Crash Data Suggest Driver Error in Toyota Accidents | Hacker News Reader

Crash Data Suggest Driver Error in Toyota Accidents

online.wsj.com

30 pointstshtf39 comments

I'd love to see some statistics on the number of these incidents that have occurred with Toyotas versus other makes as a proportion of the total fleet.

These incidents happen all the time, and it almost always turns out that the driver was standing on the accelerator instead of the brake. (Naturally they adamantly deny it - if they'd thought they were pressing the accelerator they would have stopped, after all. Everyone underestimates how much your brain can play tricks on you in this situation.) Of course that does not eliminate design flaws as a cause - for example in the Audi case the pedals were too close together.

Ever since this all blew up I've suspected that it's quite possible the floor mat recall may have simply brought a lot of cases out of the woodwork that are actually not inconsistent with the normal "background" level of such accidents.

Not sure if you saw the graph hidden in the side: "Complaints rose after Toyota recalled 3.8 million vehicles in November..." -- it makes the same case as you.

Let's have an experiment: another manufacturer can institute a fake recall and see what happens.

> Naturally they adamantly deny it

And, thanks to the nature of human memory, after the first few times they aren't even intentionally lying. (A memory is part recall, part imagination. Replay something enough times, it can become more of the latter than the former.)

Faking a recall is a bad idea. Consider the possibility that Toyota drivers were primed by the media hype to believe that the acceleration problems were real and out of their control. Thus, when they found themselves mistakenly pressing on the accelerator, they were less likely to reevaluate the situation. If they had, they would have realized what was happening and pressed the brakes. The accidents, regardless of cause, were real and dangerous. Inducing more accidents to prove a point is bad policy.

Not sure if you saw the graph hidden in the side

I actually missed it, thanks. But what I'd really like to see are the number of police reports of unintended acceleration by model.

And, thanks to the nature of human memory, after the first few times they aren't even intentionally lying.

What you say about memory is completely correct, but in this particular instance I don't imagine for a second that they were intentionally lying even the first few times.

people can't seem to acknowledge that they're getting fuzzier as they get older. I know! Its happening to me and I refuse to acknowledge it as well.

The uncommanded accelrations are proprtional to the numbers of that car model on the market.

20years it was AUDI (accelerates under demonic influence) - it can't be the drivers cos they are Americans - it must be those foreign cars.

Not too surprised either.

But one thing I never understood is how a stuck pedal (one that's actually stuck) can lead to a car accelerating out of control. How could it possibly prevent you from taking the car out of gear, rolling to a stop and turning the thing off? Does it actually affect the ability to shift? Or are drivers just panicking and being dumb? Or do people who own a fancy automatic Lexus actually not know what the "N" on their shifter means?? I sincerely hope it's not the latter.

The article says the data recorders indicated the brakes were not applied at all but the accelerator pedal was floored. In other words, people thinking they're standing on the brakes when really they're standing on the gas pedal.

A person comfortable with technology will react to a surprising result by immediately changing what he's doing on the controls to search for cause and effect; for those who have difficulty with technology it is because they can't think scientifically and react by trying to do more of what wasn't working.

I long to live in a society where "difficulty with technology...because they can't think scientifically" is seen as a disability!

E.g., button mashing.

In at least some incidents, it was impossible to change into neutral(owing to some electronic failsafe) and not at all obvious how to switch the ignition off. Non-obvious is bad bad bad when your throttle is suddenly stuck wide open.

The brake pedal is a pretty obvious user interface. Most people use it whenever they drive. In general, brakes will easily overpower the engine when fully applied. Car & Driver did some tests to be sure [1], and were able to stop a floored Camery going 70 MPH in 190 feet, only 16 feet further than with the throttle closed. Even if shifting or turning off the engine aren't an option (doubtful) the brakes are an obvious and simple way to bring the car back under control. There's really no avoiding the fact that driver error, or at least inaction, played a large part in these accidents.

[1](http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q4/how_to_deal_with_u...)

Just curious, how can it be non-obvious how to stop the engine? Why couldn't the drivers simply turn back the key? Is there some safety feature I'm not aware of?

In my car there's nothing preventing you from completely removing the key while the car is in drive (this actually screwed me once when I parked on a hill and forgot to shift to park). Is this unusual?

Some newer cars don't have a key, they have a pushbutton on/off "switch" (not really a switch at all, just a signal to the computer that the driver wants to start the car). To "force shut off" a running car in gear, you have to hold the button down for several seconds (think rebooting a PC by holding the power button down for several seconds).

Many of these cars have a power button -- if the "key" is inside the car, the button is activated. When the car is on, and in park, it will turn off with a simple press of the button, but when in motion that does not work.

(I've been told that holding the power button for several seconds, just like one would a crashed computer, will force a shutdown; can't verify that though.)

Why am I not surprised?

This can happen to anyone. I accidentally shifted into reverse instead of drive and backed into the corner of my parent's garage. And when I saw I was backing up (slowly) I slammed on the gas. I managed to hit the brake fast enough to avoid damaging my SUV but not the garage.

I wonder if the same sensors that provide the log data also control the engine. In that case, it would be impossible to distinguish a sensor glitch from user error by purely relying on in-system logging.

This sort of thing happens all the time when debugging production servers. The same system usually provides the control signal and the diagnostic data. So what initially looks sane, if you keep investigate it, can lead you to a real bug.

I've been pretty skeptical about the whole Toyota stuck accelerator brouhaha myself but this development does not necessarily rule out a design flaw.

Really? I mean, we can agree that if there is a glitch that makes the ECU think the throttle is WFO, the log will say WFO.

The important thing is that the log also says the brakes were completely inactive.

Also, consider that the brakes will operate no matter what the ECU thinks, and in at least one case the brake pads themselves were examined, and experts concluded they had not recently been applied at high speeds under full force. The findings support eachother.

I recall at least a few reports, I think one was on a recorded 911 call and another observed by a state trooper following, that brakes were applied and after the car was ultimately stopped there was evidence (burned brake pads, brake rotors discolored by heat, etc.) that the brakes were in fact used.

It may be that there were a few genuine throttle malfunctions which, once reported, brought all the "accidentally stepped on the gas pedal" accidents out of the woodwork.

If you are referring to the Sikes case near San Diego, that was likely a hoax perpetuated by a bankrupt insurance scammer, an expert driver who supposedly didn't want to put it in neutral and was observed speeding up and slowing down.

The car rental agencies stacking double floor mats is a real issue though, regardless of car model. I had a Saturn where a secondary mat slid under the pedal and got trapped. I never understood the purpose of floor mats anyway. I just take them out.

I have to agree, the fact that this is a WSJ article makes me curious about the possibility that this is a Toyota-paid-for damage control article. Especially due to the FRBNY/WSJ editing scandal exposed by ZeroHedge last week. I expect this is a PR attempt by Toyota to discredit the lawsuits in the eyes of the general public and counter their dropping sales figures.

Unless this diagnostic system is completely separate from the drive-by-wire system, this isn't pertinent information.

If you think the WSJ would try to cover up something for Toyota you're an idiot. This isn't some second-class blog we're talking about - it's WSJ.

I'm new to hackernews and I thought maybe you people were as respectful as your mission statement suggests. This is Ad-hominem.

It's not ad-hominem, because he didn't say you were wrong because you're an idiot; he said you're an idiot because you're wrong. ;-)

Conspiracy theories aren't very popular here, unless they involve those pesky climate scientists.

If you're here on HN to learn new things, you should read this article from ZeroHedge, about the WSJ and the way it panders to power and money.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/new-york-feds-editorial-inf...

There was a piece on this in the Washington Examiner 4 months ago, here: http://bit.ly/dmG12o. It basically noted that almost all of the fatal accidents involved elderly drivers, who, presumably, would be more likely to get confused about which pedal they were pushing:

"In the 24 cases where driver age was reported or readily inferred, the drivers included those of the ages 60, 61, 63, 66, 68, 71, 72, 72, 77, 79, 83, 85, 89—and I’m leaving out the son whose age wasn’t identified, but whose 94-year-old father died as a passenger."

"These “electronic defects” apparently discriminate against the elderly, just as the sudden acceleration of Audis and GM autos did before them. (If computers are going to discriminate against anyone, they should be picking on the young, who are more likely to take up arms against the rise of the machines and future Terminators)."

I think the fact that over half of the quotes in this articles is from lawyers tells the real story here. Lawyers see a recall, a rich multinational, and some dumb people who will swear that they didn't hit the accelerator instead of the brake.

The NHTSA is a thorough organisation - this isn't some sham front for Toyota.

I just wish someone would publish statistics on make/model for unintended acceleration accidents. I bet the Toyota case is not statistically significantly higher than all other makes and models. But give people something other than their own stupidity to blame and they will grasp it with 5 hands.

My initial thought when hearing about all of this was exactly that: they hit the accelerator instead of the brakes. It took me a while to realise why they weren't standing on the clutch: most cars in the US have automatic gearboxes.

I'm guessing this sort of thing basically doesn't happen when you have a clutch, which, if you're used to driving cars with a manual transmission, you'll instinctively jump onto when braking. If you hit the gas instead of the brakes, you won't stop very fast, but at least you won't accelerate.

"An attorney who represents four drivers who sued Toyota in state courts over sudden acceleration said the NHTSA finding doesn't mean much for his litigation."

Gotta love how a scientific study by an impartial 3rd party never gets in the way of the legal balance of probabilities and a jury of average Americans.

So you were expecting the attorney to say "oh we are screwed now."

> Ms. Marseille said in an interview Tuesday that she was entering a parking space near a library when she heard the engine roar. "I looked down and my foot was still on the brake, so I did not have my foot on the gas pedal," she said.

Ms. Marseille, if you are so sure that is what happened, I invite you to sit in my friend's '09 Camry, and from a stop, stand on the brakes and then simultaneously floor the engine. Let's see if you go anywhere.

There is a reason cars can brake many times faster than they accelerate. The only way to start moving in the above situation involves really big engines, manual transmissions, and careful 2-foot, 3-pedal technique.

> "It makes me very angry when someone tells me, 'She probably hit the gas pedal instead,' because I think it's a sexist comment, an ageist comment," she said.

If someone has proof, it is neither sexist nor ageist. (I'm calling the surveillance video evidence that the brake lights did not go on proof. Brake lights basically can't malfunction, short of blown fuses or bulbs, yet they turned on after the impact)

Also, she mentions people saying "She probably hit the gas pedal instead", not "She probably hit the gas pedal instead because she is in a certain age range and female". People shouldn't confuse a statement about a person with a statement about a group, data supported or not.

I agree with this. However, I will make a devil's advocate comment re: braking vs. acceleration. People almost never fully emergency brake, even in actual emergencies. More often than not people feather the brake and then press it harder if they found that the car was not braking as it should, continuing until they are pressing the brake harder than they would normally ever press it but not necessarily as hard as they possibly could. In such a scenario, a very realistic scenario, it might be possible that the car would still accelerate at full throttle.

Not that I'm saying that's what happened, it appears not, but it's not terribly outside the realm of possibility.

Deleted comment

Same thing happened to me in a fast-food drive thru. I was behind an elderly woman who was driving a Buick (no, really --- you see how these stereotypes gain traction). First, she overshot the pickup window. She reversed, but ended up too far away to reach the food being handed out. So she decided to get out of the car, but left it in reverse. As she got out of the car and her foot came off the brake, the car started to roll backwards (automatic transmission). She quickly sat back down and --- I knew what was going to happen but I could not go anywhere --- she stepped on the accelerator. Luckily she was only a few feet in front of me by then and the damage was confined to the bumpers.

The idea of growing old and having my facilities degrade like that truly scares me.

The NHTSA spokeswoman said the agency wouldn't comment on its Toyota probe until a broader study is completed in conjunction with NASA, which is expected to take months.

NASA? really?

They then went on to mention 'the National Academy of Sciences', so I'll assume it's a misprint.

Yes NASA, really.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/30/autos/NHTSA_NASA_Toyota/inde...

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which has been criticized for lacking sufficient technological expertise, has recruited nine experts from NASA to help the agency understand how issues such as electromagnetic interference may have contributed to Toyota's acceleration issues.

Separately, the National Academy of Sciences will conduct a study of unintended acceleration and electronic vehicle controls across the entire automotive industry.

cameras are cheap. take a low resolution photo every 5 seconds when the gas is fully depressed, store the most recent 20 and we'll know for sure whats going on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com