Stuck cruise-control fatal accident .

[poundcoin]

Absolutely frightening but what would you do if this happened ?
I've only got a bog standard hatchback , so don't fully understand all the automatic gizmos on the car in question .
In mine if it happened I would just turn the ignition off but appears he didn't have that option ?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2254198/d ... capitated/

[swill453]

Some more detail here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/24/drivers-last-moments-recorded-999-call-ashe-tells-operator-cars/

Including the finding that "The accelerator pedal is recorded as having been depressed fully, five seconds prior to the impact".

Something very strange going on there I think.

Scott.

[Alaric]

In mine if it happened I would just turn the ignition off but appears he didn't have that option ?

With power steering and assisted brakes, you could lose both steering and brakes with the engine off. As it says in the report, putting the car into neutral should have been possible. A warning perhaps, not to use cruise control unless you understand how it works.

[moorfield]

Something very strange going on there I think.

Yes, a Skoda Octavia reaching 119mph

But seriously, I'm very very surprised that the car could not easily be put into neutral, if that is the case then every single Octavia will be recalled and Skoda will have a problem larger than the emissions scandal on their hands ...

[bungeejumper]

Not to doubt the poor sod's account of the event, but people can do peculiar things under extreme pressure, and it's very possible that he had things that he could have done.

I remember hearing about two people who'd drowned when their car went into a reservoir, and when the divers went in they found the car upright, its doors wide open - and both occupants still strapped into their seatbelts. In their panic, that was what they'd forgotten.

Nasty business, though. So the guy had eight and a half minutes in which to contemplate his imminent mortality? Eurgh.

BJ

[staffordian]

I'm sure this isn't the first incident I've read about where a car has apparently developed a fault which had this result, and frankly, I find them extremely difficult to understand.

I've not seen anything in reports of this recent case which explicitly states whether the gearbox was manual or auto, but there seem to be mentions of a clutch so I'm assuming the former. So surely just depressing the clutch would stop it gathering speed, if not actually helping it to stop.

Why not then steer towards the central barrier to rub along it then turn towards it more to slow the car to a stop?

Or gradually apply the handbrake?

He's quoted as being a car enthusiast but he needs advice of a call handler as to whether to try the handbrake?

I know many car controls are "fly by wire" these days, but not all of them,surely. And for all to fail without the evidence being here afterwards?

A sad case, but IMHO many unanswered questions.

[bungeejumper]

So surely just depressing the clutch would stop it gathering speed, if not actually helping it to stop.

The VW that I had with CC (Passat) had a very distinct physical on/off switch to enable/disable cruise control. You pushed the steering column stalk back to turn the system off, and pulled it toward you by an inch or so to turn it on. Only then were you in a position to set it. Pushing the column stalk back away from you would always have cancelled CC.

A quick Google suggests that current Octavias are fitted with the same forward/back stalk system. Either he was too panicky to think of that, or else there was something very seriously wrong with the car. I'm still guessing pilot error. Poor bloke.

BJ

[poundcoin]

I used to have a 52 plate Mondeo and as far as I remember touching any of the pedals disengaged cruise (not sure about clutch) .
I found it more of a faff as there weren't many occasions when you had a clear run . In fact trying not to touch the pedals to keep it in cruise is probably more dangerous and probably explains some of the erratic driving you see .

[dionaeamuscipula]

I used to have a 52 plate Mondeo and as far as I remember touching any of the pedals disengaged cruise (not sure about clutch) .

Usually, pressing the accelerator will not disengage cruise control. Pressing the brake does. Not sure about the clutch, my Mondeo is automatic.

In this instance, the car has apparently accelerated under cruise control, which is abnormal behaviour even if it has become stuck on. The evidence noted that the accelerator pedal was depressed until it was too late suggests perhaps that the driver had in some way become confused and didn't realise he had his foot on that pedal.That the crash took place at 3 in the morning may have some bearing on this.

DM

[staffordian]

I used to have a 52 plate Mondeo and as far as I remember touching any of the pedals disengaged cruise (not sure about clutch)

I've had two manuals with cruise control and in each case touching either the brake or the clutch disengaged it. The accelerator is still active in the sense that if you wish to go faster than the set speed, eg to quickly overtake something, you can do so without it deactivating the CC, so as soon as you take your foot off the accelerator the speed falls to whatever is set.

Staffordian

[Slarti]

I used to have a 52 plate Mondeo and as far as I remember touching any of the pedals disengaged cruise (not sure about clutch) .
I found it more of a faff as there weren't many occasions when you had a clear run . In fact trying not to touch the pedals to keep it in cruise is probably more dangerous and probably explains some of the erratic driving you see .

I've had automatic Sierra Sapphire, Volvo 240, Vauxhall Carlton and 4 Toyotas plus hire cars and in no case did the accelerator disengage cruise control.

Brake did, or the disengage switch, or turning it off, if available.

But, I've not seen a car that you can't put into neutral. Though if you're only used to using flappy paddles, you may not think of the stick on the floor, in a bad situation.

Slarti

[TheSocialClimber]

With power steering and assisted brakes, you could lose both steering and brakes with the engine off. As it says in the report, putting the car into neutral should have been possible. A warning perhaps, not to use cruise control unless you understand how it works.

To be fair, brakes and steering will still work, though more effort will usually be required to operate them. Shouldn't be a problem for most people, but yer standard FrailOldLady(tm) may indeed not be able to use them effectively.

TSC.

[Clitheroekid]

From the press report:

The car was travelling at 116mph with the accelerator pedal fully depressed five seconds before the crash, while no braking was recorded.

... there were no skid marks near the layby

The steering input data indicates small deviations left and right during the last five seconds.

The car continued to accelerate and hit a top speed of 119mph with the accelerator pedal pressed two-thirds of the way down, two seconds before the impact at 94mph when it was fully off

"The vehicle was badly damaged in the collision but subsequent extensive investigations have not revealed any evidence of the faults described by Mr Gandhi.”

I know it was discounted, but this looks like suicide to me. Why was no braking recorded? Why were there no skid marks? Even if one accepts that the cruise control had somehow jammed on and that he was unable to select neutral and that he was unable to turn off the engine (an inherently very unlikely combination) the one thing that anyone would do in that situation is use the brakes.

As I understand it the brakes will overcome the accelerator if both are used simultaneously, and the only logical reason someone in this situation would not use them is because he didn't actually want to stop the car.

Also, the speed had reduced from 119 mph to 94 mph immediately before the impact, and at that point the accelerator was fully off. So if the car had started to slow down why did Mr Gandhi not steer so as to avoid the lorry? In fact why would he drive into the back of a parked lorry anyway, when he had the choice of carrying on along the motorway?

It was 3:00 in the morning. I've driven along the M40 at that time and it's virtually empty, so whilst such a situation would no doubt have been alarming he could just have kept driving along an empty motorway quite safely until the car ran out of fuel.

Finally, the slight adjustments to the steering in the last 5 seconds sounds like someone who is deliberately targeting the car at an object, in this case the lorry.

I have heard of many such suicides. In Germany driving into a motorway bridge support at high speed is (or was) a recognised way of committing suicide in such a way that the death wouldn't be classed as such. The motive was often to avoid life insurance companies refusing to pay because of suicide exclusions, but I would imagine there are also many men (and I suspect drivers who die like this are nearly all men) who just don't want the stigma attaching to suicide, and the possible shame that it might bring on their families.

A disguised suicide would also explain the reason he phoned the police - a deliberate attempt to place on record that it was not suicide.

But it's very sad, whatever the reason it happened.

[Alaric]

It was 3:00 in the morning. I've driven along the M40 at that time and it's virtually empty, so whilst such a situation would no doubt have been alarming he could just have kept driving along an empty motorway quite safely until the car ran out of fuel.

If he was travelling out of London, he could reach Scotland before running out of Motorway. Travelling towards London, as the reports seem to indicate, he's got perhaps 10-15 miles of non-motorway dual carriageway before he runs into traffic lights the other side of Hanger Lane.

[bungeejumper]

In Germany driving into a motorway bridge support at high speed is (or was) a recognised way of committing suicide in such a way that the death wouldn't be classed as such. The motive was often to avoid life insurance companies refusing to pay because of suicide exclusions, but I would imagine there are also many men (and I suspect drivers who die like this are nearly all men) who just don't want the stigma attaching to suicide, and the possible shame that it might bring on their families.

On the clear understanding that the coroner found no reason to suspect suicide (and he would have interrogated the family pretty closely), I'd have to say that deliberately using somebody else's vehicle as your personal passport to oblivion strikes me as just about the most disgusting and shameful thing one could possibly do. What about the truck driver, who was probably sleeping in the cab? Did nobody consider that the lorry might have been shunted forward into somebody much more vulnerable? (As per the Polish driver collision we were recently discussing on the old Fool forum.)

I've known two suicides, both of whom had no immediately obvious reasons for doing it. One gassed himself in his car, and the other walked out into a field and blew his head off with a shotgun. Neither put anybody else's life at risk. And for that, I am sincerely grateful to them.

BJ

[TopOnePercent]

I've had the throttle jam fully open on my before on the wifes Shopping Trolley (throttle pot return spring tied itself in knots). I just popped the clutch, stuck it in neutral, allowing the engine to rev its knackers off, while safely pulling over to the side of the road and stopping. If turning off the ignition doesn't work, pulling the battery leads should - combustion requiring something to burn (fuel), oxygen, and a spark (ok, diesel doesn't).

I can't quite comprehend how anyone would manage to have a major accident due to a sticky accelerator.

[staffordian]

I've had the throttle jam fully open on my before on the wifes Shopping Trolley (throttle pot return spring tied itself in knots). I just popped the clutch, stuck it in neutral, allowing the engine to rev its knackers off, while safely pulling over to the side of the road and stopping. If turning off the ignition doesn't work, pulling the battery leads should - combustion requiring something to burn (fuel), oxygen, and a spark (ok, diesel doesn't).

I can't quite comprehend how anyone would manage to have a major accident due to a sticky accelerator.

Quite.

I think Ck hit the nail on the head, whilst everyone else was dancing around the elephant in the room, so to speak.

[tournesol]

40 years ago I had the throttle on my mini go into spasm at a very difficult point in my daily journey. I was on a country lane approaching a dog leg bend leading onto a single lane hump back bridge which was at right angles to the road - (it crossed a railway line running parallel with the road). The throttle malfunction happened as I would normally have braked on the approach to the bridge. By the time I realised I had a problem there was not enough road for an emergency stop and I did not want to enter a sharp bend with the brakes hard down. I ended up going round the dogleg at break neck speed and some of the wheels lost contact on the top of the hump-back. By great good luck there was no one coming the other way and I escaped without hurt or damage.

It would have been very easy for a serious accident to have been caused.

I seem to remember a spring had detached from the carburettor.