Black box' in car crash court case

[MAGPIE]

Interested in peoples opinions on this scenario...

I remember seeing a piece in a car mag about the potential for this to happen a while back, but have never actually seen it go this far here in NZ.

Is this common practice in Australia or other countries ?

Black box' in car crash court case
By MARTY SHARPE - The Dominion Post

Speed data stored in the "black box" of a car's airbag has been cited in a court case, one of the first times such data has been used in a New Zealand court.

However, the defence says police seized the information illegally.

The box was removed from a car involved in a crash in Hawke's Bay last year, and the prosecution has cited the data as evidence the driverwas going faster than he claimed.

Alan Hohaia, 50, of Levin, appeared in Hastings District Court yesterday to defend a charge of dangerous driving causing injury. He faces a jail term of up to five years or a fine of up to $20,000.

Hohaia was driving his high-performance V8 HSV Holden Clubsport from Porangahau, 45 kilometres south of Waipukurau, toward the nearby beach, on January 25.

While rounding a corner he lost control of his car, which crossed the centre line and collided with a Mercedes driven by Peter Gilbert-Kerr, 55.

It took fire crew more than an hour to cut Mr Gilbert-Kerr free. He fractured his arms, legs, pelvis and left hip, and lost the top of his scalp. He spent eight months in hospital, and has no mobility in one hand.

Hohaia suffered minor injuries. Hohaia told the court he was travelling no faster than 110kmh and braked to between 55kmh and 65kmh around the corner.

A crash investigator told the court the corner could be safely negotiated at 58kmh to 68kmh.

To prove the speed Hohaia was travelling, police sent the Holden's airbag data unit to William Haight, director of the San Diego Collision Safety Institute. Mr Haight told the court via video conference yesterday that 2.5 seconds before the crash Hohaia's Holden was travelling at 150kmh and 0.5 seconds before the crash it was travelling at 98kmh.

Mr Haight said the same Bosch data box was used in various makes and models of car. The HSV Holden Clubsport was the same vehicle as a Pontiac GTO and he had been able to read the data on a machine by reading it as if it was from a Pontiac.

But Hohaia's lawyer, Catherine Clarkson, said the data box had been seized illegally. She said Hohaia owned the car when police removed the data box, and the information in it belonged to Hohaia.

Ms Clarkson also questioned the accuracy of Mr Haight's information as it was based on a different make and model car.

Prosecutor Andy Horne said the data box was taken from the car under a search warrant at a time when police believed the car belonged to an insurance company.

Judge Ann Gaskell was due to give an indication of her decision this morning.

[macca13]

If the accident causes death or disability yes they should.

[Boosh Brus]

Originally Posted by macca13

If the accident causes death or disability yes they should.

I agree 100%

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by macca13

If the accident causes death or disability yes they should.

Yes... and only under those circumstances.

[GTP-814]

Originally Posted by macca13

If the accident causes death or disability yes they should.

without a doubt

[flappist]

And if the black box is completely wrong what defense do you have?

Has anyone here had one of the computers in their car go silly and do stupid things?

I have had idle go up to 2700 rpm, doors lock and unlock randomly, speedo just stop and then start again just to name a few.

We have had a couple of threads on how inaccurate speedos are and this "black box" data comes from accelerometers in the same way that "G-Techs" measure 0-400m (and we all know how accurate and reliable those are).

[RG]

Originally Posted by flappist

And if the black box is completely wrong what defense do you have?

Has anyone here had one of the computers in their car go silly and do stupid things?

I have had idle go up to 2700 rpm, doors lock and unlock randomly, speedo just stop and then start again just to name a few.

We have had a couple of threads on how inaccurate speedos are and this "black box" data comes from accelerometers in the same way that "G-Techs" measure 0-400m (and we all know how accurate and reliable those are).

Exactly, before anyone says anything about planes having black boxes etc have a think about maintenance on vehicles compared to aircraft.

Too many variables and too long between maintenance will cause too many issues for these to be reliable.

[MexicanBatman]

Originally Posted by flappist

And if the black box is completely wrong what defense do you have?

Has anyone here had one of the computers in their car go silly and do stupid things?

I have had idle go up to 2700 rpm, doors lock and unlock randomly, speedo just stop and then start again just to name a few.

We have had a couple of threads on how inaccurate speedos are and this "black box" data comes from accelerometers in the same way that "G-Techs" measure 0-400m (and we all know how accurate and reliable those are).

Please tell me how accurate they are I made several passes at heathcote and even used my iPhone on one of them and bugger me it was 2km/h off the trap speed ond 0.1 off the et. That's using a telephone not a dedicated tool

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by flappist

And if the black box is completely wrong what defense do you have?

Has anyone here had one of the computers in their car go silly and do stupid things?

I have had idle go up to 2700 rpm, doors lock and unlock randomly, speedo just stop and then start again just to name a few.

We have had a couple of threads on how inaccurate speedos are and this "black box" data comes from accelerometers in the same way that "G-Techs" measure 0-400m (and we all know how accurate and reliable those are).

One could ask: How many times has an airbag deployed because the readings were wrong? Hmmmmm

Airbags are only designed to deploy above a certain speed (I think its 40kmh), however if the decelleration is excessive then it will (should) deploy.
i.e: when you are sitting still and are hit head on by a car going faster then 40kmh

Speedos are as accurate as the ADR allows..... so what is the difference between 110kmh or 100kmh if there is a 10% error?
If you as the owner of your car know your speedo is out by 10% then that is your fault for not getting it resolved.

Typically cars involved in serious accidents are towed to the Police compound for their crash investigators to inspect the vehicle. This means they seize the vehicle and anything inside. It is released back to the owner/ insurance company after their investigation is complete.

Id like to see how far you get if you refuse to have your vehicle checked by them in an investigation.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

One could ask: How many times has an airbag deployed because the readings were wrong? Hmmmmm

Airbags are only designed to deploy above a certain speed (I think its 40kmh), however if the decelleration is excessive then it will (should) deploy.
i.e: when you are sitting still and are hit head on by a car going faster then 40kmh

Speedos are as accurate as the ADR allows..... so what is the difference between 110kmh or 100kmh if there is a 10% error?
If you as the owner of your car know your speedo is out by 10% then that is your fault for not getting it resolved.

Typically cars involved in serious accidents are towed to the Police compound for their crash investigators to inspect the vehicle. This means they seize the vehicle and anything inside. It is released back to the owner/ insurance company after their investigation is complete.

Id like to see how far you get if you refuse to have your vehicle checked by them in an investigation.

How many times has an airbag deployed (or not deployed) because of computer oops?

Many more times than a GPS receiver has transmitted to a satellite.

The airbag systems are designed to check that there is actually an accident happening and you are OVER a certain speed. 41 is over 40, 410 is also over 40 as is any random number between 41 and 160 so if the system can't tell the difference between 60 and 160 it does not matter as it is all over 40 and that is all it needs to know.

The problem is not that they can or do look at the data, it is the presumption that this data accurate and valid.

How would you feel if you were booked for speeding based on a reading from a "radar gun" bought from Toyworld for $49.95?

[jpd80]

That's why I favor point to point radar speed detection, it weeds out those
that speed everywhere and only slow down for the known single point radar traps....

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by jpd80

That's why I favor point to point radar speed detection, it weeds out those
that speed everywhere and only slow down for the known single point radar traps....

Where they're placed, the fixed cameras are better IMO (if it's a choice between the two). We're talking about long highways where sitting near or on the speed limit, focusing on making sure your average speed over a determined distance is less than the posted limit is a lot more dangerous (and mind-numbing) than slowing down for 1 camera.

Recently did a trip out to Bathurst and I'm glad there was roadworks between the two average speed cameras which meant that there was no way you could break the average posted limit. I could travel at a comfortable speed at around 100kph instead of applying brakes on a downhill section of a two lane highway so I don't exceed the average speed.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by jpd80

That's why I favor point to point radar speed detection, it weeds out those
that speed everywhere and only slow down for the known single point radar traps....

Yes because if you want to drive drunk, unlicensed and erratically in an unroadworthy vehicle all you have to do is stay under a number that some public servant put on a sign and everything will be wonderful.......

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by jpd80

That's why I favor point to point radar speed detection, it weeds out those
that speed everywhere and only slow down for the known single point radar traps....

How do average speed cameras work? Take a photo of your car then take it again at the second point and match the number plate?

I believe trucks SAFE T CAMS read a little electronic tag on the trucks window and match up to find it's average speed, but how do cars ones work?

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by flappist

How many times has an airbag deployed (or not deployed) because of computer oops? Many more times than a GPS receiver has transmitted to a satellite. The airbag systems are designed to check that there is actually an accident happening and you are OVER a certain speed. 41 is over 40, 410 is also over 40 as is any random number between 41 and 160 so if the system can't tell the difference between 60 and 160 it does not matter as it is all over 40 and that is all it needs to know. The problem is not that they can or do look at the data, it is the presumption that this data accurate and valid. How would you feel if you were booked for speeding based on a reading from a "radar gun" bought from Toyworld for $49.95?

The vehicle data logging is a lot more accurate than just identifying the vehicle was involved in an accident over 40 kmh. Many cars now have multi stage airbags that sense the severity of the accident, calculate force and speed of deceleration and adjust the speed of airbag deployment and speed of seat belt pretensioners. This type of system requires a lot more data than a simple " -40 kmh = off, + 40 kmh = on".

Your vehicle is fitted with an event data recorder, which is capable of collecting and storing data during a crash or near crash event. The recorded information may assist in the investigation of such an event. To access this information, special equipment must be directly connected to the recording modules. Ford does not access event data recorder information without obtaining consent, unless pursuant to a court order or where required by law enforcement, other government authorities or other third parties acting with lawful authority. Other parties may seek to access the information independently of Ford.

This is a direct quote of the FPV Owners Manual, BF Mk1 F6 Typhoon, pg 47.
Now, considering all this data recorded is from the safety systems fitted to the car, it will involve vehicle speed sensors, ABS sensors, throttle position sensors, yaw angle sensors, brake sensors, airbag sensors and steering input sensors etc. Many of these sensors are involved in the everyday operation of systems on the car such as EBD, DSC, ABS and traction control as well as the ECU for the function of the engine and transmission.
Due to the link of these sensors to the airbag, DSC and traction control, each of these sensors are run through a diagnostic test each and every time the car is started. Thus a fault in these systems would be communicated to the driver through a warning light and a fault logged on the ECU which would show clearly by a simple scan of the ECU. I think you will find the safety mechanisms put into place on these systems would be very stringent and reliable as any fault found in the system may in extreme cases be found to have contributed in a severe accident causing injury or death, leaving the manufacturer open to legal liability. These system controls and recordings are there to protect the manufacturer from legal action and allow them to prove that all their safety systems were working or if they were not that the driver was aware they were not functioning.
As to the question of accuracy of these readings, let’s think about this.

A crash investigator told the court the corner could be safely negotiated at 58kmh to 68kmh.

So we can assume that either the speed limit of the crash site was within this speed range or there was cautionary signage advising of this decreased safe speed to negotiate the corner.

Hohaia suffered minor injuries. Hohaia told the court he was travelling no faster than 110kmh and braked to between 55kmh and 65kmh around the corner.

If he was doing this speed, why did he lose control at a speed that the crash investigator stated the corner could be safely negotiated? Personally just this statement causes me to smell a rat.

To prove the speed Hohaia was travelling, police sent the Holden's airbag data unit to William Haight, director of the San Diego Collision Safety Institute. Mr Haight told the court via video conference yesterday that 2.5 seconds before the crash Hohaia's Holden was travelling at 150kmh and 0.5 seconds before the crash it was travelling at 98kmh

So the information recorded on the data recorder clearly shows the driver attempted to negotiate the corner far outside the safe speed for the road conditions. Is the data likely to be inaccurate enough to negate this information? I would say no as the difference between the safe speed and the recorded speed is 30 km/h. I find it hard to believe that in a reasonably new car the data could be that inaccurate.
Consider this, if his wheel speed sensors (the source of the data) indicate he is doing 98 while he is travelling in a 100 zone. Yet he is actually travelling at 65, as his statement suggests (because his system is so inaccurate). I doubt that he would find it acceptable that when his speedo says that he is travelling at the speed limit, all other traffic is passing him 33 kmh faster. I am sure that he would have the car in at the service department stating that his speedo is grossly inaccurate. Yes there may be an inaccuracy in the system but I highly doubt it is enough to account for the 30% difference between safe speed of the road and the recorded speed. If there is that level of inaccuracy, HSV may find themselves in trouble as defective vehicle systems have contributed to the accident.

Mr Haight said the same Bosch data box was used in various makes and models of car. The HSV Holden Clubsport was the same vehicle as a Pontiac GTO and he had been able to read the data on a machine by reading it as if it was from a Pontiac.

I think this is perfectly acceptable, let’s be real here, a GTO is the same car as the Commodore. So therefore all readings would be within an acceptable margin of error to prove that the driver was attempting to negotiate the corner much faster than his statement suggests.

Alan Hohaia, 50, of Levin, appeared in Hastings District Court yesterday to defend a charge of dangerous driving causing injury. He faces a jail term of up to five years or a fine of up to $20,000.

He is not being charged with a speeding offence, it is dangerous driving. This is an offence that may occur at a speed that is less then the posted speed limit. Imagine I am driving in the Mt Glorious area of QLD, the posted limit is 80 kmh but there are a few corners with yellow signs of 20 kmh (these are the conditions present in this area). If I was to attempt to negotiate one of these 20 kmh corners at the posted speed limit of 80, lose control and wipe out another car, I would not be charged with speeding because I wasn't, and it would be dangerous driving because it was. You can not attempt to negotiate a corner at 4 times the advised speed without responsibility for the outcome.
To me, all this discussion regarding the accuracy of the data and the application of the data read as a GTO although the unit was fitted to a commodore is a moot point. Even the defence is not challenging this data or its accuracy (probably because they acknowledge this is not an issue). If the theories on this forum are correct and the data is likely to be inaccurate and his defence counsel has not realised this, he should get a new lawyer (one that knows what he is doing).
They are challenging the legal right to collection of that data only. In a serious crash the police have the right to examine the vehicle and all the systems of that vehicle, they do it every day. As to the question of does the owner of the vehicle have the right to deny access to the vehicle by police investigation, I don't know but I highly doubt it. Does this right of access apply to the data recorder, I assume yes because it is a vehicle system just as the brakes, steering and suspension are. The lawful answer here is one for a judge to sort out and I would suggest we are about to see a legal precedence set here.
As for the question of the thread, should they have access to the data recorded in the event of a serious accident? If the police feel the accident is significant enough to justify spending thousands on getting the data recorder analysed, then absolutely.

[Boosh Brus]

That is for the defense to argue. The black box should be used as evidence to support the case.

Not saying it cant happen but it would be crazy for someone to be convicted on a black box alone. I would be mighty peed off if the evidence was rejected and I was the one left crippled

[burnz]

no: as to what flappist's said, how ever next of kin should be able to ask holden for the read out if they want to know.

the police using the "non" compatable softwear to obtain info is subjective at best.

[fairBA]

correct me if I'm wrong but when certain models depoly air bags - the speedo and tacho stay frozen displaying the speed and revs at the time of the crash - A few cop/crash shows feauturing bseries have done this...

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by fairBA

correct me if I'm wrong but when certain models depoly air bags - the speedo and tacho stay frozen displaying the speed and revs at the time of the crash - A few cop/crash shows feauturing bseries have done this...

I have been to many crashes as part of my work and I can not remember seeing a speedo or tacho "frozen" at the last reading on a car.

I assume this is because most speedos and tachos work electronically and at the loss of the electrical signal, the needle will return to zero as a result of the spring pressure. Try unplugging your instrument facia from the wiring loom with the engine running to demonstrate this. I have heard of this freezing of the reading happening on older vehicles with cable drive speedos and tacho but there are not many of these vehicles now.

I have however seen a motorcycle that had a mechanical drive tacho that froze at the last reading on impact when it t boned a car. The accident investigator said that they will check what gear the bike was in and calculate the speed according to the reading on the tacho and the gear ratio. Considering the bike had a heavy aluminium box section frame on a high powered sport bike, which was snapped in two at the head tube, he was going a bit faster than the 60 kmh limit.

Next time I am at a serious crash and accident investigation are there, I will ask to clear this up.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I have been to many crashes as part of my work and I can not remember seeing a speedo or tacho "frozen" at the last reading on a car.

I assume this is because most speedos and tachos work electronically and at the loss of the electrical signal, the needle will return to zero as a result of the spring pressure. Try unplugging your instrument facia from the wiring loom with the engine running to demonstrate this. I have heard of this freezing of the reading happening on older vehicles with cable drive speedos and tacho but there are not many of these vehicles now.

I have however seen a motorcycle that had a mechanical drive tacho that froze at the last reading on impact when it t boned a car. The accident investigator said that they will check what gear the bike was in and calculate the speed according to the reading on the tacho and the gear ratio. Considering the bike had a heavy aluminium box section frame on a high powered sport bike, which was snapped in two at the head tube, he was going a bit faster than the 60 kmh limit.

Next time I am at a serious crash and accident investigation are there, I will ask to clear this up.

A long time ago there was a thread with a link to an auction on a Falcon and it had been in a serious crash and the speedo needle was frozen on like 160km/h. Maybe its not designed there but the impact from the crash probably effected something.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

A long time ago there was a thread with a link to an auction on a Falcon and it had been in a serious crash and the speedo needle was frozen on like 160km/h. Maybe its not designed there but the impact from the crash probably effected something.

That is why I said in my experience I have not seen this. I was trying to say this is not a common thing. I guess it is more likely to happen in a crash involving high speeds (say 160 kmh), involving forces so great it damages internal components of the gauges. In most crashes the forces involved are unlikely to be high enough to do this.

[vztrt]

This info from the 'black box' as its being put requires the police to get a warrent to get the info that is stored (if you have a look in a B-series manual it will actually tell you this). Now the info may be helpful, but as long as investigators dont start thinking that its the be all and end all (like the recent DNA debarcle) then I dont see an issue. The data should be used as a tool to help piece together info on a crash. A planes black box is used that way as they still need to investigate the actual plane and what was going on at the time of the crash.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by vztrt

This info from the 'black box' as its being put requires the police to get a warrent to get the info that is stored (if you have a look in a B-series manual it will actually tell you this). Now the info may be helpful, but as long as investigators dont start thinking that its the be all and end all (like the recent DNA debarcle) then I dont see an issue. The data should be used as a tool to help piece together info on a crash. A planes black box is used that way as they still need to investigate the actual plane and what was going on at the time of the crash.

The black box in an aircraft records the outputs from avionics and control systems. These avionics and controls systems are maintained on a VERY regular basis, in the case of bug smashers every 100 hours and in the case of RPT much more often.
This equates to the average car being completely stripped and recalibrated every 4000-5000km or so as opposed to the current practice of NEVER.

The fact that so many are so willing to accept that information supplied for cheap domestic rubbish is gospel is the most frightening although we do live in an age where so many believe anything they read on the internet or see on A Current Affair.

The adage "only in extreme cases" is another trap. What is an extreme case?
Causing death? What about injury?
Causing injury? What about could have caused death or injury?
In other words any and every time your car is being driven this would apply because at any time you can cause death or injury can't you.

Lets look at hoon laws. How many cars have been confiscated for minor operational indiscretions?
A minor chirp or spin leaving the lights in a low traction environment, goodbye car.
A short burst of speed in the middle of woop woop, goodbye car.
A mechanic working on your car does something silly, goodbye car.
An employee talks on a phone and has let their license lapse, goodbye front end loader.

Naive do gooder mentality is the source of almost all the injustice, tyranny and autocracy in Australia and the whole "if it just saves one life" dogma will be the epitaph on the gravestone of performance motoring.

Look at the big picture people otherwise one day you will be stopped for a "random computer check" and have your car confiscated on the spot for doing 150km/h with a grace period of 24 hours for you to prove that it was on a race track not a road.
Of course proving someone else was driving, even the previous owner will just allow you to recover your lost license not recover the "naughty" car.........

[auxr]

Originally Posted by flappist

The black box in an aircraft records the outputs from avionics and control systems. These avionics and controls systems are maintained on a VERY regular basis, in the case of bug smashers every 100 hours and in the case of RPT much more often.
This equates to the average car being completely stripped and recalibrated every 4000-5000km or so as opposed to the current practice of NEVER.

The fact that so many are so willing to accept that information supplied for cheap domestic rubbish is gospel is the most frightening although we do live in an age where so many believe anything they read on the internet or see on A Current Affair.

The adage "only in extreme cases" is another trap. What is an extreme case?
Causing death? What about injury?
Causing injury? What about could have caused death or injury?
In other words any and every time your car is being driven this would apply because at any time you can cause death or injury can't you.

Lets look at hoon laws. How many cars have been confiscated for minor operational indiscretions?
A minor chirp or spin leaving the lights in a low traction environment, goodbye car.
A short burst of speed in the middle of woop woop, goodbye car.
A mechanic working on your car does something silly, goodbye car.
An employee talks on a phone and has let their license lapse, goodbye front end loader.

Naive do gooder mentality is the source of almost all the injustice, tyranny and autocracy in Australia and the whole "if it just saves one life" dogma will be the epitaph on the gravestone of performance motoring.

Look at the big picture people otherwise one day you will be stopped for a "random computer check" and have your car confiscated on the spot for doing 150km/h with a grace period of 24 hours for you to prove that it was on a race track not a road.
Of course proving someone else was driving, even the previous owner will just allow you to recover your lost license not recover the "naughty" car.........

Flappist _ I can see your logic, but the main issue is the admittance of evidence in a court case.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by flappist

The black box in an aircraft records the outputs from avionics and control systems. These avionics and controls systems are maintained on a VERY regular basis, in the case of bug smashers every 100 hours and in the case of RPT much more often.
This equates to the average car being completely stripped and recalibrated every 4000-5000km or so as opposed to the current practice of NEVER.

The fact that so many are so willing to accept that information supplied for cheap domestic rubbish is gospel is the most frightening although we do live in an age where so many believe anything they read on the internet or see on A Current Affair.

The adage "only in extreme cases" is another trap. What is an extreme case?
Causing death? What about injury?
Causing injury? What about could have caused death or injury?
In other words any and every time your car is being driven this would apply because at any time you can cause death or injury can't you.

Lets look at hoon laws. How many cars have been confiscated for minor operational indiscretions?
A minor chirp or spin leaving the lights in a low traction environment, goodbye car.
A short burst of speed in the middle of woop woop, goodbye car.
A mechanic working on your car does something silly, goodbye car.
An employee talks on a phone and has let their license lapse, goodbye front end loader.
Naive do gooder mentality is the source of almost all the injustice, tyranny and autocracy in Australia and the whole "if it just saves one life" dogma will be the epitaph on the gravestone of performance motoring.

Look at the big picture people otherwise one day you will be stopped for a "random computer check" and have your car confiscated on the spot for doing 150km/h with a grace period of 24 hours for you to prove that it was on a race track not a road.
Of course proving someone else was driving, even the previous owner will just allow you to recover your lost license not recover the "naughty" car.........

Since we are straying off the subject so much here.....

RPT aircraft are not serviced at more frequent periods of 100hrs. Yes they go in for a check every 25hrs or so but its to do only a particular part of the aircraft. That way it only takes a few days to do a particular area of the service, instead of many weeks to do a complete service.

Extreme cases.... what is more extreme then serious injury? death?
Since you decided to use aircraft as an example, every RPT accident or incident is investigated and EVERYONE is put through the wringer.

Would you prefer when an airliner crashes and killed people they dont investigate it using EVERY means possible?
Because what your saying is exactly that in the case of a motor vehicle accident. That Police should not do anything and sit on their ***** all day.

So what if they didnt go to Holden to get the thing read. Holden DIDNT make it.... Bosch did.

An employee talks on a phone and has let their license lapse, goodbye front end loader.

And?? Whats your point here? Dont tell the whole story, but just generalize.
The idiot was on a public road talking on a phone without a license.... Again you seem to prefer people doing anything they want without any form of repocussions....

[burnz]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

So what if they didnt go to Holden to get the thing read. Holden DIDNT make it.... Bosch did...

sorry to selective quote...
but by that logic why didnt they take it to ford??

fact is bosch is just hardware with rudamentry bios, gm, ford, merc, and all else add their own softwear

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by burnz

sorry to selective quote...
but by that logic why didnt they take it to ford??

fact is bosch is just hardware with rudamentry bios, gm, ford, merc, and all else add their own softwear

To prove the speed Hohaia was travelling, police sent the Holden's airbag data unit to William Haight, director of the San Diego Collision Safety Institute. Mr Haight told the court via video conference yesterday that 2.5 seconds before the crash Hohaia's Holden was travelling at 150kmh and 0.5 seconds before the crash it was travelling at 98kmh.

If your going to read it you take it to the manufacturer or a company/ organistion who is impartial.

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by flappist

Look at the big picture people otherwise one day you will be stopped for a "random computer check" and have your car confiscated on the spot for doing 150km/h with a grace period of 24 hours for you to prove that it was on a race track not a road.

This is already happening with heavy vehicles. The task force regularly stop trucks and “plug into them” to make sure that limiters aren’t tampered with.

What has our country come to?

The Kenworth I drive is GPS tracked, and that means everything, braking applications, braking distance, deceleration, G forces in corners, the lot.
But, if I were to have some major accident, the police would be kicking the front door of my employer in demanding the data from the vehicle under the “chain of responsibility” laws.

Whether they get this information or not, I’m not sure but they would give it a bloody good try.

They have no right to this from anyone. If they want to convict someone, they can damn well do the investigation themselves, not rely on outside data that in many cases, they have to legal right to.

In my opinion, we are becoming a police state.

[MO]

No it should not be used,it is an indicator of speed NOT an accurate reliable set of data.
As for you jim goose now go away.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by MO

No it should not be used,it is an indicator of speed NOT an accurate reliable set of data.
As for you jim goose now go away.

Gee wizz.... personal insults.
Usually occurs when another person hasnt got anything to contribute to the arguement/ discussion...