Driver Inattention: Trucker Kills LEO

[ClimbnSink]

Got a buddy who was going on picnic with his family, minivan breaks down he pulls off into the shoulder and they all go sit on the grass off the road waiting for a tow. Cop shows up and made them wait in the minivan. As for the cop in the video and ones like him I guess they just think they are above the law. The laws of physics.

 

[John Baker]

This is a shame, nobody should have to die while earning a living. Stopping on a freeway or highway is downright dangerous no matter what the circumstances, but probably especially more for cops and highway workers. They do it as a matter of course in their jobs, and probably are not as on guard as most of us would be if we had to change a tire or some such thing. Much like looking in the gas tank, but not seeing in the gas tank because we do it so much.

I can see the day coming when all cars and trucks will be operated by computers, with no driver input at all, not even a steering wheel or peddles on the floor, people just sit in the contraptions after telling it where they want to go. No need for drivers licenses, no traffic tickets, no dead people on our highways.

-John

 

[ClimbnSink]

I can see the day coming when all cars and trucks will be operated by computers, with no driver input at all, not even a steering wheel or peddles on the floor, people just sit in the contraptions after telling it where they want to go. No need for drivers licenses, no traffic tickets, no dead people on our highways.

-John

Never happen. States could not operate at their current level without speeding tickets, DUI revenue and all the other driver freedom taxes. Plus no BS probable cause stops for 'touching the line' or not coming to a full, full stop, etc.

 

[John Baker]

Never happen. States could not operate at their current level without speeding tickets, DUI revenue and all the other driver freedom taxes. Plus no BS probable cause stops for 'touching the line' or not coming to a full, full stop, etc.

Your right, traffic tickets are a huge government industry, but autonomous vehicles are already being tested on our roads and highways much like the model A Ford a hundred or so years ago, it is in its infancy, but it will grow and it will catch on. They will prove to be the safest and fasted transportation other than aircraft and perhaps high speed rail.

Government will undoubtedly do all they can to keep licensed drivers behind the wheel as long as possible, if for no other reason than finding other ways to keep the dollars rolling in, but in the end, progress will win.

Heck, I'd be willing to bet that governments are already started on writing the volumes of laws and regulations regarding autonomous vehicles in order to try a quash or delay their eventual acceptance and success with the public.

-John

 

[3393RP]

It wasn't the officer in the car that he hit who died. It was the one in the cruiser parked on the shoulder.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[Corpsmaide]

Just wondering out loud here. Let's say we all agree that blocking the lane with the patrol car was the right thing to do to protect those further down the road.

Might was also not agree that sitting in said patrol car was the absolute dumbest thing to do? Someone have a reason for the officer, said hero, to have remained sitting in what became a stationary target?

There are several reasons why he would be in his car. We try to limit the time in the car and onside as much as possible.

 

[No Joy]

It wasn't the officer in the car that he hit who died. It was the one in the cruiser parked on the shoulder.

Source? How did you come to that conclusion? Perhaps I'm misreading, or misunderstanding something, or my sources wrong? From what I understand he was in his vehicle filling out a report when his vehicle was hit by the truck then the truck pushed his vehicle into the other vehicles. From what I understand none of the other emergency responders reported injuries.


In Memoriam - Officer Tim Huffman
http://lawenforcementtoday.com/2013/05/07/in-memoriam-–-officer-tim-huffman/

 

[ChrisK]

Source? How did you come to that conclusion? Perhaps I'm misreading, or misunderstanding something, or my sources wrong? From what I understand he was in his vehicle filling out a report when his vehicle was hit by the truck then the truck pushed his vehicle into the other vehicles. From what I understand none of the other emergency responders reported injuries.


In Memoriam - Officer Tim Huffman
http://lawenforcementtoday.com/2013/05/07/in-memoriam-–-officer-tim-huffman/

It was in the article you originally linked.

 

[weilke]

Source? How did you come to that conclusion?

By looking at the local coverage on the event.

This is from the Yuma Sun (the quote should be covered by fair use)

http://www.yumasun.com/articles/huffman-87310-officer-rollover.html

One patrol car with the emergency lights flashing was parked in the lane and Huffman’s vehicle was parked a few feet away on the shoulder. Huffman was seated in his vehicle, writing a report.
Moments later an empty tanker truck traveling eastbound in the No. 2 lane approached the closure, according to DPS. Despite the flashing lights and a DPS officer’s attempt to signal to the truck driver, the semi-truck struck the patrol vehicle in the No. 2 lane, pushing it into Huffman’s vehicle. The officer was able to jump out of the way moments before the crash.
However, the force of the impact killed Huffman, who was still inside his vehicle. Officials said Huffman died on impact and was pronounced dead at the scene.

 

[No Joy]

By looking at the local coverage on the event.

This is from the Yuma Sun (the quote should be covered by fair use)

http://www.yumasun.com/articles/huffman-87310-officer-rollover.html

One patrol car with the emergency lights flashing was parked in the lane and Huffman’s vehicle was parked a few feet away on the shoulder. Huffman was seated in his vehicle, writing a report.
Moments later an empty tanker truck traveling eastbound in the No. 2 lane approached the closure, according to DPS. Despite the flashing lights and a DPS officer’s attempt to signal to the truck driver, the semi-truck struck the patrol vehicle in the No. 2 lane, pushing it into Huffman’s vehicle. The officer was able to jump out of the way moments before the crash.
However, the force of the impact killed Huffman, who was still inside his vehicle. Officials said Huffman died on impact and was pronounced dead at the scene.

Thanks. That's probably a more accurate source for this matter. Though the facts are different than what I thought.

It still doesn't change that the truck driver was at fault.

It still doesn't change my opinion that he is a hero, that died in service to protect and serve.

In my opinion the officer that was blocking traffic, was probably acting within the protocol, and probably shouldn't be disciplined.

Though I do think emergency responders should add to or change some of their procedures and add additional some equipment.

A lot of LEOs and other emergency responders have been injured and killed by inattentive drivers, or drivers that lost control rubbernecking or whatnot.

Cop gets hit by car during traffic control
http://youtu.be/TecrjFXxNSY

cop hit
http://youtu.be/gqz-n9M2ydI

 

[weilke]

In my opinion the officer that was blocking traffic, was probably acting within the protocol, and probably shouldn't be disciplined.

I am not a cop and not sure what procedures in AZ are on this. When I see lanes blocked around here, they usually have one cruiser about 1/4 mile further back with an officer in a high-viz vest and a wand getting drivers attention an pointing them to change lanes.

Nothing excuses the inattention of this particular trucker, but there are situations where the lane-blocking thing is done in a less than safe manner. You change from the left into the right lane, and whoops there is a cruiser parked right in front of you.

This is one of things that are safer at night because you can see the flashers a mile out. Daytime in the desert, not so much.

 

[silver-eagle]

This is a shame, nobody should have to die while earning a living. Stopping on a freeway or highway is downright dangerous no matter what the circumstances, but probably especially more for cops and highway workers. They do it as a matter of course in their jobs, and probably are not as on guard as most of us would be if we had to change a tire or some such thing. Much like looking in the gas tank, but not seeing in the gas tank because we do it so much.

I can see the day coming when all cars and trucks will be operated by computers, with no driver input at all, not even a steering wheel or peddles on the floor, people just sit in the contraptions after telling it where they want to go. No need for drivers licenses, no traffic tickets, no dead people on our highways.

-John

Technology breaks. That is the major impediment to autonomous vehicles. Just ask my antilock brakes which just yesterday left a 40 foot patch of rubber.
No thank you.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Technology breaks. That is the major impediment to autonomous vehicles. Just ask my antilock brakes which just yesterday left a 40 foot patch of rubber.
No thank you.

Plenty of progress is being made on autonomous vehicles (and robots) since DARPA has been running its Grand Challenges:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Grand_Challenge

DARPA Robotics Trials (http://www.theroboticschallenge.org/) are scheduled for December 20 and 21 at the Homestead Speedway in Florida. The trials will be open to the public.

 

[Dart]

No, it's a shame, but to park in a motion lane of an interstate is just poor policy. There is a reason that when the highway department does such things they use big trucks with energy absorbers on the back.

Henning is just saying what needs to be said. I put on lots of miles behind the windshield and I see emergency vehicles blocking lanes that don't need to be blocked on a regular basis.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Chatted with a MIT professor about their DARPA car, he said it is incredibly difficult to make a computer that can drive a car considering all the randomness on the street. The cars aren't even in the real world and dopey thing mess them up. Just because computers can fly doesn't mean they can drive. Driving is harder.

 

[Henning]

Chatted with a MIT professor about their DARPA car, he said it is incredibly difficult to make a computer that can drive a car considering all the randomness on the street. The cars aren't even in the real world and dopey thing mess them up. Just because computers can fly doesn't mean they can drive. Driving is harder.

I agree with that, we'll have autonomous airliners long before we have autonomous cars. There are just too many targets and points of attention to process and filter while driving and only 2 dimensions of control.

 

[ChrisK]

I agree with that, we'll have autonomous airliners long before we have autonomous cars. There are just too many targets and points of attention to process and filter while driving and only 2 dimensions of control.

I don't think so. I think a collaborative controlled freeway system that allows automated assist cars only is in our future.

 

[Henning]

I don't think so. I think a collaborative controlled freeway system that allows automated assist cars only is in our future.

Automated assist is available today, we already have cars that will automatically enforce spacing and parallel park the car. Autonomy is a several levels of magnitude more complicated especially in crowded city driving. For a car to process the risk of kids playing ball in a yard or notice that someone is sitting in that car that just parked 200 feet ahead and is likely to open the door in front of you, that is yet well beyond our technological grasp.

 

[N801BH]

Automated assist is available today, we already have cars that will automatically enforce spacing and parallel park the car. Autonomy is a several levels of magnitude more complicated especially in crowded city driving. For a car to process the risk of kids playing ball in a yard or notice that someone is sitting in that car that just parked 200 feet ahead and is likely to open the door in front of you, that is yet well beyond our technological grasp.

The scary part of automated assist is that the general public will see it as another task they don't have to perform and start driving with their head up their a$$ even further...

 

[Henning]

The scary part of automated assist is that the general public will see it as another task they don't have to perform and start driving with their head up their a$$ even further...

Quite likely...

 

[silver-eagle]

Automated assist is available today, we already have cars that will automatically enforce spacing and parallel park the car. Autonomy is a several levels of magnitude more complicated especially in crowded city driving. For a car to process the risk of kids playing ball in a yard or notice that someone is sitting in that car that just parked 200 feet ahead and is likely to open the door in front of you, that is yet well beyond our technological grasp.

My problem isn't that technology cannot handle driving. My issue is how long before the damned thing blue screens on you while at 60 or 70 miles an hour. Sure the stuff is getting better but can you imagine rebooting your CAR while racing down the road?
And we have distracted driving now. Screw that! Assisted driving or autonomous. Nope! Fool's errand.

 

[Geico266]

Meanwhile cops are driving around listening to the radio, using a mounted laptop, running a radar gun and texting. Most everyone is guilty of this stuff. Despite the cost it will continue.

A LEOkilled 2 young women driving at high speed while looking at his comouter. Their mother talked to our police department yesterday. She goes around the country and talks to police departments for a living.

 

[Henning]

My problem isn't that technology cannot handle driving. My issue is how long before the damned thing blue screens on you while at 60 or 70 miles an hour. Sure the stuff is getting better but can you imagine rebooting your CAR while racing down the road?
And we have distracted driving now. Screw that! Assisted driving or autonomous. Nope! Fool's errand.

It's been several years since I last saw the BSD. When was the last time you had to reboot the computer currently living in your car while enroute? With dedicated computer systems that aren't subject to random add ons and downloads, it doesn't greatly concern me, especially since a primary control system will be triple redundant. We just don't have the technical capability yet to make a computer that can safely drive on 'surface streets'. As for limited access highways, I see them being quite useful and that technology is reasonably close, however it will take quite some time before all the cars are replaced that don't have it. Think of the time and fuel savings of no stop and go traffic jams on the daily commute on the freeways.

 

[rwellner98]

We just don't have the technical capability yet to make a computer that can safely drive on 'surface streets'.

Google has been doing that for a year. I was involved with an automaker starting work down this path 10 years ago. This stuff is probably going to happen commercially in the next 5-10 years. Sooner if you think that offloading 90% of the work from humans counts. Early results suggest that *today* the computer is a vastly safer driver than humans. That will only improve as technology progresses. Insurance rate reductions will be a driver for adoption.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdgQpa1pUUE

 

[Norman]

As for limited access highways, I see them being quite useful and that technology is reasonably close, however it will take quite some time before all the cars are replaced that don't have it. Think of the time and fuel savings of no stop and go traffic jams on the daily commute on the freeways.

And what happens when the system fails to detect something like black ice and takes you around a curve at highway speed?

 

[Henning]

And what happens when the system fails to detect something like black ice and takes you around a curve at highway speed?

Likely the same thing as when humans fail to notice black ice although the computer linked to individual brakes as they are now with traction and handling control systems, have a better chance of recovering than the typical human.

 

[N801BH]

Likely the same thing as when humans fail to notice black ice although the computer linked to individual brakes as they are now with traction and handling control systems, have a better chance of recovering than the typical human.

Either way, be it the computer or a human driver........... The vehicle is going in the ditch...

 

[Henning]

Either way, be it the computer or a human driver........... The vehicle is going in the ditch...

Just ride the slide...

 

[MAKG1]

Google has been doing that for a year. I was involved with an automaker starting work down this path 10 years ago. This stuff is probably going to happen commercially in the next 5-10 years. Sooner if you think that offloading 90% of the work from humans counts. Early results suggest that *today* the computer is a vastly safer driver than humans. That will only improve as technology progresses. Insurance rate reductions will be a driver for adoption.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdgQpa1pUUE

Google has been doing this for much more than a year and has surprisingly little to say about it. Results are not early, and the statements require a LOT of qualifications.

If you keep the system within its design parameters all the time, it's safer than a human. That qualifier is truly problematic, as real life has a way of not paying attention to your design parameters.

The black ice example is a good one. That can be designed for, but it is rather specific, and anticipating it requires new sensors. A blind curve with deer is another. A line of parked cars next to a busy playground is another. What about things like hail and severe weather?

Automakers have been playing with various forms of assist and autonomous driving for decades. Nothing works anywhere near the hype. Even ABS doesn't live up to its hype; you're not getting any insurance discounts for that and you haven't for years because it has been demonstrated that they do not reduce accident rates. And trust me, ABS is NOT FUN on soft roadways or when age plugs an actuator.

 

[Henning]

Google has been doing this for much more than a year and has surprisingly little to say about it. Results are not early, and the statements require a LOT of qualifications.

If you keep the system within its design parameters all the time, it's safer than a human. That qualifier is truly problematic, as real life has a way of not paying attention to your design parameters.

The black ice example is a good one. That can be designed for, but it is rather specific, and anticipating it requires new sensors. A blind curve with deer is another. A line of parked cars next to a busy playground is another. What about things like hail and severe weather?

Automakers have been playing with various forms of assist and autonomous driving for decades. Nothing works anywhere near the hype. Even ABS doesn't live up to its hype; you're not getting any insurance discounts for that and you haven't for years because it has been demonstrated that they do not reduce accident rates. And trust me, ABS is NOT FUN on soft roadways or when age plugs an actuator.

ABS sucks on the snow and ice when you actually know how to drive on snow and ice using slides to your advantage.

 

[denverpilot]

ABS sucks on the snow and ice when you actually know how to drive on snow and ice using slides to your advantage.

Or how to dig tires into deep snow on top of dirt when there's a slick layer on top.

I got a chuckle out of the blind curve plus deer one. Who needs the curve? Headlights often can't illuminate wildlife far enough ahead to be within the vehicle's minimum stopping distance in perfect conditions. Bambi jumps, no time.

Both are examples of: Who's going to teach the computer when NOT to react? Sometimes you want the wheels to stop spinning, and sometimes you're going to have to hit the deer. Try to hit it on the passenger side if you don't have anyone in the vehicle with you.

Even then you might get an antler in the head as it goes over the top. Had a friend who's Jeep Cherokee's roof looked like Swiss cheese from a rather impressive buck's rack she hit doing 70. She never even saw it and never applied the brakes.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I got a chuckle out of the blind curve plus deer one. Who needs the curve? Headlights often can't illuminate wildlife far enough ahead to be within the vehicle's minimum stopping distance in perfect conditions. Bambi jumps, no time.

Yup. Closest I ever came to killing someone in a truck was on a straight road in the middle of Kansas at night. No lights anywhere other than my headlights, and suddenly there's a person in 'em - Though it took me a second to realize that, as the person had black hair and black clothes on.

I swerved *just* hard enough to avoid her, which was pretty hard... But she probably passed less than 3 feet in front of my right headlight in the process. Luckily there was no other traffic and the highway had full-lane-width shoulders, as the swerve and countersteer took up the full width of the pavement and I managed to stay upright. I turned around at the next intersection, went back, turned around, and pulled over to where she was now sitting in the ditch.

She had somehow ****ed off the friends she was riding with and they had ditched her on the side of the road, and she had been walking down the road and was texting someone and wandered out into the middle of the road.

 

[denverpilot]

Yup. Closest I ever came to killing someone in a truck was on a straight road in the middle of Kansas at night. No lights anywhere other than my headlights, and suddenly there's a person in 'em - Though it took me a second to realize that, as the person had black hair and black clothes on.

I swerved *just* hard enough to avoid her, which was pretty hard... But she probably passed less than 3 feet in front of my right headlight in the process. Luckily there was no other traffic and the highway had full-lane-width shoulders, as the swerve and countersteer took up the full width of the pavement and I managed to stay upright. I turned around at the next intersection, went back, turned around, and pulled over to where she was now sitting in the ditch.

She had somehow ****ed off the friends she was riding with and they had ditched her on the side of the road, and she had been walking down the road and was texting someone and wandered out into the middle of the road.

That's scary stuff. My grandfather had a similar story from his driving days. Guy was drunk wandering down the center of the two-lane long before Interstates existed, somewhere between South Dakota and Chicago. Grandpa was thankful there was a bit of dirt on the right side before the slope to the ditch. He always joked that he "used every inch of it and borrowed just a touch more from somewhere."

 

[rwellner98]

Google has been doing this for much more than a year and has surprisingly little to say about it.

You mean other than the 3.2 million hits returned when one googles "google autonomous car"?

Considering how closed lipped the company can be sometimes, I've actually been kind of amazed how much they are talking about this. Perhaps they are trying to spook competition into buying their platform instead of developing one in-house? Dunno.

If you keep the system within its design parameters all the time, it's safer than a human. That qualifier is truly problematic, as real life has a way of not paying attention to your design parameters.

That's your qualification. No one I've worked with in the industry thinks that "sunny day, empty street" is the goal. Computers can see and react better than humans at night. They can pay attention for an infinite amount of time without getting drowsy or distracted. They can simultaneously take input from dozens of sensors and never get bored doing it.

The black ice example is a good one. That can be designed for, but it is rather specific, and anticipating it requires new sensors. A blind curve with deer is another. A line of parked cars next to a busy playground is another. What about things like hail and severe weather?

I think you overestimate how good humans are at reacting to those kinds of things. Having lived the bulk of my life in Chicago and Wisconsin I can say that humans pretty much stink at all of those. It won't take much for the computer to do better.

Automakers have been playing with various forms of assist and autonomous driving for decades. Nothing works anywhere near the hype. Even ABS doesn't live up to its hype; you're not getting any insurance discounts for that and you haven't for years because it has been demonstrated that they do not reduce accident rates. And trust me, ABS is NOT FUN on soft roadways or when age plugs an actuator.

Google: "abs brakes insurance reduction"

You'll find that you do get rate reductions from most companies because they do reduce claims.

 

[denverpilot]

Google: "abs brakes insurance reduction"

You'll find that you do get rate reductions from most companies because they do reduce claims.

Medical claims mostly. They do slow you down better and keep the pointy end forward so all the air bag doohickuses can do their thing. The vehicles still end up totaled.