GM Ignition Recall Snowballing

[MX793]

No, I know what you're talking about, that's not this: this was a failure. It was an '84; no other GM car of that era did this.

Yeah, I can recall encountering 80s era GM vehicles that would do this as well.  Cheap ignition switches.

[FoMoJo]

Toyota was fined because they didn't play nicely with investigators. They knew it wasn't a problem with their cars, and study upon study independently showed that that was the case, so why bother playing nicely?

Research and tests prove otherwise.

[Byteme]

No, I know what you're talking about, that's not this: this was a failure. It was an '84; no other GM car of that era did this.

Yeah, the post you responded to said "There was an era..."  I assumed they were talking about the 60's GM switches.  I fully agree if you could remove the key on a car from the 80's it was because the switch was faulty.

[Byteme]

Research and tests prove otherwise.

One should never let the facts get in the way of a good story.      

[GoCougs]

Research and tests prove otherwise.

Unless something has changed very recently it's never been proven, and every single investigation in which a proof could be had showed that it was pedal misapplication by the driver.

[NomisR]

Unless something has changed very recently it's never been proven, and every single investigation in which a proof could be had showed that it was pedal misapplication by the driver.

Well, yeah, pretty much from what I've read.. that's what happens.  So it's pretty much, damned if you do, damn if you don't...

especially with this quote

The following month Toyota told engineers not to make design changes for any other cars in North America because they would "most likely mislead the concerned authorities and consumers and such to believe that we have admitted having defective vehicles."

And considering how stupid the "authorities" are, they will automatically blame anything and everything on this issue even if it's completely driver problems. 

[FoMoJo]

Unless something has changed very recently it's never been proven, and every single investigation in which a proof could be had showed that it was pedal misapplication by the driver.

I suppose in order to accept the verdict of the research, you must have some understanding of it.  The following simplistic overview gives an indication of what can happen given specific failures of the software and firmware as well as the given of random hardware failures.

What could possibly go wrong?
! A glitch in the electronics (random hardware faults will happen)
! A bug in the software (any reasonably complex software has bugs)
! An unforeseen gap in the intended safety features
! Or all three: glitch activates bug and that slips thru safety gap

The research proved that the software had an unacceptably high occurrence of bugs.  Spaghetti code.  It also proved that there were gaps in the safety features.  Missing fail safe mechanisms.  Though the event of a hardware glitch occurring when the software is vulnerable would be rare, it can most certainly happen.  The research also proved the result of a failure in the hardware/software would produce unintended acceleration.

There was also testing done in order to validate the results of the research...Toyota Case: Vehicle Testing Confirms Fatal Flaws

Of course, all this does not prove that other manufacturers are not at risk of similar hardware/software situations of occurring.  In fact, they likely have.  I expect that quite a number of people, from time to time, have experienced an unusual surge in acceleration for no reason.  However, Toyota's defects resulted in the ECM freezing at wide open throttle and applying the brake did not cause the condition to reset.

[GoCougs]

Well, yeah, pretty much from what I've read.. that's what happens.  So it's pretty much, damned if you do, damn if you don't...

especially with this quote

And considering how stupid the "authorities" are, they will automatically blame anything and everything on this issue even if it's completely driver problems. 

Yup. That's the cost of selling consumer products to the public.

[GoCougs]

I suppose in order to accept the verdict of the research, you must have some understanding of it.  The following simplistic overview gives an indication of what can happen given specific failures of the software and firmware as well as the given of random hardware failures.

The research proved that the software had an unacceptably high occurrence of bugs.  Spaghetti code.  It also proved that there were gaps in the safety features.  Missing fail safe mechanisms.  Though the event of a hardware glitch occurring when the software is vulnerable would be rare, it can most certainly happen.  The research also proved the result of a failure in the hardware/software would produce unintended acceleration.

There was also testing done in order to validate the results of the research...Toyota Case: Vehicle Testing Confirms Fatal Flaws

Of course, all this does not prove that other manufacturers are not at risk of similar hardware/software situations of occurring.  In fact, they likely have.  I expect that quite a number of people, from time to time, have experienced an unusual surge in acceleration for no reason.  However, Toyota's defects resulted in the ECM freezing at wide open throttle and applying the brake did not cause the condition to reset.

I do understand, both what was presented in addition to the technologies at play. This testimony if anything exonerates Toyota.

First, the only condition replicated was throttle lock during acceleration via cruise control (which is only very slight as we all know - nowhere near WOT as you claim).

Second, the throttle was locked ONLY if Task "X" dies while braking during cruise control accel yet the only positive test condition noted was Task "X" must die during cruise control accel. As we all know braking cancels cruise control making this an impossible premise.

Third, there was no description given on how the "bit" was flipped to cause Task "X" death - for example it is noted there are memory protection and error correction routines - how were these defeated?

Fourth, and most importantly, brakes still stopped the car on they dyno, which at the slight accel rate of cruise control will have virtually zero affect on stopping distance or accident causation (again WOT was never referenced during any testimony).

[NomisR]

There's a reason why Toyota was found not to be at fault in any of the cases. 

[FoMoJo]

I do understand, both what was presented in addition to the technologies at play. This testimony if anything exonerates Toyota.

First, the only condition replicated was throttle lock during acceleration via cruise control (which is only very slight as we all know - nowhere near WOT as you claim).

Second, the throttle was locked ONLY if Task "X" dies while braking during cruise control accel yet the only positive test condition noted was Task "X" must die during cruise control accel. As we all know braking cancels cruise control making this an impossible premise.

Third, there was no description given on how the "bit" was flipped to cause Task "X" death - for example it is noted there are memory protection and error correction routines - how were these defeated?

Fourth, and most importantly, brakes still stopped the car on they dyno, which at the slight accel rate of cruise control will have virtually zero affect on stopping distance or accident causation (again WOT was never referenced during any testimony).

Some questions...

Do you accept that hardware can and does have glitches...that is, will occasionally malfunction?

Do you accept that, given the evidence of such, that there is bad code and a failure to comply with O/S standards and Automotive Industry Coding Guidelines?

Do you accept that, given the evidence of such, that the process failed to provide fail-safes for critical commands...such as the software to open the throttle?

[FoMoJo]

There's a reason why Toyota was found not to be at fault in any of the cases. 

That's not true.  They were found at fault by the Oklahoma court...related to ECM firmware.

[GoCougs]

Some questions...

Do you accept that hardware can and does have glitches...that is, will occasionally malfunction?

Do you accept that, given the evidence of such, that there is bad code and a failure to comply with O/S standards and Automotive Industry Coding Guidelines?

Do you accept that, given the evidence of such, that the process failed to provide fail-safes for critical commands...such as the software to open the throttle? If it can't be proven it doesn't exist.

Yes, but "occasional" is relative - it's easy to develop a control system that will fail in a dangerous condition only once every billion+ years.

I can't say; I don't know enough.

No.

Again, this line of thinking exonerates Toyota - just because it could happen doesn't mean it did - everything is true in the infinite, which is impractical.

[FoMoJo]

Yes, but "occasional" is relative - it's easy to develop a control system that will fail in a dangerous condition only once every billion+ years.

I can't say; I don't know enough.

No.

Again, this line of thinking exonerates Toyota - just because it could happen doesn't mean it did - everything is true in the infinite, which is impractical.

Ultimately, what it means is that the provision for error was in place and likely occurred a number of times...most innocuous, others deadly.  Even the monitoring process they used when testing the ECM under various conditions was proved faulty.

[MrH]

There's no proof the error ever occured.  Cougs pointed out multiple reasons why it likely never did.

No code is "perfect".  You could destroy every code every OEM makes in the same manner.  They're all capable of faults.  That's not the question though.

[GoCougs]

Ultimately, what it means is that the provision for error was in place and likely occurred a number of times...most innocuous, others deadly.  Even the monitoring process they used when testing the ECM under various conditions was proved faulty.

Again, just because it might happen doesn't mean it did. Another failure of the testimony (or at least it wasn't presented in the article) is the expected reliability of Task "X" which is pretty standard stuff.

But again that's all mute. No one dies because their car gets stuck in cruise control accel - the brakes easily will stop such a car even if it were possible.

[FoMoJo]

There's no proof the error ever occured.  Cougs pointed out multiple reasons why it likely never did.

No code is "perfect".  You could destroy every code every OEM makes in the same manner.  They're all capable of faults.  That's not the question though.

There is only proof that the software was full of bugs, that fail safes were not included when they should have been and they did not adhere to the established coding standards.  If you browse through this report, it may give you some sense of how bad the ECM code was as well as the potential for unintended acceleration.  Certainly, no code is "perfect".  This code is abysmal according to experts.  Even NASA said the code was bad but failed to make the connection between the potential for software corruption and lack of fail safe procedures.  Essentially, one corrupted bit can disengage throttle control from the driver and create a condition of unintended acceleration.

As well, it was Toyota's contention that the driver "misapplied" the pedals...meaning she applied the gas instead of the break pedal.  Eyewitnesses, as well as skid marks proved otherwise.

As for "Cougs pointed out multiple reasons why it likely never did", they were as vacuous as Toyota's claim of pedal "misapplication".

[NomisR]

That's not true.  They were found at fault by the Oklahoma court...related to ECM firmware.

I can't really find the details to the case because none of the news articles actually says anything useful.  It's just regurgitating the same thing with Toyota denying they did anything wrong and the plaintiff's attorney saying Toyota was shameful in their actions.  Honestly though, seeing the age of the driver, still think it's driver error more than anything. 

[MrH]

Yes, there's a report by people paid by the plaintiff that shows an error is possible.

Again, that's not the issue at hand.  It could happen.  All the evidence indicates that it never actually did though.

[FoMoJo]

Again, just because it might happen doesn't mean it did. Another failure of the testimony (or at least it wasn't presented in the article) is the expected reliability of Task "X" which is pretty standard stuff.

But again that's all mute. No one dies because their car gets stuck in cruise control accel - the brakes easily will stop such a car even if it were possible.

The investigation verified...eyewitnesses, skid marks, vehicle examination, etc...that, in this case, it was no pedal "misuse" nor was there linkage problems or even a floor mat.  Elimination of other possibilities pointed to ECM "misbehaviour".

There are >16 million combinations of task death
! Memory corruption can kill 1, 2, or all 24

Each task can die in thousands of different states
! Vehicle operational states (e.g., cruise on/off; accel 5% vs. 50%)
And what happens next; driver reactions to misbehaviors; etc.
! Internal software states

Test "samples" so far confirm
! Claimed fail-safes inadequate!

The cruise control scenario was only an example.

In respect to "the brakes easily will stop such a car"...the incident that brought it to the attention of public...http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/28/AR2010012803971_2.html?sid=ST2010012804490...has this to say...In the accident that has drawn perhaps the most publicity, a 2009 Lexus ES 350 raced through San Diego, weaving at 120 miles an hour through rush-hour freeway traffic. Veteran California Highway Patrol officer Mark Saylor was at the wheel, with his wife, teenage daughter and brother-in-law aboard.

"We're in trouble. . . . There's no brakes," Saylor's brother-in-law told a police dispatcher over a cellphone. As they approached an intersection, and the end of the road, the passengers could be heard urging each other to pray. All four died.

Afterward, investigators said that it appeared the brakes had been applied for so long that the brake pads melted, according to a report by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

[FoMoJo]

I can't really find the details to the case because none of the news articles actually says anything useful.  It's just regurgitating the same thing with Toyota denying they did anything wrong and the plaintiff's attorney saying Toyota was shameful in their actions.  Honestly though, seeing the age of the driver, still think it's driver error more than anything. 

Yes, there's a report by people paid by the plaintiff that shows an error is possible.

Again, that's not the issue at hand.  It could happen.  All the evidence indicates that it never actually did though.

There is no evidence that shows it never actually happened.  In fact, there is only insinuation that it may have been a floor mat, in some cases, or it may have been caused by a linkage problem, in some cases or, as Toyota would like us all to believe, it may have been pedal "misuse".  However, in the case Toyota lost, evidence and eyewitnesses and physical evidence said it was neither floor mat, or bad linkage or pedal "misuse", hence, the likely cause was ECU "misbehaviour".  However, you can belief what you like.

[Byteme]

There is no evidence that shows it never actually happened.  In fact, there is only insinuation that it may have been a floor mat, in some cases, or it may have been caused by a linkage problem, in some cases or, as Toyota would like us all to believe, it may have been pedal "misuse".  However, in the case Toyota lost, evidence and eyewitnesses and physical evidence said it was neither floor mat, or bad linkage or pedal "misuse", hence, the likely cause was ECU "misbehaviour".  However, you can belief what you like.

As I recall there were three issues going on at the same time:

1.  Sticky gas pedal assemblies.
2.  Floor mat interference.
3.  Software-hardwarerelated issues.

There was definately proof that the first two issues were real.  Neither the NSTSA nor NASA investigations found any credible evidence of the third.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/mar/19/toyota-1bn-settlement-car-safety-probe

http://www.nhtsa.gov/UA

[/color]

[MrH]

There is no evidence that shows it never actually happened.

So now the burden of truth flip flops to "guilty until proven innocent" to fit your narrative?

[FoMoJo]

As I recall there were three issues going on at the same time:

1.  Sticky gas pedal assemblies.
2.  Floor mat interference.
3.  Software-hardwarerelated issues.

There was definately proof that the first two issues were real.  Neither the NSTSA nor NASA investigations found any credible evidence of the third.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/mar/19/toyota-1bn-settlement-car-safety-probe

http://www.nhtsa.gov/UA

[/color]

While true, with respect to what was claimed and admitted, the Oklahoma case has released the elephant that was lurking in the shadows.  Reading the available information shows that Barr Group did a far greater in depth analysis of the software and discovered what NASA only suspected.  That is, there is adequate potential for the software to corrupt and, in doing so, create conditions for which there is no fail safe.  One such condition is unintended acceleration which is not corrected by applying the brake.  Also, examination of physical evidence, following the crash, eliminated floor mat and sticky gas pedal possibilities.  The defense put forward by Toyota, pedal "misuse" was also eliminated by eye witness reports and the presence of skid marks.

While not fond of conspiracy theories myself, it's been fairly apparent that software glitches do exist in ECMs and can manifest themselves in a number of ways...most quite innocuous but some deadly.  That Toyoto's ECM software was acknowledged by both NASA and Barr Group as "full of bugs" and "a house of cards", suggests that the ECM was more vulnerable to instances of corrupted code for which there was no fail safe than could be reasonably expected.  That the code did not comply with industry standards, or even their own standards, and that Toyota did not even have a copy of the source code, indicates a lack of follow through regarding proper testing.

While not conclusive proof that it was the ECM software that caused the unintended acceleration there is, certainly, a strong probability that it did; especially since the other possibilities, floor mat, sticky gas pedal, pedal "misuse" were, effectively, eliminated in this case.  As well, after Toyota was found 'at fault', they settled subsequent pending court cases and agreed to be humiliated and fined.  They just want it to go away.  Can you imagine the consequences of having to admit that it was ECM software failure that caused all these cases of unintended acceleration?

[FoMoJo]

So now the burden of truth flip flops to "guilty until proven innocent" to fit your narrative?

Well, it could've been a sticky gas pedal, in some cases or, it could've been a floor mat jamming the gas pedal, in some cases or, as Toyota is fond of pointing out, it could've been pedal "misuse"...the stupid buggers were pressing the gas instead of the brake.  Now, there is evidence that it could've been bad code in the ECM.  Do you think they actually found the floor mat pressing the gas pedal to the floor after Mark Saylor and his family crashed the Lexus into the rock wall.  That's what they said was the cause of accident.

[GoCougs]

The investigation verified...eyewitnesses, skid marks, vehicle examination, etc...that, in this case, it was no pedal "misuse" nor was there linkage problems or even a floor mat.  Elimination of other possibilities pointed to ECM "misbehaviour".

The cruise control scenario was only an example.

In respect to "the brakes easily will stop such a car"...the incident that brought it to the attention of public...http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/28/AR2010012803971_2.html?sid=ST2010012804490...has this to say...In the accident that has drawn perhaps the most publicity, a 2009 Lexus ES 350 raced through San Diego, weaving at 120 miles an hour through rush-hour freeway traffic. Veteran California Highway Patrol officer Mark Saylor was at the wheel, with his wife, teenage daughter and brother-in-law aboard.

"We're in trouble. . . . There's no brakes," Saylor's brother-in-law told a police dispatcher over a cellphone. As they approached an intersection, and the end of the road, the passengers could be heard urging each other to pray. All four died.

Afterward, investigators said that it appeared the brakes had been applied for so long that the brake pads melted, according to a report by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The the world doesn't/shouldn't work on guesses from the ethereal infinite. Process of (some) elimination is not proof.

Again with the guess from the ethereal infinite; that story doesn't add up to anything other than shocking driver incompetence - a supposedly seasoned LEO full well knows that brakes in proper working order will easily stop a car at WOT and that the car can be shifted into N.

There's never been proof so nothing more can be said (other than fault proof control systems are relatively easy to design, and no automaker is going to botch it).

[MrH]

Well, it could've been a sticky gas pedal, in some cases or, it could've been a floor mat jamming the gas pedal, in some cases or, as Toyota is fond of pointing out, it could've been pedal "misuse"...the stupid buggers were pressing the gas instead of the brake.  Now, there is evidence that it could've been bad code in the ECM.  Do you think they actually found the floor mat pressing the gas pedal to the floor after Mark Saylor and his family crashed the Lexus into the rock wall.  That's what they said was the cause of accident.

does everything just boil down to an emotional justification with you?

You want to throw out our entire legal system because you have a hunch Toyota is evil.

[FoMoJo]

does everything just boil down to an emotional justification with you?

You want to throw out our entire legal system because you have a hunch Toyota is evil.

It has nothing to do with emotion.  It's just a matter of presenting what is, ultimately, the most rational explanation.  In the Oklahoma case, Toyota was found at fault based on the presentation of the software glitches.  It is reasonable to assume then, that this is what happened.  Others seem adverse to accepting this and discarding the conclusions of  the legal system.

[MrH]

Toyota won three cases, and settled in Oklahoma. You're just going to ignore the other three cases? You're also going to ignore the black boxes the DOT looked at for every crash, none of which showed the brakes being touched? And you're going to go against NASAs interpretation of the controls. And instead trust one power point saying it was possible, but didn't necessarily happen?

Keep in mind this is civil court. The burden of proof is the preponderance of evidence.

[Soup DeVille]

The question I will asking about the Toyota thing though is whether or not we will see any sort of technical or regulatory fallout from this; could perhaps failsafe mechanical throttles be required in addition to modern fly by wire throttles?