Being part of the automotive industry, I do not think the engineers are to blame. I think it is the group leaders, department managers, and the higher ups that only think about "cost down". The engineers can only do what there bosses allow them to do.
Being part of the automotive industry, I do not think the engineers are to blame. I think it is the group leaders, department managers, and the higher ups that only think about "cost down". The engineers can only do what there bosses allow them to do.
Big ditto from me. This immediately made me think of the Challenger disaster that was caused by "decision makers" stretching the tolerances set by the Engineers for the temperature rating of the o-rings. The joint design was a known issue as far back as 1977. Physicist Richard Feynman detailed the o-ring issues and how upper management ignored advice of the engineers in his reports as part of the Challenger Commision, but his data was moved into an appendix that was published after the initial findings report was released.
Sadly, there are quite a number of design issues that are known but ignored with cars nowadays. Some are simple, some have the potential of being life threatening like this one. Our 2005 Mustang GT had an issue where the brake lights would flash when shifting and after 4 visits to the dealership, nothing was ever found. After spending some time on the internet, I found a 3 sentence post somewhere from a guy in Texas with the exact same problem. I emailed him asking if he ever resolved it and it turned out to be a side effect of a poor material choice for the cross brace for the clutch/brake pedal assembly. When dropping the clutch, enough instant torque is applied to the brace to cause it to slightly twist which would make the metal flag on the brake pedal come off the brake light switch. His dealer never figured it out, but he did personally. He simply bent the metal flag piece so it depressed the brake light switch a little further so when the brace twisted, the switch was still engaged. I did the same to ours, and no more flashing brake lights (even when speed shifting, which I never do of course......)
GM had systematic failures and the managers in charge of those processes are the ones who be held responsible; They failed to do their job of managing those processes.
Being part of the automotive industry, I do not think the engineers are to blame. I think it is the group leaders, department managers, and the higher ups that only think about "cost down". The engineers can only do what there bosses allow them to do.
TC is 100% correct. Everyone I have dealt with on the engineering, design, and manufacturing side of products wants to make high quality reliable products. It is generally the management that is willing to accept poorly designed and manufactured products as long as they can be sold at adequate profit margins.
What I find interesting is the length of time it took for this to be raised on the forum. When Toyota had to recall their vehicles it was posted as soon as the news was published, and they were raked over the coals. With GM this was in the news several months ago, and is only mentioned now. I wonder why that is?
TC is 100% correct. Everyone I have dealt with on the engineering, design, and manufacturing side of products wants to make high quality reliable products. It is generally the management that is willing to accept poorly designed and manufactured products as long as they can be sold at adequate profit margins.
What I find interesting is the length of time it took for this to be raised on the forum. When Toyota had to recall their vehicles it was posted as soon as the news was published, and they were raked over the coals. With GM this was in the news several months ago, and is only mentioned now. I wonder why that is?
I think pride / patriotism is a significant aspect. "THEY" make a mistake and rake them over the coals and "WE" make a mistake and there has to be some logical explanation so the benefit of a doubt is extended.
I agree with the article in that it is stupid that the airbags would be turned off in the "Accessory" key position. Getting smacked in a parking lot while tuning out to the radio would be another instance where airbags should still deploy if accelerometer data warrants it.
Also I have no idea why some of the new "keyless" cars don't have an "engine off" button. Instead something about holding down the "start" button for 3 seconds. Now that's also a case of cheapening out and not thinking things through. edit: or overthinking it, which is what I did. nope, an off button it is, press it for half a second or panicked hammer down on it
GOOD engineering isn't possible in a world of culturally zombified people,
who are limited and restricted by intellectual property trolls, big business, and the obsession with COST DOWN.
I have strongly suspected that certain principles of safety or quality in engineering become forgotten as one generation of engineers in control of such things dies off. And then, younger engineers muddle through building in flaws until a crisis like this occurs.
The fact that we are trying to make the car smarter than the operator just leaves the operator and passengers with no idea of how to assure their own safety.
I have never owned a car with air bags, anti-skid brakes, or this infamous ignition switch. I know how to drive and how to control an old fashioned car in an emergency; but all bets are off once the car is supposedly smarter than me.
Just consider that we once had a generation of well-trained nuclear engineers that are now retiring. We will have another generation gap in that technology with similar failures to get safety right? I certainly hope not, but Boeing is still struggling with the Dreamliner's Lithium batteries and I don't see why they were so necessary to the overall plan to reduce weight via a plastic airframe.
In sum, lead engineers need to be a conservative lot with a head full of particulars that they refuse to build for safety's sake, and not be bowed over by 'Wow, that seems really neat!'
I suppose the airbags engaged would drain the battery faster.
But I have had an incident 1965 Buick Skylark's engine twist off its mounts and jam the throttle full open when trying to jump out into traffic. I felt very comfortable with turning the ignition off to stop a runaway car in traffic. (No steering wheel lock, no air bags back then.)
I guess the steering wheel would lock up now, and if I went to accessory, I'd be without the airbags. And if I did nothing, I would just ram the car in front of me.
It seems technological innovation has put me in a 'no-win' situation. Time to jam the tranny into neutral.. if it will go.
+++++++
Revive the Kill switch! In the 3 seconds delay it takes for a keyless ignition to kill the engine, your are likely to be crunched. Throttle linkages do jam, and a simple way to shut down the engine is a 'must have'.
I think pride / patriotism is a significant aspect. "THEY" make a mistake and rake them over the coals and "WE" make a mistake and there has to be some logical explanation so the benefit of a doubt is extended.
I agree, and that's a natural response. Problem is that large corporations are now global in nature, so that is the wrong way to view it. They need to be held accountable or the situation will not improve.
I agree with the article in that it is stupid that the airbags would be turned off in the "Accessory" key position. Getting smacked in a parking lot while tuning out to the radio would be another instance where airbags should still deploy if accelerometer data warrants it.
Agreed. Current draw for monitoring an accelerometer is miniscule when compared to most of what is on with the key in the accessory position.
Also I have no idea why some of the new "keyless" cars don't have an "engine off" button. Instead something about holding down the "start" button for 3 seconds. Now that's also a case of cheapening out and not thinking things through. edit: or overthinking it, which is what I did. nope, an off button it is, press it for half a second or panicked hammer down on it
No reason for more than one button to start/stop the engine, it just requires a little more thought.
If the engine is in run mode and the button is pressed stop it immediately.
If the engine is in stop mode press and hold the button for 3 seconds to start the engine.
It has the added benefit of not having the engine start if the button is accidentally pressed for a short time.
Keyless ignition may be great until there is a faulty software update or someone hacks it.
Just like with a desktop PC you don't want one quick press to turn the car off. Imagine what would happen if you hit it by accident.
In addition to holding it down, pressing it say 5 times in a row should also turn the car off. The problem is with most cars if the engine is off you lose power steering and braking.
Does anyone know if ABS still functions with the engine off?
I have strongly suspected that certain principles of safety or quality in engineering become forgotten as one generation of engineers in control of such things dies off. And then, younger engineers muddle through building in flaws until a crisis like this occurs.
Just consider that we once had a generation of well-trained nuclear engineers that are now retiring. We will have another generation gap in that technology with similar failures to get safety right? I certainly hope not, but Boeing is still struggling with the Dreamliner's Lithium batteries and I don't see why they were so necessary to the overall plan to reduce weight via a plastic airframe.
In sum, lead engineers need to be a conservative lot with a head full of particulars that they refuse to build for safety's sake, and not be bowed over by 'Wow, that seems really neat!'
Excellent points. Someone graduating from university with an engineering degree is nowhere near knowledgeable enough to be designing reactors, cars, planes, or large civil structures. They still have a lot to learn. Call it apprenticing, mentoring, or partnering, but a newly graduated engineer still has a lot to learn, and needs to learn it from a more experienced engineer.
I suppose the airbags engaged would drain the battery faster.
Not much faster. The current to monitor the accelerometer is minor compared to other accessories.
But I have had an incident 1965 Buick Skylark's engine twist off its mounts and jam the throttle full open when trying to jump out into traffic. I felt very comfortable with turning the ignition off to stop a runaway car in traffic. (No steering wheel lock, no air bags back then.)
I guess the steering wheel would lock up now, and if I went to accessory, I'd be without the airbags. And if I did nothing, I would just ram the car in front of me.
It seems technological innovation has put me in a 'no-win' situation. Time to jam the tranny into neutral.. if it will go.
Seems like a lot of the items that were added for convenience, theft prevention, and safety are actually making cars more dangerous. That is a problem that needs to be addressed, not swept under the rug. The company vehicle I am currently driving is one of the models that has been recalled for the ignition switch, but I am still driving it while waiting for the parts to arrive at the dealership. I am not too concerned, but I do have reaction plans for several potential situations.
The fact that we are trying to make the car smarter than the operator just leaves the operator and passengers with no idea of how to assure their own safety.
I have never owned a car with air bags, anti-skid brakes, or this infamous ignition switch. I know how to drive and how to control an old fashioned car in an emergency; but all bets are off once the car is supposedly smarter than me.
I hear what you are saying, but in many ways cars are much safer now than they were. Most drivers do not have the experience or training to react properly in an emergency so abs and traction control is a benefit to them. Seat belts and air bags have saved a lot of lives and reduced the severity of injuries.
+++++++
Revive the Kill switch! In the 3 seconds delay it takes for a keyless ignition to kill the engine, your are likely to be crunched. Throttle linkages do jam, and a simple way to shut down the engine is a 'must have'.
Amen. See post 11. I think this should be a simple mechanical switch that removes power to the ignition system, similar in function to the emergency stop switches used in industry.
It's also past time for all the auto makers to review all of the ideas and systems currently in production with the goal of keeping those that are worthwhile and eliminating or fixing those that are of little benefit.
But I have had an incident 1965 Buick Skylark's engine twist off its mounts and jam the throttle full open when trying to jump out into traffic.
I had exactly the same problem with a 65 chevy caprice. The cause was a broken motor mount. A 3 second delay in killing a 350 hp engine at full throttle could have killed me. At least it had a good ignition switch.
but Boeing is still struggling with the Dreamliner's Lithium batteries and I don't see why they were so necessary to the overall plan to reduce weight via a plastic airframe.
Yea, as far as I've heard Boeing screwed themselves on the Dreamliner. Tried to outsource most of the design to save costs, and insisted on a development contract where Boeing would exclusively own all of the IP developed building the Dreamliner. Net effect, they got the B team designing the plane when they needed the A team due to all the new tech. And the battery issues? My best guess is pressure cycling the prismatic cells eventually caused internal shorts. (i.e. something new and not tested for)
In sum, lead engineers need to be a conservative lot with a head full of particulars that they refuse to build for safety's sake, and not be bowed over by 'Wow, that seems really neat!'
I doubt the lead engineers were bowed over by 'wow that's neat!' FAR more likely they were brow beaten with 'MAKE IT CHEAP!' Pisses me off to read an article like this with no mention of managers getting fired.
Franky I rather Quit my job then be a part of a dangerous product .
I dare the Eng's of the world to grow some mosfets and stand up for what your profession askes of you .
I would Never build a EV with out Real E stop for the main Drive power .Or a way to Kill the power to the fuel injectors .
I deal with dinky 200 W robots at my job . a car is WAY more then 200 watts. Its time to put a Real switch on the dash just as in a machine .
Franky I rather Quit my job then be a part of a dangerous product .
I dare the Eng's of the world to grow some mosfets and stand up for what your profession askes of you .
I would Never build a EV with out Real E stop for the main Drive power .Or a way to Kill the power to the fuel injectors .
I deal with dinky 200 W robots at my job . a car is WAY more then 200 watts. Its time to put a Real switch on the dash just as in a machine .
I might write a pointed email, and receive a warning for not being a team player (putting it politely), but that's prolly as far as I'd go. You never really know how bad a feature or design decision is really going to be, especially if you aren't in the loop. Sometimes, picking your battles is the wiser path.
On the other hand, when internal flagging has failed and you are sure it's a disaster waiting to happen, collect the evidence, including your attempt to flag it internally, and find an avenue for whistle-blowing. You might still lose your job but you may have also done some good in the process.
Regarding a real kill-switch, I'd be happy with it in principle but in practice I'd get pretty ****** off if I had to keep hitting it to save my life. Not to mention that it would likely also make for an uncontrolled stop which itself can be dangerous.
This rationale will be the basis of; make it reliable to start with and no such kill-switch is then needed. Of course, ensuring that reliability takes much design and iteration. It's unlikely the EV industry is at that point yet.
I'm happily using a direct stick-shifted manual with carburetted petrol engine and hand window winders. I love dropping into neutral and coasting ... or skipping gears ... or changing from reverse to 1st without braking or stopping. I'll keep her until she rusts out I think.
Being part of the automotive industry, I do not think the engineers are to blame. I think it is the group leaders, department managers, and the higher ups that only think about "cost down". The engineers can only do what there bosses allow them to do.
Also, auto requirements are less strict than aviation or medical devices. Were this an aircraft issue, the "story" of dev process is required to documented so issues can be retraced. Cars, not so much, as they dont fall from the sky when the engine stops.
"Minimum necessary and sufficient" is open to interpretation, and needs to be set lowest until there is a reason to set it higher. Now it might be set so high that it might cause companies to go out of business, or prevent new competitiotr from getting started.
Regarding a real kill-switch, I'd be happy with it in principle but in practice I'd get pretty ****** off if I had to keep hitting it to save my life. Not to mention that it would likely also make for an uncontrolled stop which itself can be dangerous.
What I really miss in my current car is the Hydro-pneumatic suspension of the older Citro
Also, auto requirements are less strict than aviation or medical devices. Were this an aircraft issue, the "story" of dev process is required to documented so issues can be retraced. Cars, not so much, as they dont fall from the sky when the engine stops.
"Minimum necessary and sufficient" is open to interpretation, and needs to be set lowest until there is a reason to set it higher. Now it might be set so high that it might cause companies to go out of business, or prevent new competitiotr from getting started.
Big ditto from me. This immediately made me think of the Challenger disaster that was caused by "decision makers" stretching the tolerances set by the Engineers for the temperature rating of the o-rings. The joint design was a known issue as far back as 1977. Physicist Richard Feynman detailed the o-ring issues and how upper management ignored advice of the engineers in his reports as part of the Challenger Commision, but his data was moved into an appendix that was published after the initial findings report was released.
Sadly, there are quite a number of design issues that are known but ignored with cars nowadays. Some are simple, some have the potential of being life threatening like this one. Our 2005 Mustang GT had an issue where the brake lights would flash when shifting and after 4 visits to the dealership, nothing was ever found. After spending some time on the internet, I found a 3 sentence post somewhere from a guy in Texas with the exact same problem. I emailed him asking if he ever resolved it and it turned out to be a side effect of a poor material choice for the cross brace for the clutch/brake pedal assembly. When dropping the clutch, enough instant torque is applied to the brace to cause it to slightly twist which would make the metal flag on the brake pedal come off the brake light switch. His dealer never figured it out, but he did personally. He simply bent the metal flag piece so it depressed the brake light switch a little further so when the brace twisted, the switch was still engaged. I did the same to ours, and no more flashing brake lights (even when speed shifting, which I never do of course......)
I too thought of the Challenger incident.
The difference is that the unfolding GM debacle has killed more people and will continue to...many of those rolling death traps will never get upgraded to the new switches...and each of us will pass those death traps on the road each day.
Way back when I was working in nuclear reactor construction on the Hanford Area, I recall one Quality Control engineer claiming that he had quit GMC's Cadillac division and shifted over to nuclear reactors because they spent over a year arguing where the ash trays should go in the backseat. (He wasn't much happier in the nuclear reactor industry.)
Is this really about engineering, or about corporate culture in general? Engineers are not much above Labor in the construction industries. Most the ambitious engineers I met, shifted over to being 'Sales Engineers' as a path into management. The reality is that the Sales department is generally the quickest way to an executive spot... just ask Steve Jobs. Cost and Scheduling is another good upwardly mobile career path.
Accounting and tax law are subjects that I should have been learning in university rather than after 35.
Since you will not get old Citroens anymore, get a used Mercedes SL600 (Roadster) or S600 (Sedan) ... they use the same system as Citroen, slightly perfected by the German tank-builders.
And after 15-25 years they are quite affordable used now here in the US (CA and FL best) ...
What a ride. Like on a cloud. I had a couple Citroens while living in Germany. A lot of fun possible with the height control. Lower it on Highways and pump it up on dirt roads. My favorite was the DS. When you parked her she went to sleep on the ground.
And a quite simple Ignition Switch, to get back on topic. OFF-AUX-RUN-START. what more you really need?
A lot of things are over-engineered (not just on cars) nowadays and some of them cause trouble. BASIC things. Like Ignition Switch (GMC), Throttle (Toyota), 'bio-degradable' wire insulation (Mercedes) and so on.
COMMON services like this:
- not able to remove Key while not in PARK.
- not able to remove Key while foot on Brake Pedal
Make a Ignition Switches way more complicated as it needs to be. And more prone to failure and misbehave.
KISS again.
It's not just the Engineers. It's all of them. I think that most people in their daily work routine, trying to get the job done as good as the environment around them allows them to do. Everybody wants to be proud of his work, somehow. And they loose contact to the reality. This problem occurred in ALL companies I worked for. Tracking it down is not easy, and solving it takes some hard work.
As @Prof_Braino stated often Documentation and Requirements are necessary. They describe the product to be and allow for measuring a result. BUT what is missing in our cooperate world is the COMMOM SENSE. Sort of a corrective factor.
I do not want to create @Potatohead sized posts so I slow down.
Some last example of the problem:
You all know elevators. Worldwide they look the same. One (or more) vertical rows of buttons to press for the level you want to get off. Quite simple engineering problem. Best is to order them vertical, it does represent the reality most. And so it was done first by Flohr-Otis and all others followed.
Bad decision for children, small people and those bound to wheelchairs.
Simple solution!
Order them horizontal. Same buttons, same cost, just turned around 90 degrees. But in all of my travel in the world I never found a elevator like this. None.
As I said. We are missing common sense.
Enjoy!
Mike
What we are missing is accountability....real accountability.
If those responsible for these problems...including the engineers and programmers who designed them are held responsible for their creations, there would be far fewer "problems" that kill and main the public.
Note how GM employees developed "institutional forgetfulness" when it came to determining who made the decisions to use the killing switch.
What we are missing is accountability....real accountability.
If those responsible for these problems...including the engineers and programmers who designed them are held responsible for their creations, there would be far fewer "problems" that kill and main the public.
Note how GM employees developed "institutional forgetfulness" when it came to determining who made the decisions to use the killing switch.
That's mostly a compounding outcome, one potentially small mistake becomes huge as a result of no corrective action early on. Mistakes always happen. It's better to look for ways to fix the mistake early rather than covering it up.
I say that because, when calling for accountability of individuals, who made the design error is almost irrelevant. Ignoring of the identified design error and obstructing of corrective action is where it's at. In this case, according to the media, it would seem the engineer ticks all the boxes.
Also, accountability is an institutional matter. It requires a ton of formal processes and documentation. More paper pushers to the fore.
That's mostly a compounding outcome, one potentially small mistake becomes huge as a result of no corrective action early on. Mistakes always happen. It's better to look for ways to fix the mistake early rather than covering it up.
I say that because, when calling for accountability of individuals, who made the design error is almost irrelevant. Ignoring of the identified design error and obstructing of corrective action is where it's at. In this case, according to the media, it would seem the engineer ticks all the boxes.
Also, accountability is an institutional matter. It requires a ton of formal processes and documentation. More paper pushers to the fore.
Engineers do what management tells them to.
Toss the management in jail when these problems come to light and you will see REAL changes occur in how a company does business.
I would also tie the CEO's compensation directly to product recalls...any recall...no compensation.
Comments
Big ditto from me. This immediately made me think of the Challenger disaster that was caused by "decision makers" stretching the tolerances set by the Engineers for the temperature rating of the o-rings. The joint design was a known issue as far back as 1977. Physicist Richard Feynman detailed the o-ring issues and how upper management ignored advice of the engineers in his reports as part of the Challenger Commision, but his data was moved into an appendix that was published after the initial findings report was released.
Sadly, there are quite a number of design issues that are known but ignored with cars nowadays. Some are simple, some have the potential of being life threatening like this one. Our 2005 Mustang GT had an issue where the brake lights would flash when shifting and after 4 visits to the dealership, nothing was ever found. After spending some time on the internet, I found a 3 sentence post somewhere from a guy in Texas with the exact same problem. I emailed him asking if he ever resolved it and it turned out to be a side effect of a poor material choice for the cross brace for the clutch/brake pedal assembly. When dropping the clutch, enough instant torque is applied to the brace to cause it to slightly twist which would make the metal flag on the brake pedal come off the brake light switch. His dealer never figured it out, but he did personally. He simply bent the metal flag piece so it depressed the brake light switch a little further so when the brace twisted, the switch was still engaged. I did the same to ours, and no more flashing brake lights (even when speed shifting, which I never do of course...
TC is 100% correct. Everyone I have dealt with on the engineering, design, and manufacturing side of products wants to make high quality reliable products. It is generally the management that is willing to accept poorly designed and manufactured products as long as they can be sold at adequate profit margins.
What I find interesting is the length of time it took for this to be raised on the forum. When Toyota had to recall their vehicles it was posted as soon as the news was published, and they were raked over the coals. With GM this was in the news several months ago, and is only mentioned now. I wonder why that is?
Also I have no idea why some of the new "keyless" cars don't have an "engine off" button. Instead something about holding down the "start" button for 3 seconds. Now that's also a case of cheapening out and not thinking things through. edit: or overthinking it, which is what I did. nope, an off button it is, press it for half a second or panicked hammer down on it
who are limited and restricted by intellectual property trolls, big business, and the obsession with COST DOWN.
The fact that we are trying to make the car smarter than the operator just leaves the operator and passengers with no idea of how to assure their own safety.
I have never owned a car with air bags, anti-skid brakes, or this infamous ignition switch. I know how to drive and how to control an old fashioned car in an emergency; but all bets are off once the car is supposedly smarter than me.
Just consider that we once had a generation of well-trained nuclear engineers that are now retiring. We will have another generation gap in that technology with similar failures to get safety right? I certainly hope not, but Boeing is still struggling with the Dreamliner's Lithium batteries and I don't see why they were so necessary to the overall plan to reduce weight via a plastic airframe.
In sum, lead engineers need to be a conservative lot with a head full of particulars that they refuse to build for safety's sake, and not be bowed over by 'Wow, that seems really neat!'
I suppose the airbags engaged would drain the battery faster.
But I have had an incident 1965 Buick Skylark's engine twist off its mounts and jam the throttle full open when trying to jump out into traffic. I felt very comfortable with turning the ignition off to stop a runaway car in traffic. (No steering wheel lock, no air bags back then.)
I guess the steering wheel would lock up now, and if I went to accessory, I'd be without the airbags. And if I did nothing, I would just ram the car in front of me.
It seems technological innovation has put me in a 'no-win' situation. Time to jam the tranny into neutral.. if it will go.
+++++++
Revive the Kill switch! In the 3 seconds delay it takes for a keyless ignition to kill the engine, your are likely to be crunched. Throttle linkages do jam, and a simple way to shut down the engine is a 'must have'.
I agree, and that's a natural response. Problem is that large corporations are now global in nature, so that is the wrong way to view it. They need to be held accountable or the situation will not improve.
Agreed. Current draw for monitoring an accelerometer is miniscule when compared to most of what is on with the key in the accessory position.
No reason for more than one button to start/stop the engine, it just requires a little more thought.
If the engine is in run mode and the button is pressed stop it immediately.
If the engine is in stop mode press and hold the button for 3 seconds to start the engine.
It has the added benefit of not having the engine start if the button is accidentally pressed for a short time.
Just like with a desktop PC you don't want one quick press to turn the car off. Imagine what would happen if you hit it by accident.
In addition to holding it down, pressing it say 5 times in a row should also turn the car off. The problem is with most cars if the engine is off you lose power steering and braking.
Does anyone know if ABS still functions with the engine off?
Excellent points. Someone graduating from university with an engineering degree is nowhere near knowledgeable enough to be designing reactors, cars, planes, or large civil structures. They still have a lot to learn. Call it apprenticing, mentoring, or partnering, but a newly graduated engineer still has a lot to learn, and needs to learn it from a more experienced engineer.
Not much faster. The current to monitor the accelerometer is minor compared to other accessories.
Seems like a lot of the items that were added for convenience, theft prevention, and safety are actually making cars more dangerous. That is a problem that needs to be addressed, not swept under the rug. The company vehicle I am currently driving is one of the models that has been recalled for the ignition switch, but I am still driving it while waiting for the parts to arrive at the dealership. I am not too concerned, but I do have reaction plans for several potential situations.
I hear what you are saying, but in many ways cars are much safer now than they were. Most drivers do not have the experience or training to react properly in an emergency so abs and traction control is a benefit to them. Seat belts and air bags have saved a lot of lives and reduced the severity of injuries.
Amen. See post 11. I think this should be a simple mechanical switch that removes power to the ignition system, similar in function to the emergency stop switches used in industry.
It's also past time for all the auto makers to review all of the ideas and systems currently in production with the goal of keeping those that are worthwhile and eliminating or fixing those that are of little benefit.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/08/21/googles-driverless-car-problem-isnt-technology-its-liability-and-regulation/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/05/12/when-driverless-cars-crash-whos-to-blame/
Yea, as far as I've heard Boeing screwed themselves on the Dreamliner. Tried to outsource most of the design to save costs, and insisted on a development contract where Boeing would exclusively own all of the IP developed building the Dreamliner. Net effect, they got the B team designing the plane when they needed the A team due to all the new tech. And the battery issues? My best guess is pressure cycling the prismatic cells eventually caused internal shorts. (i.e. something new and not tested for)
I doubt the lead engineers were bowed over by 'wow that's neat!' FAR more likely they were brow beaten with 'MAKE IT CHEAP!' Pisses me off to read an article like this with no mention of managers getting fired.
Marty
Franky I rather Quit my job then be a part of a dangerous product .
I dare the Eng's of the world to grow some mosfets and stand up for what your profession askes of you .
I would Never build a EV with out Real E stop for the main Drive power .Or a way to Kill the power to the fuel injectors .
I deal with dinky 200 W robots at my job . a car is WAY more then 200 watts. Its time to put a Real switch on the dash just as in a machine .
I might write a pointed email, and receive a warning for not being a team player (putting it politely), but that's prolly as far as I'd go. You never really know how bad a feature or design decision is really going to be, especially if you aren't in the loop. Sometimes, picking your battles is the wiser path.
On the other hand, when internal flagging has failed and you are sure it's a disaster waiting to happen, collect the evidence, including your attempt to flag it internally, and find an avenue for whistle-blowing. You might still lose your job but you may have also done some good in the process.
Regarding a real kill-switch, I'd be happy with it in principle but in practice I'd get pretty ****** off if I had to keep hitting it to save my life. Not to mention that it would likely also make for an uncontrolled stop which itself can be dangerous.
This rationale will be the basis of; make it reliable to start with and no such kill-switch is then needed. Of course, ensuring that reliability takes much design and iteration. It's unlikely the EV industry is at that point yet.
I'm happily using a direct stick-shifted manual with carburetted petrol engine and hand window winders. I love dropping into neutral and coasting ... or skipping gears ... or changing from reverse to 1st without braking or stopping. I'll keep her until she rusts out I think.
Also, auto requirements are less strict than aviation or medical devices. Were this an aircraft issue, the "story" of dev process is required to documented so issues can be retraced. Cars, not so much, as they dont fall from the sky when the engine stops.
"Minimum necessary and sufficient" is open to interpretation, and needs to be set lowest until there is a reason to set it higher. Now it might be set so high that it might cause companies to go out of business, or prevent new competitiotr from getting started.
What I really miss in my current car is the Hydro-pneumatic suspension of the older Citro
Read the link I provided for the Dreamliners.
I too thought of the Challenger incident.
The difference is that the unfolding GM debacle has killed more people and will continue to...many of those rolling death traps will never get upgraded to the new switches...and each of us will pass those death traps on the road each day.
Yours was.
Sometimes I need to.
Enjoy!
Mike
Is this really about engineering, or about corporate culture in general? Engineers are not much above Labor in the construction industries. Most the ambitious engineers I met, shifted over to being 'Sales Engineers' as a path into management. The reality is that the Sales department is generally the quickest way to an executive spot... just ask Steve Jobs. Cost and Scheduling is another good upwardly mobile career path.
Accounting and tax law are subjects that I should have been learning in university rather than after 35.
What we are missing is accountability....real accountability.
If those responsible for these problems...including the engineers and programmers who designed them are held responsible for their creations, there would be far fewer "problems" that kill and main the public.
Note how GM employees developed "institutional forgetfulness" when it came to determining who made the decisions to use the killing switch.
That's mostly a compounding outcome, one potentially small mistake becomes huge as a result of no corrective action early on. Mistakes always happen. It's better to look for ways to fix the mistake early rather than covering it up.
I say that because, when calling for accountability of individuals, who made the design error is almost irrelevant. Ignoring of the identified design error and obstructing of corrective action is where it's at. In this case, according to the media, it would seem the engineer ticks all the boxes.
Also, accountability is an institutional matter. It requires a ton of formal processes and documentation. More paper pushers to the fore.
Engineers do what management tells them to.
Toss the management in jail when these problems come to light and you will see REAL changes occur in how a company does business.
I would also tie the CEO's compensation directly to product recalls...any recall...no compensation.