Owens Gifts Autonomous Drivers

Jason R. Sakurai
by Jason R. Sakurai

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) today has issued a final rule, all 147 pages of it, designed to roll back numerous Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and clarify what they termed as ambiguities in current occupant protection standards, for vehicles equipped with automated driving systems (ADS). These are specifically vehicles that are designed without traditional manual driver controls.

The rule amends several regulations regarding crashworthiness, in effect lessening safety standards for automated vehicles equipped without manual driver controls. The rule also exempts automated vehicles, be it a delivery van or service truck, designed never to carry any human occupants, including drivers, from crashworthiness standards. If it sounds like the automated vehicle could hit your car or truck and not be held liable, you’re getting the gist of some of the DOT-speak contained in the rule.

Call it coincidental, but the proclamation from General Motors’ Mary Barra yesterday that they are in the e-delivery business is certainly fortuitous. What she didn’t say was that these vans, especially if made autonomous, would eliminate tens of thousands of delivery drivers, Domino’s, Pizza Hut, and Papa Johns included. Dropping the green flag on autonomous driving, how long do you think it will be before we see unmanned brown trucks pulling up to your home or business, and using your smartphone, complete delivery of your packages?

Referring to the DOT’s own internal findings, “With more than 90% of serious crashes caused by driver error, it’s vital that we remove unnecessary barriers to technology that could help save lives,” Owens said. “We do not want regulations enacted long before the development of automated technologies to present an unintended and unnecessary barrier to innovation and improved vehicle safety.” Let’s follow that line of thinking a little further. If the DOT has already determined that autonomous drivers are safer than you, why should the automaker be required to maintain liability insurance when they know that you’re at fault?

By the way, the rule will not change existing occupant protection requirements for traditional vehicles with manual driver controls, so you’ll still need to have your insurance in order and be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it wasn’t your fault when the autonomous driver hits you.

[Images: Ford, DOT, BrightDrop, Domino’s]

Jason R. Sakurai
Jason R. Sakurai

With a father who owned a dealership, I literally grew up in the business. After college, I worked for GM, Nissan and Mazda, writing articles for automotive enthusiast magazines as a side gig. I discovered you could make a living selling ad space at Four Wheeler magazine, before I moved on to selling TV for the National Hot Rod Association. After that, I started Roadhouse, a marketing, advertising and PR firm dedicated to the automotive, outdoor/apparel, and entertainment industries. Through the years, I continued writing, shooting, and editing. It keep things interesting.

More by Jason R. Sakurai

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 8 comments
  • Inside Looking Out Inside Looking Out on Jan 14, 2021

    Don't be afraid of AI. The future brings only good things. Or they say so. Imagine you are living in 1933. Ascent of autonomous trucks should be the least of your worries about the future, if you smart enough to understand it of course.

  • Watersketch Watersketch on Jan 15, 2021

    As someone who has driven behind automated cars I anticipate huge levels of road rage if these make it on the road. Will make us crave bad delivery drivers.

    • Syke Syke on Jan 15, 2021

      Yeah, all those following drivers who will be stuck driving at exactly the speed limit, coming to a full stop at stop signs, and being forced to decelerate with intent of stopping when the traffic light turns yellow. Oh, the humanity!

  • Akear Does anyone care how the world's sixth largest carmaker conducts business. Just a quarter century ago GM was the world's top carmaker. [list=1][*]Toyota Group: Sold 10.8 million vehicles, with a growth rate of 4.6%.[/*][*]Volkswagen Group: Achieved 8.8 million sales, growing sharply in America (+16.6%) and Europe (+20.3%).[/*][*]Hyundai-Kia: Reported 7.1 million sales, with surges in America (+7.9%) and Asia (+6.3%).[/*][*]Renault Nissan Alliance: Accumulated 6.9 million sales, balancing struggles in Asia and Africa with growth in the Americas and Europe.[/*][*]Stellantis: Maintained the fifth position with 6.5 million sales, despite substantial losses in Asia.[/*][*]General Motors, Honda Motor, and Ford followed closely with 6.2 million, 4.1 million, and 3.9 million sales, respectively.[/*][/list=1]
  • THX1136 A Mr. J. Sangburg, professional manicurist, rust repairer and 3 times survivor is hoping to get in on the bottom level of this magnificent property. He has designs to open a tea shop and used auto parts store in the facility as soon as there is affordable space available. He has stated, for the record, "You ain't seen anything yet and you probably won't." Always one for understatement, Mr. Sangburg hasn't been forthcoming with any more information at this time. You can follow the any further developments @GotItFiguredOut.net.
  • TheEndlessEnigma And yet government continues to grow....
  • TheEndlessEnigma Not only do I not care about the move, I do not care about GM....gm...or whatever it calls itself.
  • Redapple2 As stated above, gm now is not the GM of old. They say it themselves without realizing it. New logo: GM > gm. As much as I dislike my benefactor (gm spent ~ $200,000 on my BS and MS) I try to be fair, a smart business makes timely decisions based on the reality of the current (and future estimates) situation. The move is a good one.
Next