — Tesla is recalling nearly all vehicles sold in the U.S., more than 2 million, to update software and fix a defective system that’s supposed to ensure drivers are paying attention when using Autopilot.

    Documents posted Wednesday by U.S. safety regulators say the update will increase warnings and alerts to drivers and even limit the areas where basic versions of Autopilot can operate.

    The recall comes after a two-year investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration into a series of crashes that happened while the Autopilot partially automated driving system was in use. Some were deadly.

    The agency says its investigation found Autopilot’s method of making sure that drivers are paying attention can be inadequate and can lead to “foreseeable misuse of the system.”

    The added controls and alerts will “further encourage the driver to adhere to their continuous driving responsibility,” the documents said.

    But safety experts said that, while the recall is a good step, it still makes the driver responsible and doesn’t fix the underlying problem that Tesla’s automated systems have with spotting and stopping for obstacles in their path.

    The recall covers models Y, S, 3 and X produced between Oct. 5, 2012, and Dec. 7 of this year. The update was to be sent to certain affected vehicles on Tuesday, with the rest getting it later.

    Shares of Tesla slid more than 3% in earlier trading Wednesday but recovered amid a broad stock market rally to end the day up 1%.

    The attempt to address the flaws in Autopilot seemed like a case of too little, too late to Dillon Angulo, who was seriously injured in 2019 crash involving a Tesla that was using the technology along a rural stretch of Florida highway where the software isn’t supposed to be deployed.

    “This technology is not safe, we have to get it off the road,” said Angulo, who is suing Tesla as he recovers from injuries that included brain trauma and broken bones. “The government has to do something about it. We can’t be experimenting like this.”

    Autopilot includes features called Autosteer and Traffic Aware Cruise Control, with Autosteer intended for use on limited access freeways when it’s not operating with a more sophisticated feature called Autosteer on City Streets.

    The software update will limit where Autosteer can be used. “If the driver attempts to engage Autosteer when conditions are not met for engagement, the feature will alert the driver it is unavailable through visual and audible alerts, and Autosteer will not engage,” the recall documents said.

    Depending on a Tesla’s hardware, the added controls include “increasing prominence” of visual alerts, simplifying how Autosteer is turned on and off, and additional checks on whether Autosteer is being used outside of controlled access roads and when approaching traffic control devices. A driver could be suspended from using Autosteer if they repeatedly fail “to demonstrate continuous and sustained driving responsibility,” the documents say.

    According to recall documents, agency investigators met with Tesla starting in October to explain “tentative conclusions” about the fixing the monitoring system. Tesla did not concur with NHTSA’s analysis but agreed to the recall on Dec. 5 in an effort to resolve the investigation.

    Auto safety advocates for years have been calling for stronger regulation of the driver monitoring system, which mainly detects whether a driver’s hands are on the steering wheel. They have called for cameras to make sure a driver is paying attention, which are used by other automakers with similar systems.

    Philip Koopman, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Carnegie Mellon University who studies autonomous vehicle safety, called the software update a compromise that doesn’t address a lack of night vision cameras to watch drivers’ eyes, as well as Teslas failing to spot and stop for obstacles.

    “The compromise is disappointing because it does not fix the problem that the older cars do not have adequate hardware for driver monitoring,” Koopman said.

    Koopman and Michael Brooks, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety, contend that crashing into emergency vehicles is a safety defect that isn’t addressed. “It’s not digging at the root of what the investigation is looking at,” Brooks said. “It’s not answering the question of why are Teslas on Autopilot not detecting and responding to emergency activity?”

    Koopman said NHTSA apparently decided that the software change was the most it could get from the company, “and the benefits of doing this now outweigh the costs of spending another year wrangling with Tesla.”

    In its statement Wednesday, NHTSA said the investigation remains open “as we monitor the efficacy of Tesla’s remedies and continue to work with the automaker to ensure the highest level of safety.”

    Autopilot can steer, accelerate and brake automatically in its lane, but is a driver-assist system and cannot drive itself, despite its name. Independent tests have found that the monitoring system is easy to fool, so much that drivers have been caught while driving drunk or even sitting in the back seat.

    In its defect report filed with the safety agency, Tesla said Autopilot’s controls “may not be sufficient to prevent driver misuse.”

    A message was left early Wednesday seeking further comment from the Austin, Texas, company.

    Tesla says on its website that Autopilot and a more sophisticated Full Self Driving system are meant to help drivers who have to be ready to intervene at all times. Full Self Driving is being tested by Tesla owners on public roads.

    In a statement posted Monday on X, formerly Twitter, Tesla said safety is stronger when Autopilot is engaged.

    NHTSA has dispatched investigators to 35 Tesla crashes since 2016 in which the agency suspects the vehicles were running on an automated system. At least 17 people have been killed.

    The investigations are part of a larger probe by the NHTSA into multiple instances of Teslas using Autopilot crashing into emergency vehicles. NHTSA has become more aggressive in pursuing safety problems with Teslas, including a recall of Full Self Driving software.

    In May, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, whose department includes NHTSA, said Tesla shouldn’t be calling the system Autopilot because it can’t drive itself.

    —-

    AP Technology Writer Michael Liedtke contributed to this story.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Investigators found fire and safety hazards on land under I-10 in Los Angeles before arson fire

    Investigators found fire and safety hazards on land under I-10 in Los Angeles before arson fire

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — State investigators repeatedly identified fire and safety hazards at a leased storage space under an elevated Los Angeles freeway before it burned in an arson fire, documents show.

    The Nov. 11 blaze, fed by flammable materials stored under the roadway in violation of the company’s lease, closed a stretch of Interstate 10 near downtown for days, snarling traffic as repair crews work around the clock to fix it. Officials say all lanes are expected to reopen by Tuesday.

    The California Department of Transportation, known as Caltrans, released the documents on Friday, a day before investigators said they identified a “person of interest” and released two photos in a “crime alert notification” posted to social media. Authorities said Saturday they are seeking the public’s help to identify the person.

    While investigators have not said how the fire was set, the blaze was fed by pallets, cars, construction materials, hand sanitizer and other items being stored under the freeway under a little-known program that now is under scrutiny. Gov. Gavin Newsom said the state will reassess the practice of leasing land under roads to bring in money for mass transportation projects.

    Vice President Kamala Harris is expected to join Newsom, Mayor Karen Bass and other officials on Sunday morning in Los Angeles to publicly address the fire response and repair work.

    Apex Development Inc. has leased the land under I-10 since 2008. Although one condition of the contract stipulated it not allow flammable or hazardous materials to be stored there, state inspectors have visited the site six times since early 2020 and flagged problematic conditions for years.

    “This is a filthy unmaintained lease,” inspector Daryl Myatt wrote in a 2022 report following a surprise inspection that discovered solvents, oils, fuels and other items prohibited by the agreement. “This area has been utilized since the mid-1970s and looks like it.”

    Owners of two of the companies that subleased the property said they also had warned of fire danger and other hazards related to homeless people living under the freeway. Newsom previously said that while subleasing can be legal if the company received permission from state and federal regulators, Apex did not.

    In September, state officials filed a lawsuit against Apex saying it owes $78,000 in unpaid rent. A hearing is scheduled for next year.

    The state’s most recent spot inspection, which occurred a little more than a month before the Nov. 11 fire, found “numerous lease violations,” but the documents released Friday did not list additional details.

    Caltrans had “informed Apex Development of the need to address violations, especially those creating safety hazards,” the agency said in a statement.

    Mainak D’Attaray, an attorney for Apex Development, said Wednesday that the company is not to blame for the fire and had made improvements to the property. He said the company has not been able to access the premises since October.

    “Apex rented and improved the rundown yard and made substantial capital investments during the period that it had possession of the yard,” D’Attaray said in a statement. “Caltrans inspected the premises periodically, at least once a year, and CalTrans was fully aware of the sublessees and their operations. Even the State of California’s Fire Marshall inspected the premises.”

    D’Attaray did not immediately respond to a request for comment Saturday.

    Izzy Gordon, a spokesperson for the governor, earlier this week disagreed with D’Attaray’s statement that Apex is not to blame, saying the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, known as Cal Fire, believes it was caused by arson “in a fenced-off area that Apex was responsible for maintaining while they continued to assert rights under the lease.”

    Brandon Richards, another Newsom spokesperson, reiterated the governor’s directive for Caltrans “to launch a comprehensive review of all leased sites under freeways across California” when asked Saturday for the state’s response to the inspection documents and the next steps in the process. Richards did not address whether anyone at Caltrans is facing discipline.

    Regarding the person of interest in the arson case, the governor’s office urged anyone with information about the incident or suspect to contact a tip hotline.

    The individual was described as a man 30 to 35 years old, about 6 feet (1.83 meters) tall and weighing between 170 pounds (77 kilograms) and 190 pounds (86 kilograms). Details about how he was identified were not immediately released.

    The photographs show him wearing blue shorts, a black hooded sweatshirt, a green scarf and a brace on his right knee. The individual carried a backpack and “appears to have visible burn injuries” on the left leg, the bulletin states.

    The photographs were released by Cal Fire and the State Fire Marshal, whose office is investigating the blaze. The mayor’s office also did not respond to a request for comment Saturday.

    No injuries were reported in the fire, but at least 16 homeless people living in an encampment there were taken to shelters.

    An estimated 300,000 vehicles use the stretch of freeway daily, which runs east-west across the heart of the metropolis and connects with other major highways. The city has urged people to avoid the area, take buses and trains or work from home.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Vehicles with higher, vertical front ends raise risks for pedestrians

    Vehicles with higher, vertical front ends raise risks for pedestrians

    [ad_1]

    Motor vehicles with higher, more vertical front ends raise risks for pedestrians, according to a highway safety organization.

    The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety said that whatever the nose shape, pickups, SUVs and vans with a hood height greater than 40 inches are about 45% more likely to cause fatalities in pedestrian crashes than cars and other vehicles with a hood height of 30 inches or less and a sloping profile.

    But among vehicles with hood heights between 30 and 40 inches, a blunt, or more vertical, front end increases the risk to pedestrians.

    The study released Tuesday arrives with roadway deaths in the U.S. mounting despite government test data showing vehicles have been getting safer. While the number of all car-related fatalities has trended upward over the last decade, pedestrians and cyclists have seen the sharpest rise: over 60% between 2011 and 2022.

    IHS researchers looked at 17,897 crashes involving a single passenger vehicle and a single pedestrian. Using Vehicle Identification Numbers to identify the crash-involved vehicles, they calculated front-end measurements corresponding to 2,958 unique car, minivan, large van, SUV and pickup models from photographs. They excluded vehicles with pedestrian automatic emergency braking systems and controlled for other factors that could affect the likelihood of a fatality, such as the speed limit and age and sex of the struck pedestrian.

    Vehicles with hoods more than 40 inches off the ground at the leading edge and a grille sloped at an angle of 65 degrees or less were 45% more likely to cause pedestrian fatalities than those with a similar slope and hood heights of 30 inches or less. Vehicles with hood heights of more than 40 inches and blunt front ends angled at greater than 65 degrees were 44% more likely to cause fatalities.

    “Manufacturers can make vehicles less dangerous to pedestrians by lowering the front end of the hood and angling the grille and hood to create a sloped profile,” IIHS Senior Research Transportation Engineer Wen Hu, the lead author of the study, said in a statement on Tuesday. “There’s no functional benefit to these massive, blocky fronts.”

    While sloping front ends did not reduce the risk posed by vehicles with the tallest hoods, they did make a difference for vehicles with hood heights of 30 inches to 40 inches.

    There was a 25% increase in the risk of a fatality for vehicles with flat hoods — those with angles of 15 degrees or less — compared with vehicles with more sloping hoods. That was true regardless of height and front-end shape.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Right turn on red? With pedestrian deaths rising, US cities are considering bans

    Right turn on red? With pedestrian deaths rising, US cities are considering bans

    [ad_1]

    CHICAGO — Sophee Langerman was on her way to a bicycle safety rally in Chicago’s Lakeview neighborhood in June when a car turning right rolled through a red light and slammed into her bike, which she was walking off the curb and into the crosswalk.

    The car was moving slowly enough that Langerman escaped serious injury, but the bicycle required extensive repairs. To Langerman, it’s another argument for ending a practice that almost all U.S. cities have embraced for decades: the legal prerogative for a driver to turn right after stopping at a red light.

    A dramatic rise in accidents killing or injuring pedestrians and bicyclists has led to a myriad of policy and infrastructure changes, but moves to ban right on red have drawn some of the most intense sentiments on both sides.

    Washington, D.C.’s City Council last year approved a right-on-red ban that takes effect in 2025. New Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson’s transition plan called for “restricting right turns on red,” but his administration hasn’t provided specifics. The college town of Ann Arbor, Michigan, now prohibits right turns at red lights in the downtown area.

    San Francisco leaders recently voted to urge their transportation agency to ban right on red across the city, and other major cities such as Los Angeles, Seattle and Denver have looked into bans as well.

    “Drivers should not have the option to decide for themselves when they think it’s safe,” said Langerman, 26. “People are busy. People are distracted.”

    But Jay Beeber, executive director for policy at the National Motorists Association, an advocacy organization for drivers, called it a “fallacy” to assume such blanket bans would make streets safer.

    He cited an upcoming study by his association that analyzed California crash data from 2011-2019 and found that drivers turning right on red accounted for only about one pedestrian death and less than one bicyclist death statewide every two years.

    “What’s really behind this movement is part of the agenda to make driving as miserable and as difficult as possible so people don’t drive so much,” Beeber said.

    Safety advocates counter that official crash reports are often mislabeled, undercounting the dangers.

    The United States is one of few major countries that generally allow right turns on red. Concerned that cars idling at stop lights could compound an energy crisis, the U.S. government warned states in the 1970s that they could risk some federal funding should cities prohibit right on red, except in specific, clearly marked areas. Although another energy-conscious provision capping speed limits at 55 mph has long been abandoned, right on red has endured.

    “It’s an example of bad policy,” said Bill Schultheiss, director of engineering at Toole Design Group, which consults with public transportation agencies. “It made sense in the context of the gas crisis, but it was way oversold on what it would achieve. It’s a mandate that doesn’t consider the full consequences.”

    Right on red has never been allowed across most of New York City, where large signs alert Manhattan’s visitors that the practice is prohibited there. But it was the default policy practically everywhere else in the U.S. until last year’s vote in the nation’s capital.

    Safety advocates who pushed for the change in Washington, D.C., are bracing for blowback from drivers, particularly if the city also allows the so-called Idaho Stop in which cyclists are permitted to go through a red light after stopping to make sure the coast is clear.

    “There are just some battles, in terms of public opinion, where you have to be content to sacrifice that for the safety of the people,” said Jonathan Kincade, communications coordinator at the Washington Area Bicyclists Association. “It doesn’t make sense to treat cars and bikes the same. They’re not the same vehicle, and we’ve seen the outcomes of that.”

    Critics argue that banning right on red will not only inconvenience motorists but also slow down commuter buses and deliveries. The United Parcel Service hasn’t taken an official position on right on red but has long directed its drivers to avoid left turns whenever possible, viewing them as inefficient.

    Priya Sarathy Jones, deputy executive director at the Fines and Fees Justice Center, is concerned penalties from right-on-red bans will fall disproportionately on lower-income drivers who have to drive to work because they can’t afford housing near public transit. If there’s more enforcement at red lights, more cameras are certain to follow, she said. And in the Chicago area, any discussion of red light policy often conjures up memories of the region’s vilified red-light camera program, which spurred bribery charges against public officials accused of trying to influence the high-profit contracts.

    “It generates a lot of money for the city, instead of our decisions being driven by safety strategies backed by evidence,” she said, suggesting that road infrastructure improvements would be a much more effective way to reduce accidents.

    There are no recent, nationwide studies of how many people are hurt or killed by right-turning drivers.

    According to a national report by the Governors Highway Safety Association, more than 7,500 people walking were struck and killed by automobiles in 2022, the highest number since 1981. The spike, which included all accidents — not just those involving right turns on red, was attributed in part to an increase in larger vehicles such as SUVs and pickup trucks on the road.

    The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that the odds a pedestrian would be killed when struck by an automobile turning right were 89% higher when the vehicle was a pickup and 63% higher when it was an SUV, due to larger blind spots and the deadlier force associated with heavier models.

    “These big, blunt front hoods, they knock people down and run over them, as opposed to before when people would crumple onto the hood,” said Mike McGinn, a former Seattle mayor who is the executive director of America Walks, a national nonprofit that advocates for pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods.

    Much of the research looking directly at the impact of right-on-red policies is years if not decades old, but both sides argue it’s still relevant.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in a 1994 report to Congress looked at four years of crash data from Indiana, Maryland and Missouri and three years of data from Illinois, counting a combined 558 injury crashes and four fatalities stemming from right turns on red. Advocates of a ban point out that study came before the nation’s vehicle fleet grew much larger and more lethal.

    But Beeber said the National Motorists Association study of California found that even when there was an accident associated with right turns on red, at least 96% of the injuries sustained by pedestrians or cyclists were minor.

    “One injury or death is too many,” said Washington state Sen. John Lovick, the primary sponsor of a bill this year that would have prohibited right on red statewide near schools, parks and certain other locations. “If it were me at that intersection crossing, I would want something done.”

    Lovick’s bill didn’t make it out of committee, but Seattle this year made it the default policy to prohibit right on red when new traffic signals are added.

    Melinda Kasraie testified on behalf of Lovick’s bill at a legislative hearing, sharing her experience being struck by a car turning right on red in Seattle. She needed a total knee replacement, had to give up her 20-year job and moved to a small town in part due to her newfound fears of crossing the street.

    “He just needed to wait 20 more seconds and he would have had a green light, and that 20 seconds made a big impact on me,” Kasraie said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Toyota recalls 751,000 Highlanders in the US to make sure bumper covers and hardware can’t fall off

    Toyota recalls 751,000 Highlanders in the US to make sure bumper covers and hardware can’t fall off

    [ad_1]

    Toyota is recalling about 751,000 large SUVs in the U.S. to fix a problem with the tabs that hold the front bumper covers on

    ByThe Associated Press

    October 26, 2023, 1:08 PM

    DETROIT — Toyota is recalling about 751,000 large SUVs in the U.S. to fix a problem with the tabs that hold the front bumper covers on.

    The recall covers certain Toyota Highlanders from the 2020 through 2023 model years including gas-electric hybrids.

    The company says in a statement that the SUVs have resin front lower bumper covers that are connected with mounting tabs. If there’s a even a minor impact to the lower bumper cover assembly, the mounting tabs could detach, and parts of the assembly could fall into the road and become a hazard.

    Dealers will inspect the bumper cover tabs for damage. If there isn’t any, they’ll install improved hardware to hold the covers. If damage is found, dealers will replace the upper and/or lower bumper covers and add the improved hardware.

    Toyota says it will notify owners by late December. Owners can check to see if their Highlander is affected by going to nhtsa.gov/recalls and entering vehicle identification or license plate numbers, the company said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Stellantis recalls nearly 273,000 Ram trucks because rear view camera image may not show on screen

    Stellantis recalls nearly 273,000 Ram trucks because rear view camera image may not show on screen

    [ad_1]

    Stellantis is recalling nearly 273,000 trucks in the U.S. because the radio software can stop the rear view camera image from being displayed

    DETROIT — Stellantis is recalling nearly 273,000 trucks in the U.S. because the radio software can stop the rear view camera image from being displayed.

    The recall a nnounced Tuesday by U.S. safety regulators covers certain Ram 1500 pickup trucks and some Ram 3500 chassis cabs from the 2022 and 2023 model years. Also covered are 2022 through 2024 Ram 2500 trucks.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says a rear view display without an image reduces a driver’s view and increases the risk of a crash.

    Dealers will update the radio software at no cost to owners, who will be notified by letter starting Nov. 17.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New cars are supposed to be getting safer. So why are fatalities on the rise?

    New cars are supposed to be getting safer. So why are fatalities on the rise?

    [ad_1]

    NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Alyssa Milligan was someone who intuitively knew when another person needed help, encouragement or a kind word. Although she was new to Tennessee, the 23-year old physical therapy student, whose mother called her “Sweet Alyssa,” had already made many close connections, especially within the tight-knit cycling community around Nashville — before she was killed this month, struck by a pickup truck while cycling with a friend.

    Roadway deaths in the U.S. are mounting despite government test data showing vehicles have been getting safer. While the number of all car-related fatalities has trended upward over the last decade, pedestrians and cyclists have seen the sharpest rise: over 60% between 2011 and 2022.

    It coincides with a steep increase in sales of SUVs, pickup trucks and vans, which accounted for 78% of new U.S. vehicle sales in 2022, according to Motorintelligence.com.

    Current U.S. ratings only consider the safety of the people inside the vehicle. The National Association of City Transportation Officials is leading an effort asking U.S. transportation officials to begin factoring the safety of those outside of vehicles into their 5-star safety ratings.

    “We don’t know exactly what’s going on with the increase in pedestrian fatalities. It certainly seems like the increase in bigger vehicles is contributing to it,” said Jessica Cicchino, vice president of research at the nonprofit Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

    “Many studies have shown that larger vehicles like SUVs and pickups are more likely to kill or seriously injure pedestrians and cyclists when they’re involved in a crash,” she said, noting that large vehicles are more likely to strike people in the head and vital organs, rather than the legs.

    The design of these vehicles can also pose visibility problems. An Insurance Institute for Highway Safety study of crashes with pedestrians at intersections found that the vehicles most likely to be involved in left-turn crashes were SUVs and pickups, suggesting “they might be having a harder time seeing some of those pedestrians,” Cicchino said.

    Subaru, which has performed well in IIHS pedestrian crash avoidance tests, considers visibility its first line of safety, according to spokesperson Todd Hill. But that has become more challenging as safety standards for rollovers have required vehicles to improve the strength of the pillars that support the roof.

    “The smaller the glass you make, the more design flexibility you have … but it really comes at the sacrifice of outward visibility,” he said.

    While there has been less research on blind spots directly in front of passenger vehicles, Consumer Reports found in 2021 that high hoods obstructed driver views of pedestrians. Meanwhile, a January 2023 report from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Volpe Center determined “the increasingly large blind zones in SUVs and pickups have been associated with fatal ‘frontover’ crashes,” where people are run over by slow-moving vehicles.

    The Volpe Center, which works to address the nation’s most pressing transportation challenges, recently collaborated to produce a web application called VIEW, which uses crowd-sourcing to create a database of vehicle blind zones. For example, the app shows that as many as eight elementary school children could stand shoulder-to-shoulder in front of a 2016 Chevrolet Silverado without being visible to the driver.

    The U.S. first began crash testing cars in the 1970s, and it implemented the 5-star rating system in 1993. In 2006, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration began requiring window labels on new vehicles to include those ratings.

    Thanks to vehicle improvements, seatbelt laws and other changes, fatal crashes in the U.S. trended downward for decades, hitting a low of 29,867 in 2011. But that trend has reversed. Government estimates of fatal crashes in 2022 show a 43% increase to 42,795 — partially thanks to increases in speeding and drunk driving and decreases in seatbelt use. Fatal crashes also increased as a percent of total miles driven. Pedestrian and cyclist deaths increased by 64% since 2011, to an estimated 8,413 in 2022.

    NHTSA has proposed new pedestrian crash avoidance tests, but they would be voluntary and not part of the agency’s 5-star rating system, said Billy Richling, a spokesperson at the National Association of City Transportation Officials, which is pushing to make pedestrian safety testing mandatory.

    “A vehicle could fail the pedestrian crash-worthiness test and still receive five stars,” he said.

    A voluntary evaluation isn’t enough for Jessica Hart, whose 5-year-old daughter Allie was struck and killed in their Washington, D.C., neighborhood in 2021. Her petition on Change.org, which demands the NHTSA include a vehicle’s risk of killing a pedestrian in its 5-star rating system, has collected more than 28,000 signatures.

    “She had just started kindergarten,” Hart said of her daughter. “She was riding her bike in the crosswalk, a block from our house in the school zone. She was with her dad. And a Ford Transit van came up to the 4-way intersection, and didn’t see her, and just proceeded through the stop sign, and hit and killed her.”

    John Capp, the director of vehicle safety technology, strategy and regulation at General Motors, stressed that there is not enough data about pedestrian traffic deaths to understand the causes. He also acknowledged there are tradeoffs in design and said safety emphasis in the past has been on the people inside of vehicles.

    “Ultimately, there’s less we can do when someone is hit outside a vehicle,” he said. “That’s why we’re focused on pedestrian crash avoidance.”

    Nearly all new GM vehicles come equipped with automatic emergency braking, and cameras are getting better at seeing pedestrians at night, when the majority of those fatal crashes occur.

    That is in line with an NHTSA proposal that would require new cars and light trucks to have automatic emergency braking able to detect pedestrians, including at night, within three years.

    Advances in that technology promise to help compensate for blind spots, but safety experts say it is only part of a solution that requires infrastructure changes, speed limit enforcement and even changes to vehicle design.

    “You want to be getting it from all angles,” Cicchino said. “You want to prevent the crashes from occurring, but when the crashes occur, you want them to be less dangerous.”

    Hart is now an advocate with the Washington chapter of Families for Safe Streets, a nonprofit working to end fatal crashes.

    “I’ve been speaking out and advocating for safe streets, safer vehicles, alternatives to driving,” Hart said, “simply because I just can’t fathom that my daughter was killed — it’s violent and it’s traumatic — and that nothing would change.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California truck drivers ask Gov. Newsom to sign job-saving bill as self-driving big rigs are tested

    California truck drivers ask Gov. Newsom to sign job-saving bill as self-driving big rigs are tested

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California lawmakers, union leaders and truck drivers are trying to steer Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom toward signing into law a proposal that could save jobs as self-driving trucks are tested for their safety on the roads.

    The legislation would ban self-driving trucks weighing more than 10,000 pounds (4,536 kilograms) — which would include vehicles from UPS delivery trucks to massive semi-trucks — from operating on public roads unless a human driver is on board. Proponents of the bill say it would help address concerns about safety and losing truck driving jobs to automation in the future. Under the bill, the rules would be in effect until at least 2029.

    Republican Assemblymember Tom Lackey, one of the bill’s co-authors, said lawmakers aren’t “against technology,” but they see the bill as a safer way for companies to test self-driving trucks.

    “We want balance because we believe in people, and we believe in public safety,” Lackey said. “When surprises happen, physics is not your friend.”

    The bill coasted through the Legislature with few lawmakers voting against it. It’s part of ongoing debates about the potential risks of self-driving vehicles and how workforces adapt to a new era as companies deploy technologies to do work traditionally done by humans.

    Newsom, who typically enjoys strong support from labor, is facing some pressure from within his administration not to sign it. He has until Oct. 14 to make a decision. His administration’s Department of Finance projected it would cost the state about $1 million annually to implement the bill’s requirements, and his Office of Business and Economic Development says it would push companies making self-driving technologies to move out-of-state.

    “Our state is on the cusp of a new era and cannot risk stifling innovation,” Dee Dee Myers, the office’s director and senior adviser to Newsom, said in a letter opposing the bill.

    Other opponents of the bill say self-driving truck regulations should be left up to the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles and officials with expertise on keeping the roads safe. They argue self-driving cars that are already on the roads haven’t caused many serious accidents compared to cars driven by people. Businesses say self-driving trucks would help them transport products more efficiently in the future.

    The bill comes as the debate over the future of autonomous vehicles heats up. In San Francisco, two robotaxi companies got approval last month from state regulators to operate in the city at all hours, despite concerns about these vehicles making unexpected stops and blocking traffic. In Phoenix, companies have tested self-driving trucks on highways and to deliver mail through a partnership with the U.S. Postal Service.

    On Tuesday in Sacramento, hundreds of truck drivers, union leaders and other supporters of the bill rallied at the state Capitol. Drivers wore shirts representing their chapter of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, a large union backing the bill, and chanted “sign that bill” as semi-trucks lined a street in front of the Capitol. Some chants were laced with profanities as they urged Newsom to support their cause. There are about 200,000 commercial truck drivers in California, according to Teamsters officials.

    Mike Di Bene, a commercial truck driver of nearly 30 years and member of the Oakland Teamsters chapter, said human drivers have the “intuition and experience” to quickly adapt to unexpected situations, including when there is black ice on the road or when a tire blows out on the freeway. Self-driving technology that “doesn’t value” life can’t understand what’s at stake when operating massive vehicles at high speeds, he said.

    Brian Rice, president of the California Professional Firefighters union, said it’s important for first responders to be able to communicate with commercial truck drivers when emergencies happen — for example if there is a spill of dangerous materials that can become a health hazard.

    “Hazardous materials are everywhere,” Rice said. “We don’t need robots driving these materials around.”

    Labor was at the heart of several legislative fights this year, including efforts to raise wages for health care workers, make striking workers eligible for unemployment benefits and allow legislative staffers to unionize. The Legislature sent these proposals to Newsom at a time hotel workers, Hollywood writers and actors are on strike.

    In 2012, then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law mandating that companies get approval from the Department of Motor Vehicles before putting their self-driving vehicles to use on public roads. DMV leaders oppose the bill, saying the authority to regulate such vehicles should remain with their agency.

    In August, the DMV sent a letter to Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, who introduced this year’s bill, saying the testing of self-driving vehicles across 18.3 million miles (29.5 million kilometers) since 2014 in the state has not led to any fatalities. Autonomous vehicles were not found to be “clearly at fault” for the few collisions that caused serious injuries, the letter said.

    California DMV Director Steve Gordon said in the letter that the department meets with companies that make self-driving vehicles after accidents occur to find out the root cause. If the department finds a vehicle poses an “unreasonable risk to public safety,” it can suspend or revoke the company’s permit to test the vehicle on the roads, Gordon said in the letter.

    The bill would require the DMV to submit a report to the Legislature updating lawmakers on the safety of medium- and heavy-duty self-driving trucks. It would require companies to report collisions that caused property damage, injury or death to the department within 10 days.

    ___

    Sophie Austin is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Austin @sophieadanna

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California truck drivers ask Gov. Newsom to sign job-saving bill as self-driving big rigs are tested

    California truck drivers ask Gov. Newsom to sign job-saving bill as self-driving big rigs are tested

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California lawmakers, union leaders and truck drivers are trying to steer Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom toward signing into law a proposal that could save jobs as self-driving trucks are tested for their safety on the roads.

    The legislation would ban self-driving trucks weighing more than 10,000 pounds (4,536 kilograms) — which would include vehicles from UPS delivery trucks to massive semi-trucks — from operating on public roads unless a human driver is on board. Proponents of the bill say it would help address concerns about safety and losing truck driving jobs to automation in the future. Under the bill, the rules would be in effect until at least 2029.

    Republican Assemblymember Tom Lackey, one of the bill’s co-authors, said lawmakers aren’t “against technology,” but they see the bill as a safer way for companies to test self-driving trucks.

    “We want balance because we believe in people, and we believe in public safety,” Lackey said. “When surprises happen, physics is not your friend.”

    The bill coasted through the Legislature with few lawmakers voting against it. It’s part of ongoing debates about the potential risks of self-driving vehicles and how workforces adapt to a new era as companies deploy technologies to do work traditionally done by humans.

    Newsom, who typically enjoys strong support from labor, is facing some pressure from within his administration not to sign it. He has until Oct. 14 to make a decision. His administration’s Department of Finance projected it would cost the state about $1 million annually to implement the bill’s requirements, and his Office of Business and Economic Development says it would push companies making self-driving technologies to move out-of-state.

    “Our state is on the cusp of a new era and cannot risk stifling innovation,” Dee Dee Myers, the office’s director and senior adviser to Newsom, said in a letter opposing the bill.

    Other opponents of the bill say self-driving truck regulations should be left up to the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles and officials with expertise on keeping the roads safe. They argue self-driving cars that are already on the roads haven’t caused many serious accidents compared to cars driven by people. Businesses say self-driving trucks would help them transport products more efficiently in the future.

    The bill comes as the debate over the future of autonomous vehicles heats up. In San Francisco, two robotaxi companies got approval last month from state regulators to operate in the city at all hours, despite concerns about these vehicles making unexpected stops and blocking traffic. In Phoenix, companies have tested self-driving trucks on highways and to deliver mail through a partnership with the U.S. Postal Service.

    On Tuesday in Sacramento, hundreds of truck drivers, union leaders and other supporters of the bill rallied at the state Capitol. Drivers wore shirts representing their chapter of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, a large union backing the bill, and chanted “sign that bill” as semi-trucks lined a street in front of the Capitol. Some chants were laced with profanities as they urged Newsom to support their cause. There are about 200,000 commercial truck drivers in California, according to Teamsters officials.

    Mike Di Bene, a commercial truck driver of nearly 30 years and member of the Oakland Teamsters chapter, said human drivers have the “intuition and experience” to quickly adapt to unexpected situations, including when there is black ice on the road or when a tire blows out on the freeway. Self-driving technology that “doesn’t value” life can’t understand what’s at stake when operating massive vehicles at high speeds, he said.

    Brian Rice, president of the California Professional Firefighters union, said it’s important for first responders to be able to communicate with commercial truck drivers when emergencies happen — for example if there is a spill of dangerous materials that can become a health hazard.

    “Hazardous materials are everywhere,” Rice said. “We don’t need robots driving these materials around.”

    Labor was at the heart of several legislative fights this year, including efforts to raise wages for health care workers, make striking workers eligible for unemployment benefits and allow legislative staffers to unionize. The Legislature sent these proposals to Newsom at a time hotel workers, Hollywood writers and actors are on strike.

    In 2012, then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law mandating that companies get approval from the Department of Motor Vehicles before putting their self-driving vehicles to use on public roads. DMV leaders oppose the bill, saying the authority to regulate such vehicles should remain with their agency.

    In August, the DMV sent a letter to Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, who introduced this year’s bill, saying the testing of self-driving vehicles across 18.3 million miles (29.5 million kilometers) since 2014 in the state has not led to any fatalities. Autonomous vehicles were not found to be “clearly at fault” for the few collisions that caused serious injuries, the letter said.

    California DMV Director Steve Gordon said in the letter that the department meets with companies that make self-driving vehicles after accidents occur to find out the root cause. If the department finds a vehicle poses an “unreasonable risk to public safety,” it can suspend or revoke the company’s permit to test the vehicle on the roads, Gordon said in the letter.

    The bill would require the DMV to submit a report to the Legislature updating lawmakers on the safety of medium- and heavy-duty self-driving trucks. It would require companies to report collisions that caused property damage, injury or death to the department within 10 days.

    ___

    Sophie Austin is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Austin @sophieadanna

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California truck drivers ask Gov. Newsom to sign job-saving bill as self-driving big rigs are tested

    California truck drivers ask Gov. Newsom to sign job-saving bill as self-driving big rigs are tested

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California lawmakers, union leaders and truck drivers are trying to steer Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom toward signing into law a proposal that could save jobs as self-driving trucks are tested for their safety on the roads.

    The legislation would ban self-driving trucks weighing more than 10,000 pounds (4,536 kilograms) — which would include vehicles from UPS delivery trucks to massive semi-trucks — from operating on public roads unless a human driver is on board. Proponents of the bill say it would help address concerns about safety and losing truck driving jobs to automation in the future. Under the bill, the rules would be in effect until at least 2029.

    Republican Assemblymember Tom Lackey, one of the bill’s co-authors, said lawmakers aren’t “against technology,” but they see the bill as a safer way for companies to test self-driving trucks.

    “We want balance because we believe in people, and we believe in public safety,” Lackey said. “When surprises happen, physics is not your friend.”

    The bill coasted through the Legislature with few lawmakers voting against it. It’s part of ongoing debates about the potential risks of self-driving vehicles and how workforces adapt to a new era as companies deploy technologies to do work traditionally done by humans.

    Newsom, who typically enjoys strong support from labor, is facing some pressure from within his administration not to sign it. He has until Oct. 14 to make a decision. His administration’s Department of Finance projected it would cost the state about $1 million annually to implement the bill’s requirements, and his Office of Business and Economic Development says it would push companies making self-driving technologies to move out-of-state.

    “Our state is on the cusp of a new era and cannot risk stifling innovation,” Dee Dee Myers, the office’s director and senior adviser to Newsom, said in a letter opposing the bill.

    Other opponents of the bill say self-driving truck regulations should be left up to the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles and officials with expertise on keeping the roads safe. They argue self-driving cars that are already on the roads haven’t caused many serious accidents compared to cars driven by people. Businesses say self-driving trucks would help them transport products more efficiently in the future.

    The bill comes as the debate over the future of autonomous vehicles heats up. In San Francisco, two robotaxi companies got approval last month from state regulators to operate in the city at all hours, despite concerns about these vehicles making unexpected stops and blocking traffic. In Phoenix, companies have tested self-driving trucks on highways and to deliver mail through a partnership with the U.S. Postal Service.

    On Tuesday in Sacramento, hundreds of truck drivers, union leaders and other supporters of the bill rallied at the state Capitol. Drivers wore shirts representing their chapter of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, a large union backing the bill, and chanted “sign that bill” as semi-trucks lined a street in front of the Capitol. Some chants were laced with profanities as they urged Newsom to support their cause. There are about 200,000 commercial truck drivers in California, according to Teamsters officials.

    Mike Di Bene, a commercial truck driver of nearly 30 years and member of the Oakland Teamsters chapter, said human drivers have the “intuition and experience” to quickly adapt to unexpected situations, including when there is black ice on the road or when a tire blows out on the freeway. Self-driving technology that “doesn’t value” life can’t understand what’s at stake when operating massive vehicles at high speeds, he said.

    Brian Rice, president of the California Professional Firefighters union, said it’s important for first responders to be able to communicate with commercial truck drivers when emergencies happen — for example if there is a spill of dangerous materials that can become a health hazard.

    “Hazardous materials are everywhere,” Rice said. “We don’t need robots driving these materials around.”

    Labor was at the heart of several legislative fights this year, including efforts to raise wages for health care workers, make striking workers eligible for unemployment benefits and allow legislative staffers to unionize. The Legislature sent these proposals to Newsom at a time hotel workers, Hollywood writers and actors are on strike.

    In 2012, then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law mandating that companies get approval from the Department of Motor Vehicles before putting their self-driving vehicles to use on public roads. DMV leaders oppose the bill, saying the authority to regulate such vehicles should remain with their agency.

    In August, the DMV sent a letter to Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, who introduced this year’s bill, saying the testing of self-driving vehicles across 18.3 million miles (29.5 million kilometers) since 2014 in the state has not led to any fatalities. Autonomous vehicles were not found to be “clearly at fault” for the few collisions that caused serious injuries, the letter said.

    California DMV Director Steve Gordon said in the letter that the department meets with companies that make self-driving vehicles after accidents occur to find out the root cause. If the department finds a vehicle poses an “unreasonable risk to public safety,” it can suspend or revoke the company’s permit to test the vehicle on the roads, Gordon said in the letter.

    The bill would require the DMV to submit a report to the Legislature updating lawmakers on the safety of medium- and heavy-duty self-driving trucks. It would require companies to report collisions that caused property damage, injury or death to the department within 10 days.

    ___

    Sophie Austin is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Austin @sophieadanna

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tesla is allowing no-hands driving with Autopilot for longer periods. US regulators have questions

    Tesla is allowing no-hands driving with Autopilot for longer periods. US regulators have questions

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — Tesla is allowing some drivers use its Autopilot driver-assist system for extended periods without making them put their hands on the steering wheel, a development that has drawn concern from U.S. safety regulators.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has ordered Tesla to tell the agency how many vehicles have received a software update making that possible and it’s seeking more information on what the electric vehicle maker’s plans are for wider distribution.

    “NHTSA is concerned that this feature was introduced to consumer vehicles, and now that the existence of this feature is known to the public, more drivers may attempt to activate it,” John Donaldson, the agency’s acting chief counsel, wrote in a July 26 letter to Tesla that was posted on the agency’s website. “The resulting relaxation of controls designed to ensure that the driver remain engaged in the dynamic driving task could lead to greater driver inattention and failure of the driver to properly supervise Autopilot.”

    A message was left early Wednesday seeking comment from Tesla. “If you haven’t tried Tesla Autopilot, you don’t know how awesome it is,” Musk wrote Wednesday on X, formerly Twitter.

    The government has been investigating Autopilot for crashing into emergency vehicles parked on freeways, as well as hitting motorcycles and crossing tractor-trailers. It opened a formal probe in 2021 and since 2016 has sent investigators to 35 Tesla crashes that may involve partially automated driving systems. At least 17 people have died.

    Tesla says Autopilot and a more sophisticated “Full Self-Driving” system cannot drive themselves and that drivers must be ready to intervene at all times. Autopilot generally can keep a car in its lane and a distance away from objects in front of it.

    The special order tells Tesla to describe differences in the software update that reduces or eliminates instances where Autopilot tells drivers to apply pressure on the steering wheel, “including the amount of time that Autopilot is allowed to operate without prompting torque, and any warnings or chimes that are presented to the driver.”

    The letter to Tesla Senior Legal Director Dinna Eskin orders the Austin, Texas, company to say why it installed the software update and how it justifies which consumers got it.

    It also seeks reports of crashes and near misses involving vehicles with the software update. “Your response should include any plans to enable the subject software in consumer vehicles within the next calendar year,” Donaldson wrote in the letter.

    A Tesla officer has to respond to the letter under oath by Aug. 25 or the agency will refer the matter to the Justice Department, which can seek a maximum penalty of more than $131 million.

    Tesla’s system of monitoring drivers has been criticized by safety advocates and the National Transportation Safety Board for letting drivers check out when Autopilot is operating.

    After investigating three crashes involving Autopilot, the NTSB recommended in 2017 that Tesla and five other automakers limit where the partially automated systems can be used to limited-access divided highways, and to bolster their systems that monitor drivers.

    All of the automakers but Tesla responded. In 2021 NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy wrote a letter to Tesla CEO Elon Musk calling on him to act on the recommendations. It wasn’t clear early Wednesday whether Musk responded.

    The NTSB investigates crashes but has no regulatory authority. It can only make recommendations to automakers or other federal agencies such as NHTSA.

    Most other automakers use an infrared camera to make sure a driver is paying attention. Some Teslas lately have been equipped with cameras that watch drivers.

    Jake Fisher, who heads auto testing for Consumer Reports, said Tesla may have activated the cameras to monitor drivers, and that may be the reason for relaxing the steering wheel notifications.

    But during its last test of Autopilot in 2022, the cameras didn’t do anything, and older Teslas aren’t equipped with the cameras, Fisher said. However, the cameras did monitor drivers when using “Full Self-Driving,” Fisher said.

    Cameras, he said, are better at ensuring that drivers pay attention than steering wheel monitors.

    When Autopilot was first introduced in 2015, it warned drivers to pay attention if it didn’t feel torque on the steering wheel for about three minutes, Fisher said. Later that was reduced to 30 seconds, but it changes between software updates, he said. “It always seems to be jumping around,” he said.

    Consumer Reports also has found that it’s easy to bypass Tesla’s steering wheel monitoring system.

    Earlier this month NHTSA sent investigators to a crash in Virginia in which a Tesla apparently on Autopilot ran underneath a tractor-trailer, killing the driver.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • In deadly Maui fires, many had no warning and no way out. Those who dodged barricades survived

    In deadly Maui fires, many had no warning and no way out. Those who dodged barricades survived

    [ad_1]

    As flames tore through a West Maui neighborhood, car after car of fleeing residents headed for the only paved road out of town in a desperate race for safety.

    And car after car was turned back toward the rapidly spreading wildfire by a barricade blocking access to Highway 30.

    One family swerved around the barricade and was safe in a nearby town 48 minutes later, another drove their 4-wheel-drive car down a dirt road to escape. One man took an dirt road uphill, climbing above the fire and watching as Lahaina burned. He later picked his way through the flames, smoke and rubble to pull survivors to safety.

    But dozens of others found themselves caught in a hellscape, their cars jammed together on a narrow road, surrounded by flames on three sides and the rocky ocean waves on the fourth. Some died in their cars, while others tried to run for safety.

    “I could see from the bypass that people were stuck on the balconies, so I went down and checked it out,” said Kekoa Lansford, who made several trips into town to look for survivors. What he found was horrible, Lansford said, with dead bodies and flames like a hellish movie scene. “And I could see that people were on fire, that the fire was just being stoked by the wind, and being pushed toward the homes.”

    div class=“Enhancement” div class=“Enhancement-item” style=“position:relative;width:100vw;left:50%;right:50%;margin-left:-50vw;margin-right:-50vw;padding:0px 20px;” div class=“ImageEnhancement” figure class=“Figure” iframe src=” https://interactives.ap.org/hawaii-timeline/ ″ class=“ap-embed” width=“100%” height=“820” scrolling=“no” frameborder=“0” /iframe /figure /div /div /div

    The road closures — some because of the fire, some because of downed power lines — contributed to making historic Lahaina the site of the deadliest U.S. wildfire in more than a century. But there were many problems that day, and in some ways the disaster began long before the fires started.

    A flash drought in the region provided plenty of kindling, and Hurricane Dora brought strong winds to Maui as it passed roughly 500 miles (800 kilometers) south of the Hawaii island chain. Those winds downed at least 30 power poles in West Maui, and Hawaiian Electric had no procedure in place for turning off the grid — a common practice in other fire-prone states. Video shot by a Lahaina resident shows a downed powerline setting dry grasses alight, possibly revealing the start of the larger fire.

    And later, as the fire began to swallow homes in its ravenous path, Maui County emergency officials declined to use an extensive network of emergency sirens to alert Lahaina’s residents to flee.

    During a news conference Tuesday, Maui Police Chief John Pelletier said police officers drove up and down streets, knocking on doors and using loudspeakers to tell people to leave, but he didn’t say exactly where and what time those efforts occurred. The Associated Press has filed public records requests for location reports and other documentation including video and internal communications to clarify the details of the police and fire response, but Maui County has not yet released that information.

    A team of Associated Press journalists documented the first hours of the deadly wildfire by interviewing dozens of survivors and public officials, examining public documents and analyzing citizen videos, satellite images and publicly available data. The timeline reveals the chaos that overtook the town.

    Shane Treu wakes early on Aug. 8, and is in his backyard when he hears a utility pole snap next to Lahainaluna Road. He sees the downed powerline ignite the grass, and calls 911 at 6:37 a.m. to report the fire.

    Small brush fires aren’t unusual for Lahaina, and the fire department declares this one 100% contained by 9:55 a.m. The assurance puts many residents at ease; the high winds have prompted the closure of some public schools for the day, and others have not yet started. That means many of Lahaina’s 3,000 public school students are home alone while their parents work.

    Contained is not controlled, however, and the town is being battered by high winds. While many of Maui County’s fire crews work to extinguish the Upcountry fire on the eastern half of the island, the wind is toppling power poles and scattering embers like seeds in Lahaina.

    Treu’s neighbor Robert Arconado said the fire reignites around 2 p.m. He records video of it spreading at 3:06 p.m., as large plumes of smoke rise near Lahainaluna Road and are carried downtown by the wind.

    Around 3:20 p.m., Lahaina resident Kevin Eliason is watching the black smoke from a vantage point closer to downtown when passersby tell him a power pole has been knocked onto the tar roof of a gas station two blocks away, creating fireballs that are being blown in the wind, he said.

    Eliason said the fire knocked the power out in the area soon after.

    Ten minutes later, Hawaiian Electric sends a news release asking Maui residents to prepare for extended outages. The utility says more than 30 power poles are down in West Maui, including along the Honoapiilani Highway at the south end of Lahaina. At the same time, the fire department closes the Lahaina Bypass road because of the fire.

    The closures block the only route out of Lahaina to the south. Two weeks later, Maui Police Chief John Pelletier says during a news conference that officers never stopped people from leaving Lahaina that day but did try to prevent them from driving over live power lines.

    Back in the subdivision near Lahainaluna Road, the first sign of trouble for Nate Baird and Courtney Stapleton comes at 3:40 p.m., when their 9- and 10-year-old sons say they can smell s’mores.

    By the time the family piles into the car with their dog and Baird’s mother and joins a caravan of evacuating residents, parts of the subdivision are beginning to burn. A telephone pole falls behind their car, causing an accident and blocking a side street.

    Meanwhile, police officers knock down a fence to help others escape, the police chief says later. Firefighters in the area nearly become trapped themselves, losing a truck to the flames, Pelletier says.

    When Baird and his family turn south to drive out of town, the way is blocked by cones and a crew working on downed electric poles. The workers were motioning for everyone to turn back toward Lahaina.

    They decide they don’t care what the crew wants, swerving around the cones and heading south. They make it to a neighboring town by 4:18 p.m. and begin texting people to see who else has made it out.

    “Nobody realized how little time we really had,” Baird said. “Like even us being from the heart of the fire, we did not comprehend. Like we literally had minutes and one wrong turn. We would all be dead right now.”

    Jonelle Santos said her daughter, Ronelle Santos-Adrian, managed to escape her Lahaina affordable housing apartment with her 3-year-old daughter and partner by turning their four-wheel-drive vehicle away from the standstill traffic and onto a dirt road, eventually finding their way to a friend’s house in Napili. Some of the other people who lived in the apartment complex didn’t have cars, Santos said, and her daughter thinks some of them didn’t make it out.

    Kim Cuevas-Reyes narrowly escapes with her 12- and 15-year-old by ignoring instructions to turn right on Front Street toward Lahaina’s Civic Center, which earlier in the day had been turned into a shelter for refugees. Instead, she takes a left, driving in the wrong lane to pass a stack of cars heading in the other direction.

    “The gridlock would have left us there when the firestorm came,” said Cuevas-Reyes, 38. “I would have had to tell my children to jump into the ocean as well and be boiled alive by the flames or we would have just died from smoke inhalation and roasted in the car.”

    At 5:20 p.m., Maui County shares another update on Facebook. The road leading south out of Lahaina has been cleared and is open for traffic, the county says.

    But by then, some on Front Street have already died, according to survivor accounts. Others have jumped over the seawall and are treading water, dodging flaming debris and breathing overheated black smoke.

    At some point, police begin directing people away from Front Street, Pelletier says, “because it had already gotten too late.” He does not say exactly when that that point is reached.

    A private ambulance company calls the U.S. Coast Guard at about 5:45 p.m., asking for help transporting 10 injured people from Lahaina to Maalaea because a fire is blocking road access to Lahaina. It is the Coast Guard’s first notification of the fire.

    People in the water and on boat moorings use flashlights and phones to guide the boats through the thick smoke. The Coast Guard rescues nearly 40 people from the shore, and pulls 17 people from the water while civilians help pull more from the ocean. The rescue efforts stretch into the early morning hours.

    Kekoa Lansford is among the rescuers. Earlier, he had climbed a hill behind the town and watched as the city burned, trying to gauge when it would be safe to return. Lansford said he knew people would need help “because the roads are small, and it’s pretty tight down there.”

    Over the next several hours, Lansford makes repeated trips into the still-burning downtown, often using back roads to travel safely.

    “I seen one girl and her legs was all burned up, and then I helped her,” Lansford said. “And then something just clicked in my head, like, everybody’s going to be burned up. So I just kept going back down.”

    Lansford focuses his effort on Front Street, getting as many people as he can out of the fire.

    “Pulling them off behind the seawall, you know, and walking them back to my truck,” he said.

    He takes each person to a place that seems safe from fire where they can be picked up by others. And then he goes back to find more.

    “Just getting them out of the fire, make sure they don’t die of smoke inhalation. Some of them will die after anyway,” he recounted.

    The houses and buildings are too hot to enter, he said, and a popular spot for watching the sunset has become a death zone.

    When the sun rises on Wednesday, the town that was once home to about 13,000 people has become an ashen wasteland frozen in its final moments of panic.

    More than 100 deaths have been confirmed, and roughly 1,000 people remain unaccounted for.

    Many of the survivors are angry, and haunted by the thought that a just few minutes of notice could have saved many lives.

    Baird’s neighborhood near Lahainaluna Road was filled with kids who were home alone when the flames hit, he said.

    “We needed like 10 more minutes, and we could have saved a lot of kids,” he said, choking back tears. “If we’d just had like a 10- or 15-minute warning.”

    The family ventured out to a Kahului mall recently, looking for a moment of normalcy in the aftermath of the tragedy. They ran into a playmate of their son.

    “The kids just don’t have a filter. So their son ran up and was just telling our son, you know, ‘This kid is dead. This kid is dead.’ And it’s like, all my son’s friends that they come to our house every day,” he said. “And their parents were at work, and they were home alone. And nobody had a warning. Nobody, nobody, nobody knew.”

    ___

    Boone reported from Boise, Idaho; Hollingsworth reported from Mission, Kansas; Keller reported from Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Lauer reported from Philadelphia. Associated Press journalists Audrey McAvoy and Haven Daley in Wailuku, Hawaii; Andrew Selsky in Salem, Oregon; Ty ONeil and Claire Rush in Lahaina, Hawaii; Michael Biesecker in Washington, D.C.; Jennifer McDermott in Providence, Rhode Island; Jennifer Sinco Kelleher in Honolulu, and Christopher Weber in Los Angeles contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • While a criminal case against a Tesla driver ends, legal and ethical questions on Autopilot endure

    While a criminal case against a Tesla driver ends, legal and ethical questions on Autopilot endure

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — A criminal prosecution against a Tesla driver in Los Angeles County will end on Tuesday, the final step of a case believed to be the first time in the U.S. prosecutors brought felony charges against a motorist who was using a partially automated driving system.

    But the conclusion of driver Kevin Aziz Riad’s case is offering little solace to Lorena Ochoa, whose spouse was one of two people killed in the 2019 crash in a Los Angeles suburb. She believes both Tesla and Aziz Riad, who received probation as punishment, should face harsher consequences.

    Aziz Riad faces a restitution hearing on Tuesday, where a judge will determine how much money he owes the families of Gilberto Alcazar Lopez and Maria Guadalupe Nieves-Lopez. Aziz Riad was using Autopilot, and the case has raised legal and ethical questions about the technology, particularly as Tesla sales grow and more automakers equip cars with similar systems.

    The victims’ families have separately filed civil lawsuits against Aziz Riad and Tesla that are ongoing.

    Tesla says on its website that its cars require human supervision and are not autonomous, but critics say the electric vehicle maker continues a misleading marketing campaign implying that vehicles using Autopilot can drive themselves.

    “They make cars that they know cause accidents, and they don’t care,” said Ochoa, Alcazar Lopez’s spouse, in an interview in Spanish last week. “Families are broken, lives are lost and they don’t care.”

    Authorities say Aziz Riad, a limousine service driver, was at the wheel of a Tesla Model S that was moving at 74 mph (119 kph) when it left a freeway and ran a red light on a local street in Gardena, California, on Dec. 29, 2019. The Tesla struck a Honda Civic at an intersection, and Alcazar Lopez and Nieves-Lopez died at the scene.

    Tesla says Autopilot technology can keep a car in its lane, maintain some distance from cars in front of it and make lane changes. But Autopilot has had trouble with stopping for emergency vehicles parked on roads, and it’s also under investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for braking without driver input.

    U.S. safety regulators are probing Tesla’s partially automated driving systems in at least 35 crashes and 17 deaths nationwide since 2016. The automaker did not respond to requests for comment.

    Experts saw the felony charges for the deaths of Alcazar Lopez and Nieves-Lopez as a warning for drivers who use systems like Tesla’s Autopilot that they cannot rely on them to control vehicles and could face prosecution if a tragedy occurred.

    Aziz Riad, the Tesla driver, pleaded no contest to two counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence. Despite facing more than seven years behind bars, a judge sentenced him to probation in June.

    Ochoa blames both Aziz Riad and Tesla for her spouse’s death. She had hoped Aziz Riad would go to prison and feels probation was too lenient.

    “How can there be justice if the person who took the life of the father of my children, of my husband, is free and is not paying for the mistake he made?” she said. “It is not fair.”

    The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office defended the plea deal in a statement, saying the disposition “was arrived at taking into account all of the evidence and materials presented in the case.”

    The couple had separated but co-parented their three children and remained on good terms. In 2019, Alcazar Lopez was living in Los Angeles with their eldest. He was a good father, Ochoa said, and looked out for his family even though the spouses were apart.

    Alcazar Lopez and Nieves-Lopez had been on their first date when the crash occurred.

    Bryant Walker Smith, a University of South Carolina law professor who follows automated vehicles, says the law has to balance two arguments that are both correct. One is that people should be held accountable for mistakes if they fail to control a two-ton vehicle. Another is that in Aziz Riad’s case, there’s no evidence he intended to kill anyone.

    Arthur Barens, Aziz Riad’s criminal defense lawyer, said he is “comfortable” with probation given his client did not mean to do anything wrong.

    The question of civil liability is even more complex. Is Aziz Riad responsible for the deaths, since he was behind the wheel, or is Tesla?

    It’s possible to argue Tesla engineers should know that people will become too reliant on driver-assist systems and trust them too much, Walker Smith said.

    For years, he and others have said Tesla can do more to make its technology safer. Their suggestions include limiting Autopilot use to freeways, as well as upgrading a driver-monitoring system that currently allows drivers to “check out” while behind the wheel. Walker Smith also wants Tesla’s technology to shut down faster if it determines drivers are not watching the road.

    Similar technology from Ford and General Motors, for instance, monitor drivers with infrared cameras to make sure they’re paying attention. If they don’t, the systems warn the drivers and will turn off. They also confine use of their systems to mostly limited-access freeways and turn them off when they are on city streets, which are more complex and present more dangers.

    Don Slavik, an attorney representing Alcazar Lopez’s family in their lawsuit, said he will argue in court that Tesla has been marketing its cars as being able to drive themselves since at least 2016. Civil attorneys for Aziz Riad and Nieves-Lopez’s family did not respond to inquiries.

    Slavik said he has little hope Tesla will change its behavior or upgrade the technology even if he wins a big judgment for Alcazar Lopez’s family.

    “Maybe not this case, but after they get hit enough times, maybe they’ll make some significant changes,” he said.

    __

    Krisher reported from Detroit. Associated Press Writer Amy Taxin in Orange County, California, contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Contractors group says safer roads will help curb traffic deaths | Long Island Business News

    Contractors group says safer roads will help curb traffic deaths | Long Island Business News

    [ad_1]

    The Long Island Contractors Association (LICA) is pointing to a new report that blames inadequate roadway safety features for a third of fatal traffic crashes. 

    The report from TRIP, a national transportation research nonprofit, examined a recent increase in traffic fatalities and prescribes more investment in road safety as a major solution. 

    From 2018 through 2022, 5,207 people died on New York’s highways, an average of 1,041 annual fatalities, according to New York State Department of Transportation statistics provided by LICA. The numbers also show that from 2019 to 2022, the number of traffic fatalities in New York increased by 23 percent. 

    During the same period, the traffic fatality rate per 100 million vehicle miles of travel increased 39 percent, even as vehicle travel decreased by 9 percent during that time. 

    LICA says 45 percent of New York’s major roads are in poor or mediocre condition, according to an association statement. In addition, 9 percent of New York’s bridges are rated in poor or structurally deficient condition, while 52 percent of the bridges are at least 50 years old, with many requiring significant rehabilitation or replacement.  

    Besides the risk of injuries and fatalities, the trade group says unsafe roadways are also an economic burden. Traffic crashes in New York imposed a total of $33.6 billion in economic costs in 2022, according to LICA, including. These costs work and household productivity losses, property damage, medical costs, rehabilitation costs, legal and court costs, congestion costs, and emergency services.  

    But above all, the trade group maintains that roadway improvements can reduce traffic crashes and save lives. 

    “Investing in New York’s transportation system creates jobs, encourages economic recovery and growth, and improves safety,” LICA Executive Director Marc Herbst, said in the statement. “It’s time to improve our roadways and bridges to benefit the people of Long Island.” 

    The trade group touted the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that was signed into law by President Biden in Nov. 2021, that will provide $13.6 billion in state funds for highway and bridge investments in New York over the next five years, including a 51 percent funding increase.  

    But the group is also concerned that the cost of maintaining safe roadways in New York continues to rise. LICA says the Federal Highway Administration’s national highway construction cost index, which measures labor and materials cost, increased by 28 percent during the first three quarters of 2022.  

    l

    [ad_2]

    David Winzelberg

    Source link