[Auto Reporter]

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will decide whether to require two advanced safety features in new cars: systems that warn drivers when they are leaving a lane, and automatically brake ahead of an impending crash.

Safety experts say both systems show significant promise to sharply reduce the more than 40,000 yearly traffic fatalities and 2.5 million injuries in vehicle crashes.

In a report released Wednesday, NHTSA said it “will decide whether to require automatic crash-imminent braking … (and) automatic lane-keeping” in 2011. It also sought public comment on its plans.

“These are two very promising technologies, but whether or not you can justify through cost-benefit analysis, requiring them remains to be seen,” said Rae Tyson, a spokesman for NHTSA.

NHTSA already has developed a performance test for frontal-crash and lane-departure warning systems that it plans to make a part of its revamped New Car Assessment Program starting in the 2011 model year.

Forward-collision warning systems alert drivers, using radar, that they are quickly approaching a car or an object; in some cases, they automatically apply the brakes. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says the systems could help in the 2.3 million annual frontal crashes that result in 7,200 deaths — or more than one in every six road fatalities.

Institute President Adrian Lund said the agency hopes to be able to say by the end of the year whether insurance data support requiring the technologies.

Lane-departure warning systems alert drivers who may be dozing off or distracted that they are leaving their lane. In some cases, the vehicle automatically shifts the car back into the lane, unless the driver overrides it.

The insurance institute said lane-departure systems could impact 483,000 crashes per year, keeping many of those vehicles on the roads — like a virtual rumble strip. About 10,000 highway deaths occur annually when vehicles leave the roadway.

Both of those systems are on a number of luxury and higher-end vehicles. Because of the expense, however, automakers haven’t added the technologies to most vehicles.

NHTSA also is considering requiring new safety features on motorcycles, which accounted for a growing percentage of road deaths.

The agency plans to decide by next year whether to require anti-lock brakes on motorcycles, Tyson said.

An insurance institute study showed that the rate of fatal crashes was 28 percent lower for motorcycles equipped with optional anti-lock brakes than for those same motorcycles without them.

Motorcycle deaths have more than doubled since 1997, from 2,116 to 5,154 in 2007. The motorcycle fatality rate has also nearly doubled from 21 per million miles traveled in 1997 to 39 in 2007. Injuries also have doubled.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a trade group representing Detroit’s Big Three, Toyota Motor Corp., Daimler AG and six other automakers, said it was studying the report.

“We’re committed to ever safer vehicles and believe a priority plan is a part of how we make progress toward national goals,” alliance spokesman Wade Newton said.



More...

[Irresponsible Robot]

That's all well and good, but shouldn't we worry about mandating ABS and side-curtain airbags first?

And aren't most fatal crashes caused by poor road conditions anyway?

[furyman67]

You can add all the safety features you want-you still can not fix STUPID
Tom

[dakotaquadsport]

ESP (which includes ABS) is being mandated for the 2010 or 11 MY (along wtih tire pressure monitors). Side airbags I believe are also up next.

After seeing someone get killed after wrapping their 300C around a lightpole, I agree 100%....and that car had all the "safety' features available.

[Charles_Scott]

I am sorry, but I find non-abs to be more saving than abs, me and some friends did testing on a snowy road, my car, non abs, another intrepid with ABS, I stopped a LOT sooner than he did SEVERAL times, and each time, he would hit a cone that marked where a car would have been, and I would be 3-5 foot away from it...

But, side airbags, would be good. I just see the whole warning for when leaving a lane would be annoying, as a lot of people get in other lanes to turn and so on, I just see these cars being like the annoying cars from the 80's that complained if your lights was on when you turned it off...

[Irresponsible Robot]

I think it would be a nice feature to be able to deactivate ABS for driving in snow at low speeds, like you said. There are times when ABS is wonderful, and there are times when it isn't.

[Charles_Scott]

Well the downside is, in a real accident you would never have time to activate or de-activate it, same with the air bags you can disable with the drivers keys, if needed and its off, you would NEVER have the time to turn car off, pull key, enable, and start back up....

[Irresponsible Robot]

What if it was implemented ala traction control? For example, you would press a button/switch, telling the car to not use ABS if you are going under a certain speed? That could make it more idiot-resistant.

[Charles_Scott]

True, but then there would be lawsuits over the abs not working, and possibly failing.

[Irresponsible Robot]

Maybe, maybe not.

[dakotaquadsport]

Your testing, honestly proves nothing. Tires, condition of the braking system, and driver reaction times could all vary, pushing testing either way. It's also very well noted that ABS does not make a car stop in shorter distances, especially on gravel or unpacked snow and Chrysler knows this, hence why most new Jeeps will deactivate ABS when switched into 4L.

The main purpose of it is to maintain CONTROL of the car, not to provide shorter stopping distances. Which is a fact that the general public still fails to realize, because you have ESP, ABS and whatever else, doesn't mean you can outdrive mother nature or the laws of physics.

I believe it's why they have or are switching to seat sensors for the airbags, I can easily carry my dog, package or whatever in the front seat and it will turn the airbag off. No need to turn a dumb switch on and off.

[Charles_Scott]

Being capable of stopping sooner, is far better than having to swerve on a road and chance flipping at high speeds to miss something. Having to wait a longer distance to stop, means you aren't in full control of the braking system or car.

[NHogan]

I agree, maybe you know how to drive better and he doesnt.

[dakotaquadsport]

So slamming on the brakes, having all the wheels locked up headed straight towards the object your trying to avoid means you have full control of the car?

I would believe "full control" would mean being able to steer, and continue to stop safely, without spinning out or hitting something.


Dodge has a decent demonstation video with the Nitro, showing the pro's of ABS.

Dodge - 2009 Nitro - Safety - Accident Avoidance

Yes, there are negatives to ABS, such as longer stopping distances, in certain situations. These issues though, are known by the NHTSA and the manufacturers themselves, and proper driving training, and a little common sence in bad weather should make safer roads.

[Charles_Scott]

In the area I lived in, there is no avoiding someone, you either stop, or take them out and fall off a cliff down to the kentucky friver, a good 300 foot drop... Yea...