Event Data Recorder?

[KBCobra]

I just saw in the paper about a local guy who recently crashed his Maserati Quattroporte and the police took his car to a dealer to get the car's Event Data Recorder out. I remember that several cars makers were putting these big brother devices in cars but was wondering if the M's also had this in them. They supposedly track and record the last 30 seconds of car data including the speed, brakes, steering wheel direction etc.

Any ideas??

[szh]

I just saw in the paper about a local guy who recently crashed his Maserati Quattroporte and the police took his car to a dealer to get the car's Event Data Recorder out. I remember that several cars makers were putting these big brother devices in cars but was wondering if the M's also had this in them. They supposedly track and record the last 30 seconds of car data including the speed, brakes, steering wheel direction etc.

Any ideas??

I suspect they all have these recorders now ... I seem to recall reading (perhaps incorrectly) that it is a Federal mandate.

But I do not really know for sure about the M.

Z

[Q45tech]

Built into air bag computer/controller. Even 1990 Q45 had them.

[EniGmA1987]

any way to disable them?

[ken in az]

http://www.harristechnical.com/cdr.htm

Good explanation of what they are and what they do. I don't think you'd want to disable it at any time.

[ArbitrageMan]

Lets say youre driving down the highway at 75 mph with your foot squarely on the gas, and the data recorder craps out and stops recording.

A month later, a car pulls out in front of you and you hit him. The police take the data recorder out of your car to examine it. What are they going to see you doing for the last 30 seconds before the accident?

I can think of a million reasons why this sort of survalence should not be used against people.

[InfinitiMe]

Lets say youre driving down the highway at 75 mph with your foot squarely on the gas, and the data recorder craps out and stops recording.

A month later, a car pulls out in front of you and you hit him. The police take the data recorder out of your car to examine it. What are they going to see you doing for the last 30 seconds before the accident?

I can think of a million reasons why this sort of survalence should not be used against people.

i'm pretty sure that the programming is such that they would be able to tell that that's what happened.

[ArbitrageMan]

You're probably right. Computers are perfect and never crash.

If you can prove to everyone that they are perfect and there is no possible way a mistake could happen, then its safe to use them. Unfortunately, theyre black boxes and we have no idea how good they are. If you were to be charged with a crime as a result of one of these data recorders, you'd have to prove that they DO sometimes make mistakes, instead of the government having to prove that they do not ever make mistakes. The presumption of guilt is automatic because its a computer. I dont buy it.

To reply directly to your sentence, are you sure the programming is so good that they would be able to tell what happened? How sure? If Im charged with a crime, should I have to prove these things are prone to error, or should the govt have to prove they are perfect? Innocent until proven guilty, or guilty until proven innocent?

Just food for thought. I doubt police are using these things for anything more than a tool in accident reconstruction. If the data was inconsistent with other evidence gathered at the accident, they'd probably realize what happened.

[ken in az]

You're probably right. Computers are perfect and never crash.

If you can prove to everyone that they are perfect and there is no possible way a mistake could happen, then its safe to use them. Unfortunately, theyre black boxes and we have no idea how good they are. If you were to be charged with a crime as a result of one of these data recorders, you'd have to prove that they DO sometimes make mistakes, instead of the government having to prove that they do not ever make mistakes. The presumption of guilt is automatic because its a computer. I dont buy it.

To reply directly to your sentence, are you sure the programming is so good that they would be able to tell what happened? How sure? If Im charged with a crime, should I have to prove these things are prone to error, or should the govt have to prove they are perfect? Innocent until proven guilty, or guilty until proven innocent?

Just food for thought. I doubt police are using these things for anything more than a tool in accident reconstruction. If the data was inconsistent with other evidence gathered at the accident, they'd probably realize what happened.

Not trying to sound wise or anything here, but they use them in airplaines so I would think that there is a time stamp with every data point from the point of impact. If the data shows no impact then I don't think they could use it in the court of law, confirming your point that you'd have to prove that the unit was not accurate at the point of impact.

Oh, and I'd think they'd have other physical evidence in a crash to convict you of a crime.

[candymanfb]

If the data recorder ever needs to be reviewed .... I think there may be bigger issues at hand.

There may be a legal issue of authority to view the data. Lawyers can hash that out!

[jamieP]

Driver should be aware of the presence of an EDR and drive appropriately. Event Data Recorders were installed in vehicles to prevent possible accident. Beginning Sept, 2014, the NHTSA will be free to go ahead with a suggested mandate that would put black boxes into every U.S. car. However, there is a concern over privacy.