September 17, 2019 at 2:44 pm #1760
|Posted: Jun/16/2016 at 5:50pm – author:cosbourn|
I agree that this is important to capture the vehicle’s automation capabilities, particularly as these technologies become more common. However, I wonder if we should take it a step further.
Consideration should be given to whether we should add another data element under this section identifying if some level of autonomy was engaged at the time of the crash, and what type of autonomous technology was in use. The adaptive cruise control for example likely will become very common in many vehicles in the very near future. Knowing whether a vehicle has this technology “capability” may ultimately not be as important as knowing if the adaptive cruise control feature was engaged or was in-use at the time of the crash or first harmful event. I suggest adding another data element to identify A) if autonomous technology was engaged or in-use at the time of the crash, and B) if the answer to A is yes, the identification of said technology, which we would need to identify and define.
This is where I am a bit unclear if this is something that belongs in MMUCC vs ANSI D16, or both. I have made a similar suggestion to the MMUCC Panel, so I wanted to raise this here as well.