• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    NHTSA Admits They Missed Clues During GM Ignition Switch Defect


    • New Reports Show NHTSA Has Some Blame In the Ignition Switch Mess

    While General Motors has gotten most of the blame in the ignition switch fiasco, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) isn't getting away scot free. The New York Times reports that the Department of Transportation released two internal documents revealing a series of failings by NHTSA.

     

    One of those failings was the administration not paying sufficient attention to a Wisconsin state trooper’s report in 2007 which suggested that the ignition switch played a key role in a fatal accident. The reports go on to say that NHTSA didn't use their full power to hold GM accountable in terms of this problem.

     

    “There needs to be a complete overhaul of this failing agency. The results of this report are long overdue,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).

     

    NHTSA has begun to make a number of changes in light of these reports. They include,

    • Put manufacturers “on notice” about potential defects as soon they identified any troubling cases.
    • Institute a 'Risk Control' program that better aligns different sections of NHTSA and encourage more sharing
    • Be monitored by a group of outside experts including former officials of the National Transportation Safety Board and NASA


    “The G.M. experience changed the culture here. What that means is challenge the information you’re getting, and challenge the assumptions you are pursuing,” said NHTSA administrator Mark R. Rosekind.

     

    Still some people believe NHTSA needs to go farther.

     

    “It still soft-pedals why they have gone from one defect crisis to another,” said Sean E. Kane of the consulting firm Safety Research and Strategies. “What is missing is any mention of the importance of transparency.”

     

    Source: The New York Times

    0


      Report Article
    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback


    We could just do with killing many federal agencies and stop the wasting of tax payer dollars. Next waste will be a new agency to regulate the agencies that are supposed to regulate the agencies that are supposed to protect Americans.

     

    So sad and pathetic.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It was a perfect storm of circumstances. GM was a mess internally, evidenced by the steady decline throughout the 2000s going into the bankruptcy, then you had the failure of the NHTSA to put together 1 + 1 = ?? when so many accidents involving failed airbag deployments had been occurring. And lastly, we as consumers and drivers forgot the importance of keeping our keychains light and teaching young drivers how to handle a stall.

     

    When you have a mega corporation in termoil, a safety organization that can't deduce whose ass a fart came from, and a dumbing down of consumers, it's a recipe for disaster.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I stay away from the whole issue of driver liability just because in the land of lawsuits I've pretty much given up on the average American associating liberty with personal responsibility. And I'm from Canuckistan.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If GM is found liable, shouldn't the Government be held so as well. N.H.T.S.A, after two Cobalt crashes, investigated the cause, each time raising the possibility of a defect. They met with GM but never opened a broader investigation into whether the car was defective. Never forcing GM to actually do a Recall. The FEDERAL GOV'T was made aware of the situation and DID NOTHING. If the company gets sued, so should the Gov't. Again since GM was found liable, the Government should be held so as well. N.H.T.S.A, after two Cobalt crashes, investigated the cause, each time raising the possibility of a defect. They met with GM but never opened a broader investigation into it. This is the purpose of the NHTSA. Not only that... the car czars were supposedly going over GM, with a fine tooth comb, hence responsibility would and should still remain with the Government that owned a controlling stake in the company for 5 years

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I stay away from the whole issue of driver liability just because in the land of lawsuits I've pretty much given up on the average American associating liberty with personal responsibility. And I'm from Canuckistan.

    It's sad, but true..

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If GM is found liable, shouldn't the Government be held so as well. N.H.T.S.A, after two Cobalt crashes, investigated the cause, each time raising the possibility of a defect. They met with GM but never opened a broader investigation into whether the car was defective. Never forcing GM to actually do a Recall. The FEDERAL GOV'T was made aware of the situation and DID NOTHING. If the company gets sued, so should the Gov't. Again since GM was found liable, the Government should be held so as well. N.H.T.S.A, after two Cobalt crashes, investigated the cause, each time raising the possibility of a defect. They met with GM but never opened a broader investigation into it. This is the purpose of the NHTSA. Not only that... the car czars were supposedly going over GM, with a fine tooth comb, hence responsibility would and should still remain with the Government that owned a controlling stake in the company for 5 years

    How do we sue..ourselves..? pay higher taxes? lol

     

    All kidding aside,  because it is a gov't program I would think you could only hold the individuals responsible right(because I'm not sure how the gov't goes after the gov't.. I'm sure there are legal ways I just do not know the sequence of events) ? but at that point the company is supposed to have their backs unless it is proved to be intentional neglegence.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I actually had the ignition switch thing happen to me in my 06 Cobalt.

     

    The GPS lost its suction and fell off the window, hitting the key on the way down and shutting off the car.  At highway speeds.

     

    Fortunately I figured out that I could restart the car if I shifted into neutral before anything bad happened.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I actually had the ignition switch thing happen to me in my 06 Cobalt.

     

    The GPS lost its suction and fell off the window, hitting the key on the way down and shutting off the car.  At highway speeds.

     

    Fortunately I figured out that I could restart the car if I shifted into neutral before anything bad happened.

     

     

    Still... cause and effect.. the GPS, or rather the insanity of us still using "suction cups" in 2015, IMO, would be more at fault than anything else if U had of crashed. 

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As far as I'm concerned, GM is on trial because the weak ignition switch caused a situation in which the airbags fail to deploy to prevent injury. It bothers me endlessly to hear people (and the media) quoting the story like the Cobalt's were killing people simply by turning off. If you're going fast enough to have a devastating crash, the steering will barely feel different without power assist, and the brakes retain power boost for at least one full press.

     

    Yes, it's a significant problem. You slide off the road (whether it's ice or avoiding an accident or anything) into a tree, or hit an obstacle that causes you to lose control, and the jarring event shuts off the car and therefore the airbags, not a defect to be taken lightly. However, how much different would the narrative be if it was reported as "Ignition switch fails to deploy airbags in 110 fatal accidents" versus "Ignition switch causes 110 fatalities." IMO the second line doesn't even make any damn sense, it's like click bait. An ignition switch can't cause death.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The other issue was that apparently airbags have always had a percentage that do not deploy in an accident and the percentage of non-deployments in these cars was not outside of the statistical norm, thus no statistical anomaly to detect.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

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

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    Loading...



  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Every Chevrolet Bolt that will be rolling off the assembly line will lose General Motors close to $9,000 once they are sold. This seems like madness, but according to a report from Bloomberg, there is some method to it. 
      Thanks to new regulations done by California Air Resources Board, automakers have to sell a certain amount of zero-emission vehicles if they want to sell other vehicles - primarily crossovers, SUVs, and trucks - in the state. These new regulations say by 2025, zero-emission vehicles need to make up 15.4 percent of the market. Since then, nine other states including New York have adopted these regulations. All told, these ten states make up 30 percent of the total U.S. auto market.
      Take for example Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. CEO Sergio Marchionne revealed a couple years back they take a hit of $14,000 on every Fiat 500e sold. But if they wanted to sell Ram pickups and Jeep SUVs in California, they need to take the hit.
      How does Bloomberg get the $9,000 figure? That's due to a source at General Motors who revealed the estimate is based on the Bolt's $37,500 base price. A GM spokesman declined to comment.
      If General Motors is able to sell enough Bolts, they'll be able to gather enough credits to not only sell other vehicles which will make up for the Bolt's loss, but also be able to sell extra credits to other automakers. Tesla has taken advantage of this to great effect. In the third quarter, Tesla made $139 million from selling credits.  
      Source: Bloomberg
       
       
       

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Every Chevrolet Bolt that will be rolling off the assembly line will lose General Motors close to $9,000 once they are sold. This seems like madness, but according to a report from Bloomberg, there is some method to it. 
      Thanks to new regulations done by California Air Resources Board, automakers have to sell a certain amount of zero-emission vehicles if they want to sell other vehicles - primarily crossovers, SUVs, and trucks - in the state. These new regulations say by 2025, zero-emission vehicles need to make up 15.4 percent of the market. Since then, nine other states including New York have adopted these regulations. All told, these ten states make up 30 percent of the total U.S. auto market.
      Take for example Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. CEO Sergio Marchionne revealed a couple years back they take a hit of $14,000 on every Fiat 500e sold. But if they wanted to sell Ram pickups and Jeep SUVs in California, they need to take the hit.
      How does Bloomberg get the $9,000 figure? That's due to a source at General Motors who revealed the estimate is based on the Bolt's $37,500 base price. A GM spokesman declined to comment.
      If General Motors is able to sell enough Bolts, they'll be able to gather enough credits to not only sell other vehicles which will make up for the Bolt's loss, but also be able to sell extra credits to other automakers. Tesla has taken advantage of this to great effect. In the third quarter, Tesla made $139 million from selling credits.  
      Source: Bloomberg
       
       
       
    • By dfelt
      G. David Felt
      Staff Writer Alternative Energy - www.CheersandGears.com
       
      Europe's 400 Ultra-Fast Charging Network by 2020

      Europe like America has the 3 basic charging standards in play in their fragile network of 2016. These is what we know as the 110, 220 and 440, level 1, 2 and 3 chargers. Yet Europe is not standing by waiting for Tesla or American Auto companies to drive EV auto's. Instead Europe has built the following consortium of Auto companies who have all chosen to contribute an equal amount to building the next generation charger network. VW, GM, BMW, Daimler, FORD, FCA, Hyundai, Volvo and Jaguar Land Rover have choosen to build 400 locations over the next 3 years that will sense and charge up to 350 kW in the period of a quick Coffee break. This is significantly faster and higher than the Tesla 120kW fast charging system. The goal by the European Government is to offer road trip worthy auto's with fast charging to bring less noise and cleaner air to European cities by 2020 and to make the bulk of inner city auto's EV's within 10 years of the fast charging system going live, so by 2030.

      Diamler is wanting to lead the European charge with their 300+ kilometer EV-CUV

      This would seem to show that Tesla has had the desired effect of making a market changing revolution of how companies and governments see the future of transportation.
      Source PM
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online