In June 2021, the NHTSA ordered identified manufacturers and operators to report crashes involving vehicles with SAE Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS). For vehicles with Level Two ADAS, the driver is required to be fully engaged in the driving task. This includes lane-keeping assistance, cruise-control systems, and other higher-tech systems.
Those included in the General Order were mandated to report a crash if:
- At any point within 30 seconds of the collision, level two ADAS was in operation.
- A vulnerable driver was involved in the collision.
- There was a fatality, a car tow, an airbag deployment, or someone had to be sent to a registered hospital for immediate treatment due to the collision.
Findings After NHTSA’s General Order
Recently, the NHTSA released its first findings on data collected from vehicles using SAE Level Two ADAS. The report covered information relating to statistics, telemetry, and reporting technologies. It also included commentary on the 12 reporting entities that submitted reports for 392 Level Two ADAS-equipped vehicle crashes.
NHTSA’s findings are crucial in understanding ADAS’s role in car crashes. It also helps understand the driver habits relating to the use of the system and possible flaws in such software programs. The findings may also contribute to future lawmaking and vehicle regulations.
The report brings attention to the need for regulators and manufacturers to understand how automated systems perform in the real world. The NHTSA has agreed to meet this demand by re-releasing new metrics monthly. The agency will also continue to collect data as Level two ADAS becomes more common.
Issues Surrounding the Development
There is no doubt that the new actions are contributing to the future of vehicle safety. However, looking deeper at the report brings up some issues that need to be addressed.
One of those issues is regarding telematics, the most frequently cited source for data collected by the SGO. According to the report, entities whose vehicles have telemetry capabilities can provide robust data to the NHTSA more quickly. While telematics provides important, real-time data, it skews the results because not all manufacturers use the system.
Another issue has to do with consumer reports and field reports. The NHTSA noted that there might be a time delay before the manufacturer is notified of the crash. As a result, the administration admitted that none of the data to date statistically represent crash outcomes.
There are also issues concerning the normalization of data. The number of vehicles a manufacturer has deployed is not used to normalize the data generated over the previous 12 months. The kilometers a vehicle has traveled is also not used to normalize the data.
Only manufacturers hold this information and do not report it to the NHTSA. This implies that the data cannot be used to compare one manufacturer’s safety against the other.
Will NHTSA’s Efforts Be Significant?
Because of the highlighted issues above, one cannot help but wonder if the actions of the NHTSA will be effective. However, it is vital to acknowledge that this is just the agency’s first report. Despite the questions raised, the findings are still impressive and pivotal for future findings.
NHTSA’s administrator, Stephen Cliff, commends the efforts of gathering real-time safety data. He admits that understanding the data will take time, but it is needed, regardless.
