The Great Toyota Recall

Sounds like Toyota has adopted the large software company philosophy of introducing partially developed software into the market and letting the consumer sort it out.

DITP,

You clearly are quoting somebody, and your title implies that you're quoting somebody on the inside. Can you say who by name or at least their position of authority, please?

Don't know his name but is in the design/fabrication mgt. at CTI.

Thank You, if you're going to claim that information has some level of authority it is good to know that the horse was not a mythical talking horse named Ed.

But I believe that unless an Engineer or bean counter (accountant? ) deliberately concealed information or mislead anyone in any fashion, neither were at fault here. Both disciplines were doing their jobs. It is Toyota's management as a group that is at fault. Pointing fingers before solving the problem will not help anyone but those trying to cover things up. (That idea puts your horse in a different light, doesn't it. )

Now if the electronic throttle control sensor originates with a potentiometer, I'm surprised that redundancy and/or failsafe protocols were not implemented. A failing, single potentiometer does fit the possible fully open throttle failure. I would expect an incremental encoder would fail by appearing to be frozen in place. But this drive by wire approach is just the automotive application of fly by wire that is used by most modern commercial and military aircraft today. Maybe the profit margin for automobiles is to small to reliably use this approach.

IMHO, this will show that Toyota briefly took their eyes off of the reliability and safety mantra they hold so dear. But by not hiding from this brief mistake, they will regain the confidence of their customers.

_{For those wondering, the two vehicles in my household were built by Nissan and Subaru.}

I persoanlly think that, much to the disappointment of some media types, what is at issue here is not actually pointing the finger but salvaging the reputation of two companies. I suspect the caption below the statement was a later addition intended to provoke a negative response.

I mentioned my vehicles only because I wanted people to not think I was biased toward Toyota. The sheer volume of this recall combined with Toyota's demonstrated integrity to not try to sweep this under a rug will in the long run bolster both companies.

That's ok Redfred. It must have been a moment of weakness buying the Nissan......

I'm hoping my 97 Accord will die soon so I can buy another one........

Pointing fingers before solving the problem will not help anyone but those trying to cover things up.

Unfortunately when you identify the problem, and address it. It does not have to be someones or a departmental fault, but a procedure issue.

You have to find where the responsibility lies to correct the procedure so it does not happen again in the future, ....who knows until then....i.e. sometimes one has to "point it out" because it ones job, so it needs to be addressed,the sooner the better because there are cars running off the line constantly...and if it is a cover-up, and that is not good role.

p911

Regardless of who may be at fault here, if indeed the potential problem was previously discovered or discussed, it still is going to cost Toyota a pretty penny to fix all the recalled cars, plus the "for sale" cars now sitting idle in dealer's showroom and lots.

But by not hiding from this brief mistake, they will regain the confidence of their customers.

You are correct. Unfortunately, they appear to be hiding and intentionally obfuscating. Back in the days of the Bridgestone - Ford Explorer fiasco, many remarked on the value of doing the right thing immediately, as Tylenol had done years before. Toyota seems to be following the Bridgestone - Ford path rather than the Tylenol one.

Yeah it does seem now that Toyota is following the more common slight of hand act some call poor communication. (Did I say that, or do you just think I did?) I just heard on NPR that the Prius is having braking problems, too. Well I guess they must be human.

I should have known these things might be happening. Their commercials were getting to be just a little to slick.

With regard to sources, Design News has an interesting article entitled Toyota's Problem Was Forseeable.

Nicely balanced and well thought out article. Toyota is without doubt the best car manufacturer in the world today. This is a major setback for them, but knowing the Japanese the problem will be neither ignored nor "obfuscated". They have been working on this problem since day one with many "tweeks" to the system.

Look at this part of the article:

• For Toyota, as well as for engineers around the world, the stuck-gas-pedal story has served as a painful lesson in how difficult it is to get everything right in the design of a machine with tens of thousands of parts.

"tens of thousands of parts" Isn't this the best promotion for an electric car. The simplest motor and the most power full motor is the electric motor. Way more power full than a combustion motor. Two bearings, little bit of copper, bit of Iroc and off you go.

Ohh and when you do go for a tune up. Be prepared to bring at least 10 bucks because once in a while you do need to buy new wiper blades :-)

Have you seen the products from Wartsila? www.wartsila.com

I have heard that GE is making some powerful devices that help keep the commercial airliners in the air.

"I have heard that GE is making some powerful devices that help keep the commercial airliners in the air."

Yep! They're called engines!

And would they be more, or less powerful than electric motors?

Since jet engines ar normally rated in thrust, rather than horsepower, it's a little difficult to compare. The GEnx-1 in its current configuration is rated at 65,000lb of thrust. Since maximum thrust is normally used only during takeoff, maximum power would probably be at around 250mph, or 367 f/s. 367f/s*65000lb = 2.38e6 ft-lb/s, or 43,300hp. The largest electric motor I happen to have seen was only 2,000 hp, and it was perhaps half as big as one of these engines.

If you were to try to use electric motors, you'd have to add the weight of the motors and the generators to the engines - No comparison. As always, the smallest number of energy conversions is best!

Thanks for the conversion. I had no belief that electrics were the most powerful, as posted in #36.

"The simplest motor and the most power full motor is the electric motor. Way more power full than a combustion motor. "

I just am not enough of an expert on electric motor sizes to speak effectively. Thanks again.

Many electric motors do have the greatest torque at zero velocity, so they are excellent for starting under load. I've long been a fan of the idea of putting the motors in the wheels of vehicles to eliminate all gears, shafts, clutches, transmissions, differentials, etc. and the losses thereof. Such motors would use electronics for speed control, and should be able to regenerate while going downhill or slowing down. I doubt if motors able to do all this from zero to full speed would be 'simple' motors, as suggested in #36. This would imply either a hybrid vehicle (fuel engine charging batteries) or one powered by fuel cells.

I'm well aware that some people object to this concept because of the unsprung mass, but that is only a problem on rough roads. The vast majority of driving in the US is on reasonably good paved roads, so I view this as an unimportant issue.

In aircraft, its a whole different scenario. I can visualize a plane with only electric motors, but it would be one that could barely take off on a long runway (or catapult). Once aloft, solar cells could conceivably keep it flying all day long, but nighttime would be a problem, unless it was a lighter-than-air craft. Could be great for reconnaissance.

Many electric motors do have the greatest torque at zero velocity, so they are excellent for starting under load.

Probally why thats the reason huge earthmovers and such have electric motors in there wheels.

Throttle-by-wire in automobiles is a bad idea. Unlike the airline industry, automobile design from concept to production is precipitously undertaken everywhere. There is no excuse for the failure of such an important device. Why would any auto manufacturer move from the time-tested cable operated throttle to something that could be so inherently dangerous.

Also, I cannot believe that Toyota did not provide any safety measures into their design. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that an electronic throttle control could and will eventually go awry. Something as clear and simple as a software sub-routine that would override the throttle by application of the brake pedal is mandated into this design. It would also break people of the habit of riding the brake. I hope Toyota gets raked across the coals for this one - they deserve nothing less.

Why would any auto manufacturer move from the time-tested cable operated throttle to something that could be so inherently dangerous.

Weight

I cannot believe that the weight difference between a throttle-by-wire and a cable-operated throttle would be significant enough to justify the change.

The usual reason for changes to design normally involve cost. Not so in this design. A cable operated throttle body with an attached position sensor has to be cheaper than an encoder attached to the gas pedal along with a stepper motor on the throttle body.

I am at a loss on this one................

Weight is the best answer I can com up with

How many different throttle cables do you think Chevrolet Has used on just the 350 motor? How many different cable mounting brackets do you think have been used on 350 motors?

Every one of them has a different part number, a different set of specifications, and must be maintained in the inventory of parts.

A throttle body with a stepper motor attached starts to sound a little simpeler now .

How many of these throttle cables have you heard of failing right out of the gate?

I rest my case.

How many throttle problems have been linked to electric throttle systems before? We have a 2000 GMC with drive by wire. That is 10 years till one surfaced, that I am aware of. Detroit Diesel had the system since 1987 on heavy duty engines I believe. Up until about 1970, most auto manufacturers had solid rods for throttle linkage. Were you one of the people crying that they should have left them alone. As long as we are asking, were you against electronic fuel injection and electronic ignitions? Hell for all we know you converted your car back to a generator.

Manufacturing cars is all about balancing cost against quality. If you built 3 million cars, you would find ways to save money too.

Many of today's vehicles have displacement on demand. Some cylinders will stop running when not needed.How well do you think they would drive with direct acting throttle cables?

Hey - it just so happens that you are the only one asking. Since when were you nominated as the official C4 spokesman? And, in answer to your query (not that it deserves a answer): I have a thirty-two year old Ford whose charging system I have converted to a 3G alternator. This upgrade eliminated a troublesome electro-mechanical voltage regulator. And for your information, Ford didn't use generators in 1979. And the ignition? It too has been modernized with a reluctance-type billet distributor and a capacitive discharge ignition system.

I am not against advancements in automotive design. what I am against is engineers who could not design their way out of a paper bag having the responsibility of designing systems without any regard to safety issues. Japanesse engineers can't and never could design anything worth a darn - only copy western designs and they did a piss-poor job of that. Where is the bushido code when we need it.

Carpet my ass! Mark my words - the truth will eventually surface and Toyota will not recover as a result.

I had always believed that this forum was a place to express ideas, observations, and occasionally opinions. Since when do ideas and opinions draw denunciation and criticism?

Why is it that when a design is determined bad is after it be made and in public use.

When designs are made the success of a design is determined from history. I do not believe no company releases poor designs that will initiate a recall.

And to play it safe to eliminate a poor design prior from reaching the public is ridiculous and there will be no improvements. Because a poor design is determined after release. Just like a good design is.

Tell that to the families of the dead splattered across the highways.

Well as long as your on a crusade.

how many are dead?

do you know the names?

Chris Lastrella, 38

Cleofe Lastrella, 45

Mark Saylor, 45

Mahala, Saylor, 13.

As morbid as it is, Why are you stopping there?

There are more recalls than that had injuries and deaths involved. And it was not just from Toyota.

I had always believed that this forum was a place to express ideas, observations, and occasionally opinions. Since when do ideas and opinions draw denunciation and criticism?

I think you are mistaken in your impressions of CR4. This has always been a place for vigorous debate: even simple challenge questions can go on for hundreds of posts of back-and-forth. Often, if someone says something patently idiotic or offensive to the global audience here, we will call them out. Your "Japanesse engineers can't and never could design anything worth a darn" is both unsupportable, and offensive.

Unsupportable, unsupported, poorly thought out, and illogical ideas and opinions typically draw criticism here.

So now I am a bit confused. Your upgrade to the electronic ignition system is acceptable, but not an upgrade to electronic throttle.

The technology that brought forth electronic throttles is well founded. It appears that manufacture of one or more of the components may be bad, or the software that drives it may have flaws. But there are too many advantages to electronic throttles for volume production of automobiles to ever go back.

I speak my mind only as a way to engage in discussion. And I represent only my own opinions.

"I am not against advancements in automotive design. what I am against is engineers who could not design their way out of a paper bag having the responsibility of designing systems without any regard to safety issues."

Your earlier posts would leave one to believe that you did not regard electronic throttles as progressive.

Electronic throttles are indeed progressive. They have the capacity to produce increased efficiency through system management. The downside is that they can be dangerous if not properly thought out.

Toyota has a good design where there are reciprocal sensors on both the gas pedal and the throttle body to ensure failure analysis on-the-fly. The problem arises when the hardware and software engineers do not communicate. Case in point is the the current problem facing Toyota. Something as clear and simple as a sub-routine that would override the throttle when the brake pedal is depressed was not implemented. The European manufacturers have implemented this feature since their introduction of the electronic throttle.

Second, is the clearance between the gas pedal and the floor. Toyota engineers seem to think that the throttle stop could be eliminated by allowing the pedal to instead reach the floor. There is no one there at Toyota that is overseeing the safety issues associated with with their design changes. It is this that now has Toyota in such a mess today. They are killing Americans with their piss-poor designs, non-existant systems integration, and vacant HSE.

I am very passionate when it comes to integration of electronics in automotive design. As automobiles become more complex, the vehicle becomes populated with more devices that can and will eventually fail. The mechanical engineers have been replaced by electronic and software engineers - the majority of which are too detached and so do not have a clue regarding safety and longevity. The automotive market is too cost-driven to expect a bullit-proof product that will last. They are built as cheaply and quickly as possible. And, the introduction of new technology not correctly implemented turns them into death-traps.

I hope that this is the wakeup call that the automotive industry has needed for a very long time.

Like anything that is progressive. They are going to have problem with this also.

And its going to happen automobiles no matter what your passion is.

You are right, Phoenix911. I just have a problem with engineering that is not well thought out as is the case with Toyota's throttle problem. It seems that things as plain as the nose on your face have either been overlooked or have been overruled by the bean counters.

The Hybrid in question is designed by Cat and they always had excellent design capabilities. There was only one instance that I can recall where a production run of the I believe was the 3208 in the 80's had a problem with the fuel rack not delivering full-power. It was an easy fix where a fluid passage to the actuator needed to be enlarged. We shall see.....

Regards

It is the simplest issues that are missed, and being simple and erratic which this fall into, the hardest to identify

Certainly the only ones qualified to answer why many automobile designers have switched to throttle-by-wire control. My speculation for this switch away from a cable linkage that along with weight being a factor, emission control and maximizing efficiency likely come into play. A fully open throttle may not be the correct position to provide maximum torque with a certain air intake velocity, engine RPM and I'm certain other factors that I do not know come into play. But the driver will likely show this desire by putting the pedal to the floor. An added benefit will be the standardization of robust parts while low cost wiring handle the variety of changes in part locations.

Interesting observation there, Redford, regarding the DCM deciding what throttle position would be ideal for a given situation in respect to efficiency and torque. I for one would not like a software program deciding weather or not to give me the throttle position that I desire and more importantly - need. The throttle and brake system should not be subject to failure as a result of an electrical problem or a computer glitch. If the automotive industry thinks it can effectively design systems previously implemented in the aviation industry they are in for a rude awakening. Case in point - Where is the redundancy?/

"....the standardization of robust parts...". Redford, are you listening to yourself?!! It is these robust parts that now have Toyota in such a mess. Have you ever heard of a throttle cable failing because of carpet lint? I really respect all your input at this forum but I have to strongly disagree with you on this one.

Regards

I believe that your confusing the difference between a reason and your idea of a good reason.

I never claimed that I knew the primary, real, or actual reason for switching over to electronic throttle control. I wished to make my proposals for reasons why many automobile manufacturers might be switching to electronic throttle control. I particularly wanted to point out that not just Toyota but Nissan, Lamborghini, Mercedes Benz, Audi, and I'm certain others have implemented electronic throttle control on some models. So there likely are very good reasons for doing this.

But if you really believe that you can build more reliable, cost effective automobile that will meet today's emission standards using a cable controlled throttle, be my guest.

Oh, and it's redfred. Not Paul Newman's costar from The Sting or Dustin Hoffman's costar from All The President's Men. I have nothing to do with the Sundance Film Festival.

GA. All correct.

"There's no question we are going to see a brake override system requirement in response to this." Joan Claybrook, a safety advocate and former director of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

"Almost all auto manufactures are making (and have made) that move...". Redfred./p]

Just because they can doesn't mean it is right. I believe that this movement makes for a strong case of runaway technology.

I do not like the idea of a disposable automobile as is the DVD player. When the DVD player fails one ends up watching cable. When an auto fails one ends up watching their life pass before their eyes.

"The standard on-off buttons for cruise do not mechanically toggle: the latching into the "on" state is in the electronics, not in the pushbutton you press." Redfred.

Precisely the point that I am trying to make. The cruise control in my '79 t-bird is a vacuum assisted electrical servo device. When I press the off button, vacuum is dumped from the servo via a de-energizing solenoid valve. When I press the brake, in addition to de-energizing the vacuum solenoid, a mechanical vacuum valve attached to the pedal also dumps the servo vacuum just in case. Just because it is easier and friendlier does not necessarily make it better.

According to my local TV station, the manufacturer of the accelerator assembly is CTS of Indiana (not CTI). Whatever the problem is, I can tell you that unforeseen reliability issues surface in the most unlikely places. I have seen these problems in high reliability missile programs. They cost tax payers millions of dollars and jeopardize our military resources. I am annoyed because my 2000 Tacoma was part of a buy back program, and now its 2009 replacement has this potential problem.

It is CTS and from what I gathered the faulty part was made in Ontario. Whether this fault is in fact mechanical or electronic has not been substantiated by the media. Regardless what the fault may be it became incumbent on the engineering (forensics)team to immediately make a public statement.

I don't know how things work at Toyota, but in much of industry the engineering (forensics) team report to management. Management decides how to "spin" the tale. I have been reprimanded more than once for disclosing technical information that wasn't approved by upper management.

I've seen a simple fix get so spun out that the original problem was forgotten...and twenty years later is still unresolved!

It is tough sometimes for engineers. As a research engineer, I was a straight shooter. I got fired 8 times, which means they hired me back 7 times. The eighth time, they sold me to another company. I still think it pays to tell it lke it is

I quite often drove a T100 Toyota pickup in the course of my job. At the end of the work day I was in the habit of setting the parking brake. Turns out that is not recommended on cold wet days for the brake will freeze up.

Never heard of a recall on that one.

In that case I was made to look stupid for setting the parking brake.

As long as the "horse is speaking", as it were, what do you think the chances that Toyota is using Windows as an operating platform?

I remember the early days of electronic ignitions,. We had a few cases of mobile radio power supply wires being routed near the fender mounted ignition control boxes.(AMC, Fords mostly, The Chryslers seemed to have the boxes mounted on the firewall where the radio wiring did not go near it.) We would occasionally have an engine die when the radio would keyed up to transmit.

I am wondering if the there is a sensor wire that is having a signal induced into it causing the computer to give the engine a command for full, or near full throttle.

Just my opinion. That should show on a scan tool that has the ability to store the information for readout later.

I saw the similar in the 80's with a Jeep (CJ-class?) where the engine would die when transmitting with the installed 45 MHz 100W mobile. Jeep didn't have any resolve except to remove the mobile. I think with only our guess, we relocated the antenna to the other side. TA-DA!

Hopefully, we are not to see any blame on cell phones!

So whose fault was it? The engineers or the bean counters?

It could be either, or a combination of the two. There is no way for us to know until the full story comes out (if ever).

I figured out a long time ago that "REV" (as in revision on a drawing), stands for REctal Vision. Because hindsight is always 20-20. You can always see what you should have done, what you should have thought about - later, when it all goes "bufunga"¹. Engineers have been known to screw up - fortunately for mankind not often, but when we do it is always spectacular. That's we strive so hard to not screw up.

But I will put my money on bean counting, push it out the door, don't test it, "bufunga" management.

¹ Technical term meaning: Fill in the nasty blank!

The Toyota pedal sensor (per standard automotive practice) has 2 position sensors. One has a rising voltage as the pedal is pushed down. The 2nd sensor has a dropping signal as the pedal is pushed down. The ECU (engine control unit) reads both signals and uses an algorithm for safety to make sure that both voltages are in the correct range and correlate to one another. It checks for open wires, shorts to +12 V and shorts to ground on key-up and during running.

The Toyota recall, from what I read is not an electronic related issue but rather mechanical. The pedal can stick a part throttle due to a friction issue. CTS is the manufacturer.

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/30/safety-agency-is-investigating-gas-pedal-maker/

sorry but the link format does not to seem to work from a Mac.

That would be the simplest (and easiest) explanation, and who knows, it just might be the truth. However, if it is a friction issue my question would be why are these vehicles accelerating at high throttle from a standing position (as most have). I don't know about anyone else here but, speaking for myself, I do not pull out of a parking spot at anywhere near full throttle or, for that matter, ever use full throttle unless entering a highway or passing a slower vehicle on a highway.

Even being stuck at 10% pedal position will give you plenty of torque to get into trouble quickly. If the person panics and is not braking aggressively the car can continue to accelerate. I have not read of any credible reports of WOT (wide open throttle) behavior.

The recommended safety procedure is to push the brake firmly (even with both feet) and put the car in neutral. This will scare the crap out of anyone traveling in bad weather or perhaps approaching an intersection, curve in the road, pedestrians or another vehicle's rear.

Toyota strongly recommends that the driver does not key-off because you can lock the steering and also will lose power brake assist and power steering. Only turn the car off once you are in a safe position. Don't worry about the engine as the electronic governor will keep the rpm well below redline.

Having said that, this has only affected a handful of vehicles out of millions. My view of Toyota is not really diminished (yet). Hopefully this problem was not buried.

It looks to me like just another stupid and excessive piling up of rug after rug to keep the car clean from dirty shoes.

The design of the pedal didn't compensate for our obsession with keeping our expensive car shiny bright.

This is comparable to the pressure-washing of engines blowing off the rubber electrical connector covers.

Real life experience is so useful. Do you think the head administrator at the hospital ever uses the telephone tree with the worn-out music tape?

My 1983 Camry was doing very well at 300k+ miles when some cellphone yoyo t-boned it Christmas Day. So sad... now I'm waiting on a Scion Xb. Toyota rules...

There is recent talk of the problem being related the EMI. I'm curious as to how this will pan out.

If CNN reporting on the root cause of the problem is correct that it is a mechanical problem coupled to a carpet problem, then the title should be revised from mouth to arse.

Best served on the plate that is ostensibly the fix...........!

What was Toyota thinking to use CTS of Indiana to make them parts. Doesn't anybody read the newspapers anymore. US manufacturing is not able to produce non-faulty products. Everything US made seems to fail in my house. So, unfortunately, I will have to read the label of the product I am buying. In the case of Toyota just look if the vin number starts with a 'J' its made in Japan Just like all their Hybrid models, buy one of these and you will not have any issues.

If the economy seem blurry now watch what will happen in a couple of years. People will get tired of replacing their faulty equipment and will start looking for alternatives.

I'm happy to say I have the opposite attitude: In those few cases where I can still find something actually made in the USA, I gladly pay a premium price to get it.

I do have to agree in the sense that in most things the quality isn't what it used to be, but the US hardly has a monopoly on cheap! The bean counters have triumphed over the engineers with their short-range vision, and that is essentially world-wide!

I agree; if the parts were made in Japan, there would not be a problem. Toyota's and other foreign made vehicles had good service records until they started meking them here. I think all this may be a "witch hunt" to discredit Toyota. GM? I don't recall any recal by Ford when the gas tanks on the Pintos reptured or the Corvairs with theie oversteer problems.

Yeah but.......the parts are as good as head office says they are, regardless where they're made. Quality control is where the buck stops. A flaw in the design is understandable....very costly if insurmounatble.

As far as Japanese made products being without flaw goes I couldn't disagree more. I was instrumental in getting an entire Japanese product line recalled because of inherant flaws they neither wanted to address nor admit to. It took a lawsuit to finally make them fess up.

GM, on the other hand, is very much the author of its demise.

Well said Duck. Competence and incompetence knows no political boundary. There will always be groups that will temporarily earn kudos or shame for honest reasons.

I'd rather work with a guy/company who's made mistakes than one which promotes itself as some curly haired angel. Too often the angels become complacent and when the sh-t hits the fan ...that's when they fold up and leave you hanging.

The Lexus RX 400h is made in Canada and is functionally equivalent to the Hybrid Highlander which is produced in Japan with 100% Japanese parts, (according the the window sticker) .

Well, congress is now in the thick of things.

For all you who still think that throttle-by-wire is a good idea, would you drive a Toyota that was strictly steer-by-wire? I mean, a steering system computer that decides for you exactly how fast and how far you really need to turn the steering wheel?

Steering-by-wire could add additional excitement, especially if it were implemented as an iPhone app, in which case it could be even better: steer-by-wireless.

This would enable AT&T to make a little money each time you went around a corner, and turn-by-turn GPS guidance could be easily built in. After testing the system for a day or two, and defining the known bugs, the system could be released, with all due care in making sure that the release notes (spelling out the known bugs) could be found on a website for which neither AT&T nor Apple would accept responsibility.

Commuters could get an additional half-hour of sleep as their vehicles made their way to work.

Chevy implemented steer-by-wire on its Quadrasteer system for pickup trucks. In it, a computer decides in which direction and how far to steer the rear wheels. The rear steer angle was limited to 12 degrees, which at highway speeds, could put the rear end of the vehicle into the next lane in a couple tenths of a second. It really should have been a Pontiac option: "We build excitement!"

Well said and well done.

I understand the europeans are introducing a cruise control that is coupled to the steering and it follows the reflective lines on the roadway and keeps station in the lane. I believe this is viable and can be safe if properly implemented.

I would just like to mention that this was an idea of mine when I attended technical school in the late sixties that never got past the drawing board. My system used a focused and pulsed light source and photocell detectors that was coupled to a hydraulic actuator. It also used a ultrasonic transceiver that allowed the vehicle to pace the car in front of it.

The offshore vessels that I work on routinely use an autopilot coupled to a GIS interface whose position is being supplied by a GPS receiver. When on autopilot, the skipper is constantly cross-checking the GIS data with nautical charts, checking the echosounder, radar, and even sighting and ranging landmarks when running close to shore. Nothing is left to chance.

So, is it up to the motor vehicle operator to do the same?

Now if we can perfect this technique, DWI may become a thing of the past. That'll make the bars and patrons happy.

Are those reflective lines well maintained where you live? In our rural and foothill locations, edge lines are commonly either non-existent, worn, or covered by sand, dirt, or gravel. Even center lines are missing on many light-duty roads, and those present commonly have worn stretches.

When it rains, many of these lines disappear, and of course when it snows, all of them do.

I can't imagine such a system being reliable unless it uses something more than just optics for position determination.

I have found that the road lane markings are much better on the european highways as well as being maintained. My rudimentary system scanned both sides of the vehicle for the lines and extrapolated in the event that no reflective surfaces were detected but only for a short period of time because the error increased exponentially with time and distance.

Of course, a system such as this would only operate under ideal conditions. The new systems being introduced by the europeans go one step further by scanning the roadway ahead and creating a virtual roadway in the computer by integrating laser, infrared, and microwave detection systems - a far-cry from what I had envisioned in the sixties.

I understand that Mercedes Benz has a brake by wire system in use on some vehicles. Probably not as well sorted out as the Toyota system though.

I wonder where Toyota dug up the people who give the testimonial in their ad running during the Olympics. Although they are rather old, they do not otherwise appear to be senile... until they talk about how well Toyota has handled their problems, and how they are even more impressed with Toyota now than before. Toyota is on record as having hidden the problem, having reacted very slowly to it, and as of yesterday were even not sure what the problem is. If this is impressive, then how would you define "debacle?"

Yesterday, the news was that Toyota was admitting to congress that they really don't know exactly what the problem(s) is (are). But on Monday night, they were running an ad which says that they have developed a solution and are implementing it at a rate of up to 50,000 vehicles per day, and strongly suggesting that this is all behind them now. Apparently that ad is effectively a lie. It should say "We think we might have a solution, which we are going to try out on you if you have a Toyota. Please let us know how it works out. And remember... safety is our number one priority: always wear your crash helmet when driving your Toyota, and remember to turn the engine off at every intersection."

.....and the pattern of Japanese inscrutability stays the same (except now the weight of Congress demands an answer).

As another story in today's Washington Post described it, President Lentz was not well briefed before his testimony. A lot of questions of a technical nature were asked, and Lentz said he couldn't answer them because he wasn't an engineer. He was also asked a lot of questions about the status of the recall, and couldn't answer those either. Apparently, the president of Toyota USA isn't privy to the information.

A lot of questions of a technical nature were asked, and Lentz said he couldn't answer them because he wasn't an engineer

I've worked with engineers that can't answer....and its their responsibility to know, if it does not work their reply was....."Thats a matter of opinion." Piece of s#it of an engineer.

He was also asked a lot of questions about the status of the recall, and couldn't answer those either. Apparently, the president of Toyota USA isn't privy to the information.

Well whether or not he's privy to the information.....doesnt matter, as president of the company he is responsible....whether he knew or not. And if he was not aware of the recall........then Toyota is setting up a scapegoat, and they could not have found a better and well deserving one.

p911