I know for a fact my Dodge has one, but does anyone have first hand knowledge on whether the LS has something like this ? Watching TV tonight and there was an intersting story. I am sure most have heard of an airplanes "black box", but have you heard of them in automobiles. They do exist. Not exactly little black boxes, but they're called a EDR or Event Data Recorder. Most modern cars like the LS have onboard systems such as airbags, stability control, traction control. These systems monitor data from various sensors and are stored within the computer, much like check engine codes that can be checked later. The "Black Box" can record informational data, such as: engine / vehicle speed (5 seconds before impact), brake status (5 seconds before impact), throttle position(s), and even the state of the driver's seat belt switch (on/off). Here in Florida there is a guy serving 30 yrs in prison for the info obtained from his "black box". If you get into an accident that causes severe or fatal injuries you can most certainly expect for the data from your car to be used against you, your car becomes a crime scene and everything inside, including the computers can be subjected to inspection. I can personally account for this because my wife had an accident earlier this year and her airbag did not deploy which pissed me off, so i started to threaten Daimler Chrysler. They sent a rep. to inspect our car and was able to download data out of my car that suggested that the conditions did not require the airbag to deploy. So that capability is absolutely real. I guess i am posting this for informational purposes and to let anyone know who drives recklessly that you have a silent witness to your driving riding with you at all times. Right now there is debate on whether those systems should be allowed as evidence in court, but the auto makers say that the data collected is as accurate as you can get. Just something to keep in the back of your mind when driving.
Lincoln LS Black Box ?
- Thread starter Fla02LS
- Start date
2001LS8Sport
Dedicated LVC Member
Old news. But it depends on the year of your car before data capture was implemented. Most of the Ford products I've owned have stated in the owner's manual that the capability is there. It even states that the information is made available to law enforcement, insurance companies, and FoMoCo.
There was a huge personal rights debate when this technology was put into place. If you really want to get nervous, on cars with such things as OnStar, etc, they have the capability to send out the conversations in your car. Law enforcement lobbied hard for this capability. That way, in order to listen to a conversation, all they would need is a warrant and a call to the manufacturer to remotely turn on the feature. Also, with navigation systems, they can track your location and speed and burst a signal to law enforcement. The manufacturers balked at that and didn't design it in (as far as we know) Right now, GM vehicles can take a snap shot of your emissions system and email it to you. It's a new world out there.
There was a huge personal rights debate when this technology was put into place. If you really want to get nervous, on cars with such things as OnStar, etc, they have the capability to send out the conversations in your car. Law enforcement lobbied hard for this capability. That way, in order to listen to a conversation, all they would need is a warrant and a call to the manufacturer to remotely turn on the feature. Also, with navigation systems, they can track your location and speed and burst a signal to law enforcement. The manufacturers balked at that and didn't design it in (as far as we know) Right now, GM vehicles can take a snap shot of your emissions system and email it to you. It's a new world out there.
All that stuff i know, as i stated i found out firsthand that my 2001 Dodge Intrepid does indeed have "recording" capabilities. My question was if anyone knew from personal experience or knowledge that our particular model (Lincoln LS) has such recording capabilities. Since 2004 all models with these devices must be have a disclaimer in the owners manual as having an "Event Data Recorder". I searched my 2005 owners manual and found no such disclaimer. So, with people like Quik who has been doing alot of tinkering around and others just wanted to know if our cars have this capability. Doesnt the LS Navi. unit use a DVD based system which cant be tracked like a GPS? Does Ford even have any form of an OnStar type sytem? Never seen one.
Quik LS
Dedicated LVC Member
In the 03 owner's manual has the following statement regarding data recording (pages 6-7):
-----------------------
Data Recording
Computers in your vehicle are capable of recording detailed data potentially including but not limited to information such as:
� the use of restraint systems including seat belts by the driver and passengers,
� information about the performance of various systems and modules in the vehicle, and
� information related to engine, throttle, steering, brake or other system status.
Any of this information could potentially include information regarding how the driver operates the vehicle potentially including but not limited to information regarding vehicle speed, brake or accelerator application or steering input. This information may be stored during regular operation or in a crash or near crash event.
This stored information may be read out and used by:
� Ford Motor Company.
� service and repair facilities.
� law enforcement or government agencies.
� others who may assert a right or obtain your consent to know such information.
-----------------------
Data Recording
Computers in your vehicle are capable of recording detailed data potentially including but not limited to information such as:
� the use of restraint systems including seat belts by the driver and passengers,
� information about the performance of various systems and modules in the vehicle, and
� information related to engine, throttle, steering, brake or other system status.
Any of this information could potentially include information regarding how the driver operates the vehicle potentially including but not limited to information regarding vehicle speed, brake or accelerator application or steering input. This information may be stored during regular operation or in a crash or near crash event.
This stored information may be read out and used by:
� Ford Motor Company.
� service and repair facilities.
� law enforcement or government agencies.
� others who may assert a right or obtain your consent to know such information.
Wow, your right, there it is in black and white. I didnt start at the beginning, i went to the SRS section. My '05 manual has it worded a little different but its pretty much saying the same thing. Like i said, for those who didnt know this existed it sure puts things in a different perspective in regards to racing around on the roads. I for one am not 100% innocent.Quik LS said:
9enisP
Active LVC Member
Is there a way to disable this "feature"? Can this thing be bypassed without a major wiring nightmare? I don't speed around town (anymore), but I'd rather not have this impartial witness in my car if anything ever happen.
Quik LS
Dedicated LVC Member
nope - all modern cars have it
9enisP said:
I value my privacy/rights as much as the next guy..but in this case, I personally think the pro's outweigh the cons. My driving record proves that historically, I am a safe, responsible driver. In the event there is a major accident (lets even assume a life was lost, and criminal charges might be an issue) where it might be difficult to tell whether me, or the other driver was at fault/driving recklessly..it's good to know that chances are, the other driver has a car equipped with the same EDR device as me...and that the boxes could potentially tell the whole story/exonerate me from a possible vehicular manslaughter charge.
On the other hand, if I was speeding into an intersection and failed to brake..and killed someone.
Then I guess I would have to accept the consequences of my actions.
I totally agree that one should take responsibility for their own actions. I also see the point about if it was the other driver who's computer worked in your favor. I still just question the reliability of these systems for use in a court of law. The news story i saw was about a guy here in Florida. He was driving at night and plowed into two teenage girls pulling out of a driveway, killing both girls at the scene. The speed limit was 30 mph. His cars computer said he was going 110 mph. The driver said he was doing 50 mph, the crash scene analysts had estimated his speed at 60 mph, yet he was prosecuted and sentenced to 30 yrs because the computer said he was doing 110 mph and didnt apply the brake at all. I can understand the computer being used to "help" in the reconstruction, but i dont agree with them being used in court. The so called auto "experts" state that those systems require no maintenence and there is no assurance that they are functioning with 100% accuracy. They say they measure wheel speed which doesnt always equel vehicle speed. I dont know, i'm sure everyone has their own opinion. I dont look at it as much as a privacy thing as i do an accuracy thing. How many of you have had cars where something electrical went wacky for some reason?
GWL
Dedicated LVC Member
If he was really sentenced based on the computer speed, he had a rotten lawyer. But he admitted to 50 and the reconstruction indicated 60. More than enough to get that sentence for double manslaughter.Fla02LS said:
I am not a lawyer and dont know the law to that extent, but a car backing out of a driveway into oncoming traffic is definately their fault. Yeah, if the guy was going 30 instead of 50-60 mph maybe they would have survived, but the actual fault falls on the car backing up. I dont know the exact details and again i dont now the law to that extent but there is a huge difference between "speeding" at 50-60 mph and 110 mph with no braking. I could be wrong. Vehicular manslaughter is when you kill someone due to YOUR reckless driving, its max. sentence is 15 yrs. So he got the max. sentence for both homicides. Speeding in a residential area might be considered reckless in this case. But again the other driver in this case pulled out into the path of the guy. Its one of those things i guess that could happen to anyone at anytime.GWL said:
GWL
Dedicated LVC Member
Your right about traffic law (fault is a separate issue), but prosecutors, judges and juries do have discretion and can conclude that the excessive speed was so great that a reasonable and prudent driver could not avoid or possibly (depending on the topography of the accident scene) even see the speeding car. I do agree that there are a lot of missing facts in the initial description, and I also agree that we do not want to get to the point that we get tickets in the mail based on GPS readings of our speed. BTW some jurisdictions are already issuing red light citations based on cameras.Fla02LS said:
Quik LS
Dedicated LVC Member
When I lived in Toronto the police issued a bunch of tickets based on the new toll road 407 - it obviously tracks when you get on and off it - so the police measured out the disstance of each on-ramp and off-ramp. You would receive a speeding ticket in the mail to your exit proved to be in a time faster than the speed limit. It was later over-ruled and they had to stop.
There are insurance companies tsting the carchip - you get discount if you stay under or at the speed limit 95% of the time. They use the car-chip that plugs into your ODBII ports and uploads your computer. You have to e-mail the datalog in every month and there can be 'no data gaps' where you unplugged the chip and drove around.
There are insurance companies tsting the carchip - you get discount if you stay under or at the speed limit 95% of the time. They use the car-chip that plugs into your ODBII ports and uploads your computer. You have to e-mail the datalog in every month and there can be 'no data gaps' where you unplugged the chip and drove around.
2001LS8Sport
Dedicated LVC Member
Fla02LS said:
One flaw in your reasoning here. If he had been going the speed limit, would the accident have been avoided? Very possible because he could have possibly stopped, and maybe the car backing out would have had time to get out of the way.
Perfect example....a 'vette and a bike were racing early one morning on Arizona avenue in Chandler. Some poor guy pulled out in front of them and was actually hit by both vehicles. The guy on the bike and the guy who pulled out in front of them both died. The guy in the 'vette is in prison. The guy who pulled in front of them received absolutely none of the blame because it was dark and at a normal rate of speed, the lights were plenty far away for him to have room to pull out. He couldn't tell they were moving at a high rate of speed.
Your point of inaccurate data being stored is a valid. However, this is the first time I have ever heard of that happening and I would really like to know more about it...like was it REALLY inaccurate? Do we know the whole story?
In response to the redlight camera thing. There is one particular intersection here in Orlando where they set up a day/night camera system that busted you and mailed you a ticket. The number of citations and revenue created was crazy. The news made a big story about it, its totally obvious when you see it yet people would still blow thru the light. As far as the guy serving 30 yrs. I dont know alot of details but there is one HUGE detail that for me says alot. The guy was driving a newer LS1 Trans Am. Due to my own accident in my Trans Am i dont think there is a chance in hell that guy would be alive to serve any sentence if he was truly going 110 mph in a Trans Am. No way. They would have been scooping him up with a shovel. But the main point of that incident is the police crash scene investigator only estimated his speed at 60 mph yet they still used the 110 mph computer readout. Its almost like they wanted to make an example out of him, especially killing two teenage girls. Usually speeding alone unless very excessive (110 mph) isnt considered "reckless driving". If he had been going 50 mph and was on a cell phone and killed the girls he would still have been charged with reckless driving. But i dont think going 50-60 mph is going to fall under reckless driving. I guess that was the whole arguement/defense in this case. Its the fact that they used the computer readout to convict on a reckless driving charge. Here in Florida we have a "careless driving" charge and a "reckless driving" charge. Careless is you doing something that happens that you didnt/couldnt reasonably expect. Reckless is you doing something where you reasonable expect a certain outcome. Example: Careless = not using a turn signal and as a result cut someone off and cause an accident. Reckless = Racing a guy on the interstate, guy blows a tire and crashes and dies.
northstar11
Active LVC Member
There is a video on the cnn web page right now bout the black box in cars. Check it out.
Thats the exact story i am talking about. They say a pontiac grand am but the photo of the wreckage is definately a Trans Am. And i was incorrect on some numbers. The computer said 114 mph, the police said 80-90 mph, an "expert" said 60 mph.northstar11 said:
http://www.cnn.com/
GWL
Dedicated LVC Member
I just watched the video. Don't forget that in typical reporter fashion, the piece is not complete. It also does not report what weight the EDR was given in the trial or sentencing. BTW, 27 years in Law Enforcement tells me that this guy was not doing only 50 MPH. On the other hand without knowing the mass displacement (distance and weight moved) of each vehicle I cannot say he was doing 80 either.Fla02LS said:
My 2006 defiantly has an Event Data Recorder. What it does not record is road conditions such as ice or oil where the rear wheels spin faster than car speed. I suppose that the accuracy of the recorders has to be established by Courts in each jurisdiction on a case by case basis until the Supreme Court Rules or enough Judges around the country begin to "Take Judicial Notice" of the accuracy. Until then you are at the mercy of the defense attorney's ability to cast doubt on the accuracy in each individual case.
In any event, the point that there is somebody watching everything you do in these vehicles is valid.
So now here is the real question. How is the data stored? Flash memory needs power to maintain the data. Is there a battery that maintains the memory? How hard to defeat data acquisition without defeating the SRS?
I look at that case thinking if his car didnt have a EDR, would the other existing evidence have resulting in the same conviction/sentence. I also second the crappy lawyer theory. I think with three different versions of the speed a good lawyer could have created reasonable doubt.
Thats a question i had thought about also. I wanted to know if anyone who has done alot of tinkering around knew how they work. Wonder if some form of a master "kill switch" could cut the power from the battery and wipe clean the data.GWL said:
Barwick
Well-Known LVC Member
Quik LS said:
That's so freaking BS... there's roads by my house that are 35 mph, yet it is an EIGHT LANE ROAD, four lanes each way, so nobody goes 35 mph. Basically, if you go 35 mph, you're going to get freaking run over. It's more dangerous to go the speed limit than it is to go 15 over the speed limit. But the local government won't change it because they collect so much freaking money there. So much for "we're from the government and we're here to help you". Right...
What?? No, flash is a type of memory that is non-volatile, which means that it retains data when power is lost. When you take your flash memory card out of your digital camera to put it in your card reader or to take it to a photo shop to get prints, do you lose your photos? No. And besides non-volatile memory types like FLASH or EEPROM, lower-power volatile memories can be kept alive for weeks or months at a time by a super cap or a small battery. You can forget about wiping the data recorder clean by disconnecting your battery after an accident/whatever.
GWL
Dedicated LVC Member
macboy said:
You are right, I was thinking of RAM not flash. But the point is still, can these histories be modified in any way after the fact. If so, then courts will not be so willing to accept them as prima facia evidence of anything without a strict chain of custody. If not, then your cooked if you were violating the law at the time of the accident.
PaulJK
Active LVC Member
Well, I hate to tell you guys but, if you carry a cell phone, you can be tracked also. Supposedly this feature enables emergency services to find you if you call 911... at least that's all the reason they needed to build tracking capability into EVERYONE'S cell phone.
Yeah, right ... buy a cell phone using a three word name that includes Osama, then start using words in your cell phone conversations like ... airliner .... anthrax ... white house ... and see how fast it takes before guys in sunglasses and black Suburbans start appearing outside your house and find you even if you're on vacation
The GPS satellites are NOT only for commercial use - the military uses the same satellites but with a different software encryption that gives a more accurate location. You have a GPS device, you can be tracked and pin-pointed at will, just like a wild friggin' animal with a tag in its ear; not only where you are now, but where you have been, how long you stayed, how long it took you to travel, what route you took and how fast you went.
Yeah, right ... buy a cell phone using a three word name that includes Osama, then start using words in your cell phone conversations like ... airliner .... anthrax ... white house ... and see how fast it takes before guys in sunglasses and black Suburbans start appearing outside your house and find you even if you're on vacation
The GPS satellites are NOT only for commercial use - the military uses the same satellites but with a different software encryption that gives a more accurate location. You have a GPS device, you can be tracked and pin-pointed at will, just like a wild friggin' animal with a tag in its ear; not only where you are now, but where you have been, how long you stayed, how long it took you to travel, what route you took and how fast you went.
Not only for commercial use? The GPS system is a military system; commercial uses are secondary.PaulJK said:
And you can't be tracked by GPS unless you have something that communicates which is using GPS (like a cell phone). The Global Positioning System uses satellites to send out time signals which are used by GPS receivers to triangulate locations; it's not two-way communications, at least for civilian applications.