NHTSA Proposes Updates To Its Crash Test Ratings System
14
Sponsored Links
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has proposed what it calls “significant safety updates” to its well-known five-star safety ratings program as part of the current administration’s efforts to improve safety on U.S. roads.
The five-star safety rating program, also known as the New Car Assessment Program or NCAP, displays the results of a vehicle’s performance in various crash scenarios in a simple and objective manner to inform consumers of a vehicle’s safety performance. In light of the U.S. Department of Transportation publishing its National Roadway Safety Strategy last month, described as a roadmap “to address the national crisis in motor vehicle fatalities and serious injuries,” NHTSA has now released proposals to improve its established five-star safety rating system.
NHTSA is proposing the following updates to the system, as per its website:
- Recommending four new standard driver-assistance technologies: lane-keeping support, pedestrian automatic emergency braking, blind spot detection and blind spot intervention.
- Strengthening existing testing procedures and performance criteria for the driver-assistance technologies already included in NCAP.
- Establishing a 10-year roadmap for future NCAP updates.
- Requesting comment on ways to develop a meaningful ratings system for driver-assistance technologies.
- Considering the potential addition of emerging vehicle technologies related to driver distraction, alcohol detection, seat belt interlocks, intelligent speed assist, driver monitoring systems and rear seat child reminder assist.
- Discussing ways to provide a crash avoidance rating on the window sticker (Monroney label) on new and used vehicles.
The reference to adding new active intervention technologies to cars is particularly interesting, as we have not yet seen systems like seatbelt interlocking, alcohol detection or intelligent speed assist applied to current-day production vehicles. However, a revised safety rating system could encourage automakers to implement these tools, as their vehicles may receive a high safety rating if they include such systems.
NHTSA also released its 2020 annual traffic crash data report this week, which revealed a slight 6.8 percent uptick in the frequency of fatal car crashes for that year. The data also revealed that 45 percent of drivers in fatal crashes were engaged in one or multiple “risky behaviors,” such as speeding, alcohol impairment, or not wearing a seat belt.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg described the statistics from the 2020 crash data report as a “national crisis.”
“People should leave the house and know they’re going to get to their destination safely, and with the resources from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, plus the policies in the National Roadway Safety Strategy we launched last month, we will do everything we can to save lives on America’s roads,” Buttigieg said in a prepared statement.
The public has 60 days to comment on the proposed NHTSA safety rating updates. Interested parties can read the full rule change proposal at this link.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM-related NHTSA news and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
- Sweepstakes Of The Month: Win a 2023 Corvette Z06 Convertible. Details here.
Sponsored Links
The vehicles need to be tested by the ability to handle a crash.
All this other extra stuff often is over rated.
The fact is any car can crash and we need to accept this. The question is will it be in your favor that you will survive.
The best thing we can so in preventing crashes is getting people to improve their skills and attention. Good luck with that but electronics only can go so far.
We need to get back to basics like teaching people how to drive properly. Also we need to hold them accountable once trained.
This is all well and good BUT how about test on the Electric stuff. I bet if they did and one caught fire, they couldn’t put it out. Look what happened to the ship in the ocean that had a load of EV. It sank to the bottom of a watery grave.
I’m very worried about how many fire departments in the USA are not trained in how to put out EV fires and don’t have the equipment for it. Another thing that will have to change if EVs become more popular.
Doesn’t matter what you like it’s happening so deal with it.
Yeah you’re right thats just the way safety ratings seem to be going.
You got a problem with it run for office then and try to change it, if not just keep complaining on here.
Good keep on here crying then.
Really… your signature speaks for itself. Slick Willie holds the title for Epsteins private jet attendance manifest. Hell, Hillary is on the list. Suspect she wanted some too or watch. We also know Hillary was behind his death. As far as the number of trips for President Trump, he participated less than 3 times after Epstein revealed his intentions. Do the research yourself and don’t be lazy or watch CNN, Clinton News Network.
Or troll somewhere else…
Always interested in safety. Reduces insurance.
Everyone is talking safety but no one is willing to tackle the root cause. The majority of the problem is driver inattention along with poor driving skills.
Manufacturers just keep adding to the number of functions available in a vehicle that will add to driver distraction then we want more safety features to make up for it.
Number one what happened to drivers education in school? No one should be able to get a drivers license without a course in drivers education, period.
Secondly what about making it where cell phone service won’t work except for emergency calls when the vehicle is moving. No manufacturers aren’t going to do it because they’ll alienate customers. Government will have to do it and they don’t have the guts cause they are afraid they will lose votes.
OK so explain why you have to park the spark and other EV outside of the garage???
Lane-keeping assist is a bad feature and may result in fatalities. When driving on a narrow country road with no shoulder, I have had the experience of needing to move to the left to avoid a pedestrian walking along the right. The lane keeping assist then sensed I moved out of my lane and pulled the car back to the right- meaning I nearly hit the person.
If lane keeping assist is being recommended or mandated, it MUST also have pedestrian-detection for the side of the vehicle as part of the system.
Note this will NOT help if one moves to the left to avoid a pothole, debris or a large puddle.
Therefore lane-keeping assist should NOT be promoted, recommended or required.
Seat belt interlocks were tried briefly in the 1974 model year and the requirement was quickly rescinded when there was an almost universal uproar from the new car buying public. Manufacturer’s even came out with approved by-pass/disconnection repairs for this unwanted safety mandate.
Seat belt interlock of today would be much easier, just set the max speed to say 30MPH until the belt is clicked.
It’s invalid comparing a time when seat belt use rates were under 40%, versus now when seat belts rates are 90%+.