Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    GM Puts Two Engineers On Paid Leave, Recalls Vehicles Involved Ignition Switch Crisis For Another One

      The Bad News Continues For GM


    The bad news for General Motors continues to flow in.

    The Detroit News reported yesterday morning that GM has put two of its engineers, Gary Altman and Ray DeGiorgio on paid leave as part of as part of a continuing internal investigation into the ignition switch recall. The two engineers were singled out during the congressional hearings as members of congress were very dubious as to why the company hadn't fired anyone at the moment.

    In a statement released today, GM CEO Mary Barra said the decision came after an update from Anton Valukas, the former U.S. attorney who is currently overseeing an independent investigation over the recall.

    “This is an interim step as we seek the truth about what happened. It was a difficult decision, but I believe it is best for GM,” said Barra.

    Altman and DeGiorgio played key parts in some of the recalled vehicles. Altman was the program engineering manager on the Chevrolet Cobalt through May 2005, while DeGiorgio was project engineer responsible for the ignition switch on the Cobalt and Ion. DeGiorgio's name first came up when Senator Claire McCaskill D-MO revealed a document with his name authorizing the part change to the ignition. This contradicts testimony given by him last year where he stated he didn't know about the change.

    Later in the day, GM announced an expansion of the ignition switch recall to include the replacement of the ignition cylinder and if necessary, cut new keys. The automaker says it is aware of several hundred complaints of keys coming out of the ignition while the vehicle is running.

    Source: The Detroit News, General Motors

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected]or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    Press Release is on Page 2


    GM to Replace Lock Cylinder During Ignition Switch Recall

    • Second repair added to vehicles recalled earlier

    DETROIT – General Motors informed the NHTSA today that it is adding ignition lock cylinders to its safety recall of 2.2 million older model cars in the United States. The cylinders can allow removal of the ignition key while the engine is running, leading to a possible rollaway, crash and occupant or pedestrian injuries.

    As always, owners of manual transmission vehicles should be sure the ignition is in the “Off” position and set to reverse gear with the parking brake set before removing the key. Owners of vehicles with automatic transmission should be sure the vehicle is in “Park” before removing the key.

    GM is aware of several hundred complaints of keys coming out of ignitions. Searches of GM and government databases found one rollaway in a parking lot that resulted in a crash and one injury claim. The same searches turned up no fatalities.

    GM has decided to replace the ignition lock cylinders and cut and, if necessary, reprogram new keys.

    The cars covered are model years:

    • 2003-2007 Saturn Ion
    • 2005-2010 Chevrolet Cobalt
    • 2006-2010 Pontiac Solstice
    • 2007-2010 Pontiac G5
    • 2007-2010 Saturn Sky
    • 2006-2011 Chevrolet HHR

    All of these cars were recalled in recent weeks for ignition switches that may fail to meet GM’s torque specification. The ignition switch may unintentionally move from the “run” position to the “accessory” or “off” position with a corresponding reduction or loss of power. This risk may be increased if the key ring is carrying added weight or if the vehicle goes off the road or experiences some other jarring event. The timing of the key movement out of the “run” position, relative to the activation of the sensing algorithm of the crash event, may result in the airbags not deploying, increasing the potential for occupant injury in certain kinds of crashes.

    Until recall repairs are made, it is very important that customers remove all items from their key rings, leaving only the vehicle key. If there is a key fob, it also should be removed from the key ring.

    GM also announced Thursday that the company expects to take a charge of approximately $1.3 billion in the first quarter, primarily for the cost of recall-related repairs announced in the 2014 calendar year to date and related courtesy transportation. This amount includes the $750 million charge previously announced on March 31.

    On a preliminary basis, despite the $1.3 billion recall charge, GM currently expects to report solid core operating performance in the first quarter financial results.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Justice served if the people who actually approved the short cut are still at the new GM that they be let go. Still think the Executives should be pulled back in from that time and grilled along with forcing them to pay back their ill gotten gains.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    whatever happened to the report that the engineering specification was correct but that Delphi was not building to the proper spec?

    I didn't see that report.. Interesting though.

    Here was one of the stories that USA Today covered about this. Delphi told investigators that the switches were not up to spec.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/03/30/gm-ignition-switches-recall-congressional-report/7085919/

    Here is another story covering it in the Detroit Free Press

    http://www.freep.com/article/20140330/BUSINESS0101/303300138/GM-ignition-recall

    Pretty clear Delphi did not build the right part to begin with, but then OLD GM MGMT accepted it anyway. Not sure why but they did.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Canada's waterbomber fleet These guys Manitoba's fleet is 40 years old While Quebec's youngest fleet is also at 40 years old while its oldest is 53 years old.     Spain, Greece and France also have the same age range as Quebec's.  The older version which is the CL-215,  is 50 years plus in service for all that use it. They are still flying.  The next gen CL 415 is 30-40 years in service for all fleet users.  Canadair/Bombardier has sold the license to Viking and they are currently working on updating the airplane. It is called the CL 515.   European users are desperately wanting to replace their fleets.  Deliveries of the new CL 515 is said to be in early 2026.  With the water bombers, its not just cycles that put pressure on the sheet metal for metal fatigue. Its the weight of the water itself taking off from a lake. But mostly, when the water gets released.  HUGE amounts of pressure stresses  the structure when the water is released and all that weight that is released instantly and is no more.  
    • I also like black cats. I flew on a 747-400 within the last year or two.  I think it was about 25 years old.  It's an incredible machine.  I'm always a happy camper (without a Subaru) when I'm aboard one. 
    • @A Horse With No Name @oldshurst442 You guys are correct, cycle of take off and landing more than age. I should have expanded myself as my brother inlaw is a manager at Boeing with many patents for his specialty which is the airplane engines on the 737, 757, 777, 787 and the king 747. He has stated that the force of the engines cause fatigue in ALL aircrafts that hit 10 years and depending on the flying they have done, passenger versus freight, while a plane can go 20 or 30 years, many should have a very close inspection at 10 years for corrosion, metal fatigue, etc. Could be one reason some airline companies retire their aircraft after 10 years rather than continue to fly them.  Many things make up the age of an aircraft and years is only 1 little part of it, Force makes up a much bigger part.  Thank you for pointing out what I failed to expand on in my original post.
    • As one who deals with AI daily, building training, coding for data lakes to help others understand their data and what it can do for them, I have come to one reason for turning off copilot, the attempt that it makes over and over in correcting my writing and word use when it does not understand technical terms, legal terms, medical terms and then changes the whole meaning of a sentence due to the changes if I do not catch it. AI bots are great for helping find info on processes and configuration of a product such as our Dell PowerScale OneFS filer or our ObjectScale Object storage devices so that admins can quickly get the instructions on how to configure features. Otherwise, the rest of AI trying to tell me how I should do something makes it annoying and worse yet is the incredible amount of memory / CPU cycles it takes that I would rather use on other things that I do with my computer. Personally, I wish AI bots would not use any resources until I click on it and want it to work, once I close it, it should totally turn off rather than idle in the background listening to you.
    • Yes and ummmmm...no.  Yes.   Metal fatigue is a very real thing in aviation.  Its more about how many times the sheet metal has expanded and contracted  under stress rather than the age of the airplane itself.  10 years is somewhat too young for an airplane to be retired as airplanes are engineered fly double and even triple that age.  Unless of course the airplane in question has taken off, flown and landed enough times that would equal its maximum lifespan in 10 years.   This latest accident, UPS had a 34 year old McDonnel-Douglas MD-11 flying around.  Now...at 34 years of age, this airplane should been of concern... yes.   Like I said, airplanes' lifespans reach 30 years.  Sometimes more than that if maintenance is done properly and rigorously.   Using google and Wikipedia, if fact, 2 months prior, the airplane in question HAD been grounded for 6 weeks because cracks were found in the fuel tanks. Corrosion was also found in the structural beams in its fuselage. Repairs were made.  However, with airplanes, age is not a criteria for maintenance. But hours of flight and "cycles".   A cycle is 1 take-off and 1 landing sequence.  The airplane had logged 21000 and change cycles and the maintenance threshold for what had ultimately failed in the airplane was not due until 28 000 and 29 000 cycles.  Now...at 34 years old, maybe more vigilance was needed... This is how the airplane safety industry works. It takes an accident to amend and/or instate new safety regulations.  Maybe with this accident, NTSB will implement an age criteria too alongside flight hours and cycles.  At age 30 and a more rigorous inspection is to happen and not rely solely on cycles and flight hours.    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPS_Airlines_Flight_2976 The aircraft, N259UP, was a 34-year-old McDonnell Douglas MD-11F with manufacturer serial number 48417. The aircraft was first delivered to Thai Airways International in 1991 with the registration HS-TME,[7] after which it was converted to a cargo aircraft and delivered to UPS Airlines in 2006. It had flown 21,043 cycles and for about 92,992 hours,[8] and was equipped with three General Electric CF6-80C2D1F engines.[9][10][11] The last visual inspections of the left pylon aft mount were performed in October 2021. More rigorous "Special Detailed Inspections" for the mount lugs and wing clevis were not yet due, as the aircraft's 21,043 accumulated cycles were well below the 28,000 and 29,200 cycle thresholds required for those checks. Two months before the crash, it had been grounded for six weeks to repair a cracked fuel tank, and corrosion was later found along two structural beams in the fuselage. The aircraft re-entered service a few weeks before the crash.[12]    
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search