What’s leaking under the hood? V2X, Recalls, and Safety.

Hey listeners, welcome to the number one podcast named by Jane Perkins. That’s right. We, we apologize for a late thank you to Ms. Jane for coming up with the actual name for this podcast because early on, I don’t even remember if we had a name. And then in season one, we’re like, we need a better name.

Did we have a name?

[00:00:45] Michael: It was just the Center for Auto Safety Podcast.

[00:00:47] Anthony: Not as exciting as their Auto Review Aloha. It was a bit of a muffled, not even close. Yeah. So thank

[00:00:53] Fred: you,

[00:00:53] Anthony: Jane. There we go.

[00:00:55] Fred: Thank you for being my lovely sister,

[00:00:59] Waymo Cars and Software Challenges

[00:00:59] Anthony: and [00:01:00] Jane, have you ever, do you live next to a parking lot full of Waymo cars?

Because this is a follow up from last week where we talked about and linked to the video where collection a flock, a clouder, a murderer of Waymo cars were all just stuck in a parking lot honking at each other. Local residents complained. It’s a fleet. It’s a fleet. Ah, of course, it’s a fleet.

God. And so their Waymo’s director of product and operations, Vishay Nahalani said that, he said, hey, we’re we’ve put out an update and we’re not gonna have these cars honking at each other anymore. And she said, that’s great. Your cars are still honking at each other in the parking lot. But hey, Software is hard, and we’ll discuss more of that later on.

[00:01:44] Fred: I would like to congratulate Waymo on making it onto Stephen Colbert’s Late Show. It was a nice segment, and they say all publicity is good, so congratulations Waymo.

[00:01:58] Anthony: Hey, remember, [00:02:00] people heard about it here first. Or, where, what source we got it from first. Then they heard about it from look, we don’t do original reporting, okay?

We’re just, we’re your weekly summary of auto safety fun. Let’s go into something a little more interesting.

[00:02:17] Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) Technology

[00:02:17] Anthony: Listeners, do you remember a topic we’ve talked about in the past called B2X? This is vehicle to everything. And Michael and Fred, you’re gonna have to jump in and clear some of this up for me.

But the basic idea is that your car will share its speed, position what it’s gonna do with cars around it. So we can be safer. So for example, like if you’re driving through fog, heavy fog, half the time you can’t see what’s around the corner or cars, and so These cars can be paying to each other. They can be interacting with road signs like for speed and seeing, this is exactly what the speed is where a lot of us have cameras on the cars, but sometimes it doesn’t actually pick up the speed.

So it’s a lot of very positive things in [00:03:00] terms of safety from what I understand. And it looks like this is finally the department of transportation roadmap that will hope so will speed up the deployment of the technology. Now, I’m sure neither of you have any thoughts or opinions on such a critical safety.

[00:03:16] Fred: Not at all, but attentive listeners will notice that collisions usually happen when a moving vehicle runs into something that’s not moving in quite the same way. So the idea behind V2X is that everything around the vehicle will announce, here I am, please don’t hit me. And the attentive vehicle will then know where things are and will not hit it.

Michael, is that your understanding of what this is? And also our friends at the FCC may not torpedo it this time because they already put one hole below the hull and the ship is still sailing.

[00:03:54] Michael: Yeah. They got big phone on board with everything now that their technology is going to be used to drive the [00:04:00] system.

So everyone appears to be moving forward and by everyone, it is a lot of people involved here. Ultimately a lot of these.

[00:04:10] Challenges and Future of V2X Deployment

[00:04:10] Michael: A lot of this is going to come down to, how fast the OEMs are getting these technologies into vehicles, because essentially this requires a connected vehicle, you can’t drive around and a dumb car like mine is, you need a smart car that can communicate with.

The devices that are embedded in other vehicles or the infrastructure. And so the OEMs are going to be a big part of getting this out. But there’s a lot of, there’s potential drawbacks. There’s a lot of cybersecurity concerns. Some people have privacy concerns as well. But as the system is rolled out, cybersecurity is going to be.

Incredibly important because you cannot have, bad actors getting in and manipulating what vehicles believe is happening around them. There’s a long way to go. The [00:05:00] timelines that have been set out in the DOT’s recent document are, probably a little optimistic, I’d say I think it’s going to take.

A lot of time to get the states on board, especially all states on board with, embedding technology into every intersection in the state and betting technology into their highways and other infrastructure. But ultimately, and I hope I’m around to see the day when this happens, this could save.

Thousands and thousands of lives every year, you’re talking about, preventing cars from colliding with each other and intersections preventing cars from hitting pedestrians because they know where the pedestrians are, because the pedestrians can have, there’s a lot of, you could put devices in baby strollers to prevent cars from hitting baby strollers.

There’s just an almost limitless number of ways that you number of safety actions that can be taken using [00:06:00] VT2X that could ultimately save, a significant percentage of the lives lost in injuries caused on our roads every year.

[00:06:08] Anthony: So in the past, we know, I remember we talked about how the FCC and telecom companies put a squash in this saying, no, we need the bandwidth.

And so forgetting that’s moved past or it looks like it’s going that, that big phone, as you say, is on board. With this, what other limits are in the way, because from a technical point of view, this doesn’t seem difficult. There’s the capacity you’re saying right now, Michael, you have a dumb car, but I imagine your car, you can plug your phone into your car, and essentially it becomes a smart car.

[00:06:40] Michael: I, it uses Android auto. I have to be plugged in through a USB cable, that, that snazzy little Hyundai Kona that I drove a couple of weeks back. It was pretty nice. It communicated through Bluetooth and I had all my maps and everything right in front of me.

With no distractions whatsoever. [00:07:00] So it was it worked pretty well. I love the idea of a smart car. Just, it actually has to be smart and not use these touch screens in a way that we’ve seen, so consumers, so

[00:07:11] Fred: here’s the hook the pressure on bandwidth remains. And for our attentive listeners, they know that you can only squeeze so much information through a bandwidth.

With a certain size and there’s only 30 megahertz that’s reserved for this application. So there are limits on how much information can go through. That means that there will be relenting pressure from the cell companies to sell cellular services instead of this free bandwidth that’s available from the government.

A problem is that the bandwidth available through cellular systems always has built in latency. So when you’re driving a car, or when the car is driving itself, if you have latency, meaning a dead zone, essentially, that’s more [00:08:00] than a millisecond or so, you can put yourself in danger. Now, the DSRC that was designed by the government has essentially zero latency and also has anonymous features so that nobody will know which car is communicating.

None of that’s available through cellular, so what we need to do is be attentive to the FCC manipulation of the basically the public inputs, which will inevitably in a few years say we don’t need to spend with for safety anymore because we’ve got the cellular services and that’ll be just fine. So FCC will then try to.

Give that bandwidth away to somebody else, no doubt, as they did already with the majority of the bandwidth that Congress had reserved for this traffic safety purpose. So there is a, there is a hidden problem here that 30 megahertz bandwidth isn’t a lot and migration to the cellular [00:09:00] services will mean that you lose the anonymity and you also have increased latency.

Which decreases the safety associated with this. That sounds like a lot of inside baseball stuff, but it’s very important for safety critical functions that require transmission between the rest of the world and the vehicle that contains your living body.

[00:09:24] Michael: Yeah, it doesn’t do you any good to be approaching an intersection where someone’s about to run a red light and hit your car if the the communication to your vehicle to slow down or stop or avoid that is lagging three seconds behind.

[00:09:41] Anthony: So I haven’t, I’ll admit I haven’t read through their roadmap and their timeline, but I imagine something like this can be rolled out like minimal features if your vehicle stops moving that you can basically alert everyone around the road, so you don’t have to put in a ton of information that’s limited bandwidth.

Even with the delay, like that’s still useful. If [00:10:00] there’s a stalled vehicle up ahead, sometimes Google Maps will do that, but it’ll also give you messages like, there’s de blip brie on the road ahead and you’re always looking for it. And there’s nothing cause it’s some crowdsource thing.

[00:10:12] Michael: But at least you’re looking at the road.

[00:10:14] Anthony: And I know it distracts me from watching the latest John Claude Van Damme movie. My, my car time travels and John Claude Van Damme movies are recent anyway.

[00:10:26] Fred: For those younger people, you can look it up on Google and it’ll show you some old movies.

[00:10:31] Anthony: Great. Is there plans to do this in kind of a a limited rollout or just, Hey, let’s not throw everything at once.

First, all of our dream scenarios will let us do very simple things. Like this is the speed limit in the area.

[00:10:45] Fred: So there’s a plan to roll it out. Yeah. And that goes back to the whole idea that in the future, everything will be better. So we don’t need to do anything now. This should be a discussion that people had 10 years ago when that band was [00:11:00] observed and SEC dragged its feet and refused to license the technology so that it could use the rationale that no one’s using it so we can give it to somebody else.

This could be just another way to procrastinate and obfuscate. We don’t know that yet, but our fingers are crossed. It could have tremendous benefits.

[00:11:21] Michael: Okay. Yeah, what they’re look, they’re going to be areas of the country that are going to be impacted first and primarily in major cities where you have the infrastructure to go ahead and start deploying, some of these things on intersections.

I think the goal that they’ve stated, by 2028, they want to have V2X deployed on about a 5th, 20 percent of the national highway system. They want to have a 5th. 25 percent of intersections in the top 75 metro areas signalized, they want them V2X enabled. And they’re, they, [00:12:00] there’s, they’re looking for cyber security to begin development during that, which I don’t know if that’s troublesome or not, this, there’s a large potential for, bad information, getting the systems to potentially cause crashes.

So cybersecurity is going to be really important as they develop it. And the DOT has also laid out, how they’re going to start granting states money to be able to upgrade their infrastructure to accommodate V2X, so there’s ultimately, I think we’re going to see this.

Spread like a lot of things do from cities outward. And, there’s still remain some questions, I’m sure that all of our listeners have experienced problems accessing, cell coverage in certain areas of the country. If there is no cell coverage in your area, then how are these devices based on that technology going to work?

They’re not until you get coverage in that area. And maybe there’s a way for cars to communicate directly to one another when they’re nearby each other without [00:13:00] there being some kind of self, I’m not totally up to speed on that part of that portion of this. But Yeah. This is going to happen from, yeah, this is going to happen from the cities outward it appears.

[00:13:13] Fred: That the, what you were talking about is cars communicating with each other is an intrinsic feature of the DSRC protocol was up to now the baseline for the V2X communications. What the cellular companies are trying to do is push that from DSRC over onto the cellular networks so they can increase their business.

[00:13:35] Anthony: Hey, shareholders of Verizon must be thrilled with V2X.

[00:13:39] Radar Systems for Traffic Safety

[00:13:39] Anthony: Now, okay related to this, or some making roads somewhat smarter, we have an article from Cleveland. com about how the Ohio Department of Transportation’s using radar at intersections instead of traditional street signs. I don’t fully understand this, but it seems that the, according from the article, the new [00:14:00] radar system worked by monitoring vehicles from up to 900 feet away and detecting their speed and distance.

The detectors look for breaks or gaps in traffic to determine the safest time to change the signal from green to yellow and then to red. And that seems amazing that the traffic light is figuring out, hey, this is when I should change. But I also see that, granted I live in Manhattan, I also see that light never changing.

Is it doing something else or is this what’s happening here?

[00:14:28] Michael: Essentially, the system is using radar to evaluate where vehicles are so it can determine the most appropriate time to change the signals from green to red and ensure that no one is reaching, the way to think about it might be, you don’t see a lot of people reaching traffic lights that are green or red.

Turning yellow or where there’s, the whole system is aimed at decreasing red light running crashes. And it looks like it’s been really successful, at least where Ohio has studied [00:15:00] this, they’re seeing, I think something around a quarter. 25 percent or so reduction in crashes and then 35 percent reduction in serious crashes.

And, one of the really standout stats is an 83 percent decrease in angle crashes with injury. T bone side impact crashes are one of our main concerns in intersections. And this seems to do a really good job of preventing the high speed T bone crashes. So these systems have been around, this is.

I guess less technology, technologically complex than V2X would be. I think this system has been around for about 12 years, but Ohio is moving to expand it and other states are too as well. But it’s a really neat way of. Preventing intersectional crashes. And it’s another thing that’s, relatively inexpensive to deploy and can end up saving, it’s societal [00:16:00] benefits are great when you consider the number of serious crashes it’s preventing,

[00:16:04] Anthony: I’m going to put you on the spot, Michael here, I remember reading a must’ve been 10, 15, 20 years ago, an article showing that they improve safety around intersections by increasing the length of time of the yellow lights on because people more time to.

Respond and either be like, yeah, I’m going to gun it. Or oh, I should probably stop. Do you have any idea that how that compares to this?

[00:16:29] Michael: That’s, I don’t know. I don’t know how that compares to this. I don’t think that seems like it’s a simple solution of just adjusting the time, the yellow light is on, which is great because I think that.

It’s hard to predict how humans are going to respond to that. Does that mean that when you encounter a yellow light, you can go ahead and accelerate because you’re going to have more time before it turns red. Humans make interesting decisions and yellow to many folks is a signal to speed up in [00:17:00] some spots rather than to slow down.

I, at the same time, having been in a vehicle that was pulled over for running a red light when the yellow light signal was. Probably a second or less, far too small. I can see where. I can see how short yellow lights are, can be a problem.

[00:17:20] Anthony: There’s an intersection next to me where

[00:17:23] Fred: it’ll be interesting to see how AVs respond to variable length, yellow lights.

That’s been interesting. There’s an interesting software problem.

[00:17:33] Michael: Yeah. And as a backdrop to all this whole conversation really is, the V2X is the type of technology that I think we’ll see saving a lot more lives. It’s a lot quicker than all of this autonomous vehicle robo taxi nonsense that’s currently being floated throughout corporate America.

A focus on V2X that could get average cars to communicate with each other and prevent accidents is going to go a lot [00:18:00] further than deploying a robo taxi. you know, that we’re skeptical even of the use case for longterm. We think V2X is going to save a lot more lives and should be at the forefront of the industry’s focus rather than some of the other space age nonsense that we’re seeing every day.

[00:18:19] Anthony: Wait, so Michael why would you want to support something that’s easy to deploy today with proven simple technology versus, Hey man, my car drives itself. But why do you hate the future?

[00:18:32] Michael: I don’t hate the future. I just want simple solutions that can be put in place now.

And this large, hundreds of billions of dollars that’s going into developing vehicles that not everyone is going to use. That, have a limited use case at best. Why aren’t we deploying them? Those billions of dollars to get some real technology on roads that can start saving people in the next five to 10 years.

[00:18:59] Anthony: All [00:19:00] right, listeners, if you’d like to vote for V2X, press one. If you’d like to vote for robo taxis, press two. All right.

[00:19:07] Seatbelt Usage and Pandemic Impact

[00:19:07] Anthony: AAA has a another one of these fun studies come out about what happened after COVID 19 and our driving. And so we’ve all learned that, hey, COVID 19 world shut down. Everyone started driving like a maniac.

But the world’s been open now for a couple years, right? And apparently, everyone’s still driving like a maniac. And the disheartening thing in here is, speeding, yep, seen it, I’ve tried to drive through Connecticut. But not using seatbelts! In 2024, who the hell is not using a seatbelt? Just to make that chime stop.

I don’t even know if my car will keep running if I don’t have the seatbelt plugged in on the driver’s seat for a while. Listeners, if you’re not plugging in your seatbelt, press 3. Because you’re playing with your phone anyway while you’re driving, what does it matter? Send a text, go buy some groceries.

Wait, you’re not [00:20:00] listening to this podcast? Who’s not wearing their seatbelt, gentlemen?

[00:20:05] Michael: At this point in the cycle of seatbelts, if you’re ignoring all the in vehicle warnings and the simple physics behind the matter and, all the lives that are saved every year by people wearing seatbelts and, unfortunately, all the lives that are lost from people that don’t wear seatbelts, then I don’t know how much more we can help you.

But It was astounding. They say in the study, the increase in vehicle occupant fatalities during the pandemic was almost entirely among occupants not wearing seatbelts. Which is, I don’t I don’t really have an explanation that why would a global pandemic result in less people wearing seatbelts?

We know there was also some, more aggressive driving, more speeding and less enforcement happening during that time. But also, the study points out that, it really digs into who was [00:21:00] most impacted by the pandemic and the rise in traffic fatalities. We saw pedestrian fatalities start to rise pre pandemic.

So that was something that probably was going to happen whether or not there was a pandemic, but in digging into that, they found that, a lot of minority underprivileged communities were impacted most by this rise in fatalities during COVID, which suggests that, maybe the safety messaging and the strategies that have been deployed to try to boost seatbelt use are not being.

done so in a way that helps educate everyone, maybe that messaging is not reaching all populations in the United States.

[00:21:43] Anthony: Shameful. You guys wear your seatbelts, right? Of course you do. Listener, you wear your seatbelt too. Okay, if you’re driving right now, listen, just pull over to the side of the road, stop your car.

Undo your seatbelt, and go to autosafety. org and click on donate. And after you’ve filled out all your [00:22:00] credit card information, and you’ve submitted, donate, put your seatbelt back on and get back out there on the road and drive like a maniac. Okay, only do some of these things. Hey, let’s move into Gaslight.

[00:22:11] Gaslight Illumination: GM and AVSC

[00:22:11] Anthony: How does Gaslight Illumination sound? That sounds great. I’m going to start off, it’s going to be a different choice for me than normal. I know everyone’s oh God, it’s going to be Cruise again. Isn’t it Cruise again? No, it’s GM. Ha. GM is laying off more than a thousand employees in their software and services division because they need to streamline it.

We must simplify our speed for excellence. And make bold choices and prioritize investments that have the greatest impact. So we’re gonna lay off a thousand people on our software division, while still pummeling, pumping billions of dollars into GM crews. What? And at the same time they’ve cancelled their ultra crews and tied it into their super crews.

And this just seems Hey stock market, we’ve fired a thousand people. Give us a little bump. That’s what I think this [00:23:00] is. Cause this either you’re serious about making your cars software efficient, you’ve hired the wrong people, or you’re gaslighting us. Which one is it, GM? That’s a short one.

[00:23:14] Michael: Next. Yeah, I don’t, I was interested to hear if, if how does a company lay off a thousand of, software specialists when they’re prioritizing, supposedly prioritizing all of these initiatives that are based. Or, completely software dependent initiatives like super crews.

Are they saying, I just wonder, are they moving the jobs offshore? Are they outsourcing to a supplier? It’s confusing as to why you would be cutting in the areas that you plan to develop and prioritize.

[00:23:48] Anthony: I, my only guess is if honestly, if they’re doing it honestly, is maybe they hired the wrong people.

[00:23:55] Fred: It could be that you don’t understand the need for software stress testing, which, spoiler alert, [00:24:00] we’ll be talking about later.

[00:24:01] Anthony: Hey, jumping the gun there. All right, Michael, what was your gaslight?

[00:24:06] Michael: My gaslight also comes from General Motors this week, but this is on an issue that’s currently happening out in California, I believe.

Today is Wednesday. There’s a bill being introduced that is going to, intended to change the way the Lemon Law in California operates. Now, this is a bill that is taking place through a process called Gut and Amend, where they essentially take a completely unrelated bill that was introduced earlier in the session out there in California.

And insert and have now inserted a changes to the lemon law. And so this bill will not get the full, committee hearings and, the transparency that I think any of us as consumers would like to see when legislation is proposed, that’s going to ultimately change or limit our rights.

And as [00:25:00] a. We know that GM is behind this effort along with other manufacturers. And here we have Kia Floyd, who is the vice president of state and local public policy General Motors saying that the new measure is a pro consumer bill that will help impacted customers get back on the road faster.

Now Anthony’s chuckling because the idea that GM

[00:25:25] Anthony: works for GM, that’s what I’m laughing at.

[00:25:26] Michael: Oh, that’s funny. That’s sick. No, but the idea that General Motors would back a pro consumer bill is just complete nonsense. We urge, any of our listeners in California to contact their representatives and make sure that they know that if you’re going to change a law as important as the Lemon Law for consumers, it needs to be given a fair hearing and go through the committees and process.

are normal for bills like this in California, and public transparency is key and [00:26:00] sliding an industry sponsored bill in through the back door is not acceptable.

[00:26:05] Anthony: Shame on you, GM. Mr. Perkins, you have a Gaslight nominee.

[00:26:11] Fred: Oh, I do.

Speaking of backdoors, there’s a group called the Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium, which exists, and they put out a publication called AVSC Best Practice for Core Automated Vehicle Safety Information.

It’s an interesting organization. It’s affiliated with SAE, but it’s not SAE. So it’s obliquely doing what do they call it? Valor appropriation or something like that. But it’s actually the AVSC is a program of SAE. I T C, which is itself a 501 C 6 organization now it’s nonprofit, but it can have an agenda.

Like the NFL, for example, is a 501 [00:27:00] C 6 organization that doesn’t really operate in the public interest and a V. S. C. is a similar organization. Its members are torque Zooks, Aurora, GM, cruise, lift, emotional, Uber, Volkswagen and Waymo. Notably missing

[00:27:16] Anthony: Just for one second, the list of those companies names.

Just sounds like you are reciting lyrics from a Jetsons episode. eop or Uhhuh. This is, anyway, sorry. Go on.

[00:27:28] Fred: Better than the Flintstones, but notably missing from this list are aaa. Arizona State University, Carnegie Mellon, and the Center for Auto Safety. So there’s no vetting of any of these recommendations by any outside organization.

So it’s purely self serving, number one. Number two it is, let’s see, what was my point about number two? It’s missing academic and independent certifiers and consumer advocates. But there’s only [00:28:00] two companies who are in this List who have actually operated level three or level four cars. Those are GM, Cruise and Waymo.

We can discount GM, Cruise as a source for best practices, I think. And so that leaves Waymo as the only real source for best practices. And Waymo isn’t really talking about what their best practices are. It’s hard to see how this best practice actually reflects best practices. There’s essentially no operational experience that went into this and no published information that allows them to do that.

It’s pretty much smoke and mirrors. Now, the reason this is gaslighting is not only that it has very little tech factual basis, but the companies also use this as a back door into the actual essay. Reports that are written out that people appropriate as standards. Or a V development, so it’s it’s [00:29:00] pretty sneaky and slippery.

You start with a, you start with a document that really has very little basis in reality and no operational experience. You call it the best practice. Then you slide it into a standard that everybody uses for example, as a, j3016, which is widely recognized and voila, you’ve essentially laundered bad information.

It’s like laundering money, except this is information and it has safety consequences. I’m giving my nomination to the AVSC, in particular, the AVSC best practice for core automated vehicle safety information, which is available on the Internet for free, and I invite people to read it. Skeptically.

[00:29:48] Anthony: On Waymo’s behalf, they do have a sign in their office that says, it has been 27 days since we’ve hit a telephone pole. So that’s good.

[00:29:56] Fred: That’s progress. That’s progress.

[00:29:58] Anthony: That’s pretty good. They’ve [00:30:00] got some sort of standards happening there. And GM’s got a different sign that says it’s been more than 90 days since we lied to investigators about running over a human and dragging them.

[00:30:12] Michael: We’re still waiting for the nits of fine to come out on that one.

[00:30:16] Fred: I, I think part of the best practice is. trying hard not to run over people even when you do. So I, there’s some kind of progress.

[00:30:24] Anthony: Every person I’ve run over, I’ve not lied to investigators about. So take that. Hey, Fred, let’s continue with your dulcet tones and let’s enter

[00:30:36] Fred: You’ve now entered the Tao of Fred.

Very exciting. Okay.

[00:30:39] The Importance of Software Stress Testing

[00:30:39] Fred: So one of the things that is not mentioned in this AVSC best practice for core automated vehicle safety information is something called software stress testing. So what is this all about? I’m going to ask you, Anthony, as a member of the public here, have you ever gone hiking in a scenic area that’s hilly and [00:31:00] encountered a scenic overlook that is associated with a cliff or a.

Some kind of precipice.

[00:31:06] Anthony: Yes, and I suffer something that the French refer to as the call of the void, which is when you get near the edge, you have an urge to jump or throw yourself over.

[00:31:17] Fred: Normal people, when they approach the edge, just as a point of reference, are cautious because they recognize That they’re approaching a precipice, right?

And if they approach the precipice as the same way as they approach a normal person on a normal walkway they really need a different approach. This is in a sense, what I like to . I would like to point out what I said, justify yourself. Go ahead.

[00:31:42] Anthony: Is a, apparently an innate survival mechanism and that I’m not actually gonna do this and throw myself off, even though skydiving sounds amazing and.

That’s commendable.

[00:31:55] Fred: I for listeners, you should know that his beard is going [00:32:00] gray, so he’s got some experience approaching this. Anyway, this leads me to the five most dangerous words in safety critical software development. Can anybody guess what those five critical words are? Five word phrase, five word phrase, meaning bullshit free, dude.

No, not that Michael.

[00:32:22] Michael: Yeah. I’m a word short. I was going blue screen of death, but I’m not quite there. That’s pretty good.

[00:32:27] Fred: No, the five words are, it’s never been a problem.

When you use this as a justification for continuing software development without testing it to see where the limits of your software are, then you have, you’ve inherited a problem. That’s what software stress testing is all about. Knowing where the limits are. And making sure that your safety critical operation is well within the limits and you have margin and you understand what’s going on.

To make this a specific example, okay June 4th, 1996 [00:33:00] was the first flight of the Ariane 5 rocket, which lasted exactly 39 seconds. Because what happened is the rocket was much bigger and faster than previous rockets. They reused the software. And it so happens that they had a 16 bit register, which was capable of storing a maximum value of 32, 767, and they were feeding into it 32 bit information, which was expected to be able to hold 2, 147, 000, 000 yadda, yadda, values, okay?

So They overloaded the memory, it re, it recycled to zero and started over again. This guidance system of the rocket went completely kaflouie and they blew up the rocket, which only cost roughly half a billion dollars, if you include the rocket. Happily, no person died, but the problem here is that They didn’t know, they [00:34:00] never tested the limits of this rocket with an excessive yaw of the rocket, which caused the control input that caused the memory to overload.

Now, they have similar problems with the AVs, right? And the AVs are tested to certain limits. They drive down the road, right? All of the AV developers want to have time on the public highway so that they can test this and know where the safety limits are, et cetera, et cetera. But that’s not how you do software stress testing.

You first set up an environment where you know that the system is going to exceed the safe operational limits. And then you find out where those limits are. Only then, once you know where the limits are, can you determine how much margin you have for safe operation. Let me talk about this in terms of the AV.

We know that they freak out when they encounter something like a concert letting out. There’s a lot of people on the road. A [00:35:00] lot of things going on. Some designer somewhere has got to say, how many people can the system and can the system accommodate when they’re running across the road and doing all the crazy things that people do?

You need to have that answer in order to say to public authorities, it’s safe to operate this vehicle. In the environment of people in the city getting out of a concert, for example, you need to know where those limits are. I’ve never seen any reference to software stress testing in any of the standards people generally refer to for AV development.

Not from ISO, not from SAE, not from IEEE, certainly not from the government. But this is critical to the safe. Development or the development of safe because you need to know where the limits are. If you’re going to say that we’re going to operate within the limits. Related to [00:36:00] software testing is overall system load testing where you incorporate the sensors, like the lasers, the.

LiDARs, the radars, all that sort of stuff, and find out where the overall limits are for the system operation, including the software stress testing that’s limited to the actual digital components. It’s not there, folks. Nobody’s doing this.

[00:36:24] The Importance of Software Stress Testing

[00:36:24] Fred: In that sense, the entire AV test program is either not communicating how they’re doing this safety development, or they simply don’t understand that this is a part of safe development.

Of any operational system with a computer that has safety critical characteristics. So that’s what software stress testing is all about.

[00:36:48] Real-World Examples of Software Failures

[00:36:48] Fred: And just to give you another example. There was an overflow error in a Patriot missile system during the attack in Iraq [00:37:00] in 1991. In this case, another overflow error, which had never been detected because it was based on a previous software version, meant that the missile defense system mistracked an incoming scud projectile, which was the incoming missile.

And because of that, the missile killed 28 soldiers and injured a further 98 people that were in a barracks, American soldiers. So this is serious stuff. It’s not included in the standards and please, the experts out there who are listening, if I’ve missed something, please let me know. But this is actually critical.

[00:37:40] Critical Safety Standards in AV Development

[00:37:40] Fred: It is included in UL 4600. So one of the aspects of UL 4600 that needs to be incorporated in any AV development and certification of that software.

[00:37:51] Questions and Audience Interaction

[00:37:51] Fred: With that, you guys got any questions? We’ll have references on the website for people who want to dig into this a little bit deeper.

[00:37:58] Cell Network Failures and AV Safety

[00:37:58] Anthony: So the example you were giving with [00:38:00] the people letting out of a concert, that was a cruise or Waymo in San Francisco, where their entire fleet just stopped working, my understanding is the problem was even a lot simpler, because to test for that they didn’t bother.

It was the cellular networks got overwhelmed and it wasn’t like people requesting their ride sharing apps or anything like that. It was just the cell network essentially went down and the, so the cars died on the spot. And so what blows me away is they never thought Hey, what happens if the cell networks go down?

How do you not plan for that? That’s not a hard one.

[00:38:35] Fred: That’s, and that should have been included. That should have been included in the safety critical evaluation. What happens when the system becomes overwhelmed? But, what happens when you exceed the limits? So assuming that, you’re going to exceed the limit at some point in some way, what happens then?

What is the, what does the vehicle do? Because at that moment, the vehicle is going to have kinetic energy. It’s going to be moving, [00:39:00] it’s going to have a lot of kinetic energy that can easily. Damage property or kill somebody. So there should be logic built into the safety management system for that vehicle that says, I’m going, I know that it’s going to happen sooner or later that my software is going.

To have its capacity exceeded, either due to a load of external circumstances or due to its intrinsic operation or design. What then happens to the vehicle? How do we get rid of this excess kinetic energy safely and make sure that the person or persons inside the vehicle and person or persons outside of the vehicle are rendered safe?

[00:39:44] Addressing Simple AV Safety Scenarios

[00:39:44] Anthony: Yeah, because things like that make me think that they’re missing a lot of very low level fruit low hanging fruit. Hey, what happens when the radar dies on a car? What happens when the lidar stops working? What happens when it rains? What happens if there’s fog in San Francisco? What [00:40:00] happens if, it’s there’s a lot of these very simple scenarios that that no one, even Waymo, who is the most open, which is not saying a ton.

Of the AV companies. They’ve never mentioned any of this. Have they?

[00:40:14] Fred: No, they haven’t.

[00:40:15] Lack of Stress Testing in AV Standards

[00:40:15] Fred: And in particular, I checked the AVSC best practice for core automated vehicle safety information. Oh boy, nothing there. The word stress never appears.

[00:40:24] Anthony: Can it result in you having a little stress? Okay.

Listeners. Was that humor ? No. Saying we need to learn it.

[00:40:35] Michael: It was a meager attempt,

[00:40:37] Anthony: if you have to ask, was that humor? It, it wasn’t, it just, it, yeah. It that’s how it works. . Fair enough. . Okay. Yeah.

[00:40:47] Listener Feedback and Experiences

[00:40:47] Anthony: Listeners, please I would love to hear more from people on them of what their impression, people specifically who’ve ridden in AVs, what been their impression of weird scenarios the cars have gotten [00:41:00] into.

We had Dr. Jeffrey Wishart who told a story about how the car tried to steal his girlfriend one time. Just drove a different route. But I’m very curious. Go to autosafety. org, click on contact. and contact us and send us a note and we’ll we’ll read it. We read everything that comes in.

Even the descriptions for perpetual motion machines, please stop sending that.

[00:41:22] Fred: Hey, I’m going to cycle back to the AVSC for just one moment because that standard says that quote, they are committed to, they, the AVSC, are committed to applying their experience and combined knowledge to earn public confidence in a safe operation of SAE level 4 and level 5 fleet managed automated vehicles.

very much. I want to point out the public confidence is not the same thing as objectively safe operation. So that’s an intrinsic part of their gaslighting. End of speech. Thank you.

[00:41:52] Anthony: Thank you very much.

[00:41:53] Tesla Cybertruck Quality Issues

[00:41:53] Anthony: Speaking of gaslighters, this isn’t really necessarily safety related, but it’s always entertaining.[00:42:00]

Tesla Cybertrucks. The Wall Street Journal has this article about how people are spending a hundred thousand dollars. On these cars, and they’re getting them delivered, and they’re dirty. They’re, like, filthy. They haven’t been cleaned. It seems like the glass has overspray on them. And the owners, for some reason, people who have an they can shell out 100, 000 on a car I didn’t want to mention it to the dealer because there’s other people around.

I’m just I’m just shy. What, the mindset of people who buy a cybertruck is just I’m very shy, I don’t want to bother the dealer to clean this, it was a hundred thousand, no I can’t do that, look at me and my cybertruck. It’s very weird psychological mindset.

[00:42:42] Michael: Yeah. I actually saw my first two Cybertrucks in the wild in the past week.

One, I caught a brief glimpse of in my rear view mirror in Alexandria, Virginia area. And the other was in DC on Monday, a purple one. It looked like a nice big jug of grape juice driving down the street. [00:43:00] And I haven’t changed my opinion. When I see one of those, I instantly think that, if you’re driving it, you’re a giant dick.

That’s just, I think that’s the image that they’re going for. But I’m struggling to wrap my head around the hundred thousand dollars that you’re spending to achieve that status,

[00:43:18] Fred: a giant purple dick. You’re never going to find that a piggly wiggly.

[00:43:21] Michael: Oh

[00:43:22] Anthony: my God. But Hey, they’re, they’re such well made vehicles.

Sure. They’ve had a recall every single one of them. But they’re great. And I know this because admins. They they got another one of their Cybertrucks. They had one that broke on them, and they returned it. They were The one that broke on them first, it was, they were doing a kind of performance testing this one they were just doing for like kind of B roll footage.

And it broke again and they got the proceed with caution, critical steering issue detected. So that’s another plus in

[00:43:51] Michael: the. Yeah. If, and if you’re delivering a vehicle to Edmonds for testing, you’d think it would be one of the ones that actually works, but here they’ve [00:44:00] failed twice, which suggests that they’re having.

Very serious quality control issues with these trucks.

[00:44:07] Anthony: It’s unbelievable.

[00:44:08] Tesla Semi Truck Fire Incident

[00:44:08] Anthony: But Hey, in other related Tesla news, and this is a safety related one. This is not just the sanity related one. Guys, remember the Tesla semi truck.

[00:44:19] Michael: Yeah. Yeah. It is. It’s capable of carrying potato chips.

[00:44:25] Anthony: Exactly. So this is an 18 wheeler electric truck that right now only Frito Lay, I think, is accepted as a customer.

And they’re like, yeah, we’re going to haul some potato chips. Real, because this is something we need. And unfortunately, a Tesla semi truck crashed in California, causing its battery pack to burst into flames and spew toxic fumes over I 80. The first responders had to close the highway in both directions, and they wait for the truck to burn out.

And it’s crazy. The problem with this is, just like any other E V fire, on a [00:45:00] much larger scale, because the battery is much larger. So this is not your 32 fire trucks following it to put it out. This is more than 32 fire trucks following it to put it out. I don’t want to do math.

[00:45:13] Michael: Yeah, it’s, I think they said the battery is probably, I think 10 to 12 times larger than what you’d see in a normal battery pack.

That’s in a normal Tesla. So when you have that much more energy there, you’re going to have larger, more destructive fires here. They shut down the entire road and apparently some it caused a lot of. Havoc for, I think it was what, 16 hours that I 80 was shut down. So that, just one more example of the difference, if this had been a gasoline powered diesel truck, it probably could have been, it would have, Disrupted traffic for some time, but they would not have had those lengthy delays while they tried to extinguish the battery.

And, you’re not having to establish the [00:46:00] same type of containment area to protect people in the area from the fumes that are generated by the burning battery. So it’s that’s. There are some new kinks that have been introduced into our lives with new technology and with the rise of batteries and the occasional fires that are going to occur this is one of those things that we either have to get used to or, push back against.

[00:46:24] Fred: Was this a new flavor of taco chips or was it, cyber toasted chips or something?

[00:46:31] Anthony: The article fails to mention anything about what happened to the potato chips. They might’ve been mesquite.

[00:46:36] Fred: That’s tragic. That’s a tragic oversight.

[00:46:39] Anthony: I agree. Journalists have gotten incredibly lazy when it comes to my snack food consumption news.

Yeah, and of course they can’t use water. The fire department had to let it burn out because they couldn’t use water because that starts creating all sorts of horrible chemical combinations that would float through the air like apparently [00:47:00] hydrochloric acid.

[00:47:01] Michael: That runs off into the surrounding environment, which, is a problem.

[00:47:05] Fred: Yeah, it’s also futile to use water because it won’t put it out. All it does is, what Michael says, is rather than putting the toxic fumes into the atmosphere, it puts them into the aquifer.

[00:47:19] Michael: Yeah, I ultimately, it makes me wonder if, all cities are going to need some type of portable swimming pool apparatus with a crane attached that they can just lower these vehicles into or whatever portion of the battery they can get to rather than.

Spraying water. The environmental damage that could be caused just appears to be significant. And it seems like there’s going to have to be a solution here. That’s prevent to prevent the type of damage that we’re seeing.

[00:47:46] Fred: L. A. is building big swimming pools for the next Olympics so maybe there’s a dual purpose there.

And,

[00:47:53] Anthony: I was hoping L. A. would take a note from the French and as the French cleaned up their river, maybe the L. A. would [00:48:00] clean up the L. A. river and make that part of the Olympics. That would be fun.

[00:48:05] Fred: You can clean up that river by sweeping, I think. There’s not a lot of water there.

[00:48:10] Anthony: Okay, let’s go into recalls.

[00:48:12] Ford Recalls: Window Safety Issues

[00:48:12] Anthony: And

[00:48:12] Fred: you know how like Ford and

[00:48:14] Anthony: GM, they felt a lot of pressure from Tesla we’re gonna be like Tesla. Ford, they heard about how the Cybertruck was cutting off people’s fingers with their hoods and not having warnings. Ford’s hey, I bet we can do that too.

Ford, Ranger, and Lincoln Nautilus models have a recall alert where Your fingers can get smashed in the car window. This is over 70, 000 vehicles, the 2024 Ford Ranger and the 2024 Lincoln Nautilus. The driver or passenger side windows may not automatically reverse when countering an object. That’s not good.

Little Billy and Janie’s fingers. Could get cut off in there to date. No one has lost. So

[00:48:56] Michael: noncompliance with FNBS federal [00:49:00] motor vehicle safety standard one 18 which, basically lays out some standards around the design of your power window system. It’s this is a problem beyond fingers, the past, we saw a lot of situations where kids were climbing up on the arm rests and asphyxiating themselves by, kneeling against the close the window button with their leg or arm while their head was out of the window.

And we would see, I believe around 10 of these incidents every year where a child was either asphyxiated and died or was severely injured because their head was getting caught in the window. So this standard goes to a lot more than just fingers. Although that’s what you’ll typically see mentioned in stories about it.

And so in this case. Ford’s system doesn’t meet the standard and looks like they’re going to add the it’s a software [00:50:00] issue and they’re going to be modifying the software on these vehicles and notices go out. It looks like next month for owners who are interested in getting their vehicle fixed as fast as possible.

[00:50:12] Anthony: So how does something like this happen? Because this is not a new standard. This is not something new. This is actually written down on paper. It’s been around for a long time. And they fail again at this. Is this Because a lot of things are moving to software based systems and the software engineers, these companies that are hiring are never shown the standards they have to conform to.

[00:50:36] Fred: We don’t know because we haven’t seen the details. It could be software stress testing. Like we talked about before. That could be just that they’ve chose a different transducer to figure out what the current was going through the motor. We don’t really know the reason for this. There’s a lot of possibilities.

[00:50:54] Michael: So they say, Ford in the chronology, they say that, it was identified by Ford’s [00:51:00] vehicle engineering and validation group during valid validation testing on a pre production model. They still went ahead and

[00:51:07] Anthony: sold a bunch of these.

[00:51:09] Michael: I guess so. But it appears to be related to, something to do with a supplier.

I’m sure. We don’t know exactly how it occurred, but this is a standard that’s been in place since the early 2000s. So it’s not as though they were caught by surprise or anything.

[00:51:25] Anthony: All right.

[00:51:26] Ford Recalls: Suspension and Engine Problems

[00:51:26] Anthony: Moving on to our next recall. Anyone guess who it is? Guesses Ford.

[00:51:30] Michael: Yeah.

[00:51:31] Anthony: Oh, wait, sorry. You want to continue with that?

No, I was

[00:51:34] Michael: going to say, it’s going to be Ford this week because they have retaken the lead in the clubhouse over a Chrysler with six recalls that Ford came out with over the past week.

[00:51:45] Anthony: It’s amazing. It’s a 4, 595 vehicles. This is the 2024 Mustang. And this is the rear vehicle suspension knuckles may have casting imperfections.

That weaken the part may lead to fracture. Oh. And [00:52:00] that’s not good. We don’t want that, so if you have this, you definitely want that one fixed. Because while you’re drag racing the kid next to you, you don’t want to be like, Oh, my car broke. Oh,

[00:52:13] Michael: so basically they’re going to, owners are going to bring in their vehicles to the dealer and they’re going to do an inspection to determine if, the suspension knuckles on your Mustang have these imperfections in the casting that results in failure.

And if they do, they’re going to replace them. And if not, you’re going to drive off with a clean bill of health. And that recall is actually happening pretty quickly. It looks like owners are going to be hearing about that.

[00:52:41] Anthony: That’s a good one. Next up, Ford! 37, 371 vehicles. The 2023 Ford Mustang Mach E, the 2023 Ford Bronco Sport, the 2023 2024 Ford Maverick, and this is the windshield wiper motor may become [00:53:00] inoperable.

Oh, so you’re Like, it’s raining, let me turn on my windshield wipers, and nothing happens. That’s not good. Because then you’re sticking your arms outside the window, and you’re trying to wipe down the thing, but then your window’s closing on your arm, because you’re driving a Ford Maverick, and now you can’t feel your arm anymore because the window is closed.

It’s collapsed you in there and then you’re,

[00:53:20] Michael: You sound like you’ve done this before.

[00:53:23] Anthony: My arms aren’t that long. I can’t do it. It’s not going to happen.

[00:53:27] Michael: Man, this is a pretty simple recall. Just a bunch of wiper motors failing. For whatever reason, I don’t think it’s totally clear but another, they’re going to start notifying owners on this one as well next week.

Should be a quick fix and a very important one for anyone who drives in the rain

[00:53:44] Anthony: or you drive anywhere. Next up Ford, 1902 vehicles. This is the 2023 to 2024 Ford Transit. A substitute bolt was used to secure the new steering column and [00:54:00] column intermediate shaft to the steering gear pinion shaft.

The substitute bolt may be susceptible to strip threads and bolt breakages. What is a new steering column intermediate shaft and why do I care about it? And the substitute bolt, that doesn’t sound good. No one ever paid attention to a substitute teacher. Of course, the car’s not going to pay attention to the bolt.

[00:54:24] Michael: Sorry. Go ahead, Michael. I was just gonna say these vehicles were they were equipped with a transit trail package. So I think they were lifted or, their suspension was modified or their steering was modified to accommodate the body of the vehicle being lifted. So it’s only going to affect 1900 of these vehicles, but if you have this transit trail package in your Ford transit vehicle be on the lookout.

[00:54:49] Fred: In the old days, there was a solid shaft that went from the idler. Right to the steering wheel, which would puncture your chest when you were in an accident [00:55:00] or in a front end collision. That was bad. So they’ve all gone to a design where there’s a some angles in the link between the steering wheel.

And the pinion gear in this case, so that when there’s a front end collision, there’s no solid shaft that’s going to come back and puncture your chest. So that’s what the intermediate shaft is all about. It’s part of that offset mechanism.

[00:55:27] Anthony: This is the collapsible steering column thing, huh? Yeah.

Now that damn liberal Ralph Nader and his whole bull for safety things. Hey, next up, next recall, Ford! Oh my god. 85, 238 vehicles, the 2020 to 2022 Ford Explorers. I There’s a engine fires. Oh, yeah.

[00:55:50] Michael: Oh, there’s some type of problem where engine oil fuel vapor that are inside of the engine, right?

[00:56:00] The engine block is being breached. And so this. These, gases, vapors are leaving the engine block and encountering other, hot areas of the engine compartment, potentially leading to fire. But these are basically engine failures. So this is a very expensive A very expensive repair if you don’t have a recall involved.

So this is something that consumers should, be getting. I don’t see date on this. Yeah. It looks like next, it looks like owners are already being notified about this. And Ford appears to be moving pretty quick. And they’ve also put in, they’ve got a reimbursement plan for people who have already had engine failures on these vehicles.

Let’s see. Okay. Here’s a note for owners as well. That’s important. The parts and software for this one are expected to be available in the second quarter of 2025. So you’re going to have a long wait, even though the notifications have gone out of the [00:57:00] recall. It looks like parts to repair these problems aren’t going to be available for at least a quarter.

At least eight months or so.

[00:57:08] Anthony: So what, would this be a do not drive situation?

[00:57:13] Michael: They haven’t issued a do not drive warning. But, and they expect it’s going to be a software update in the end. And if there’s, if they do. Detect a problem, or they do detect a rod bearing failure, which is at the center of this issue.

Dealers will replace your engine long block, but that’s only if the failure is detected. So this seems that failure will be

[00:57:37] Fred: detected very quickly. I can guarantee that it will. So for our attentive listeners, if you hear a giant bang in front of your car, followed by. Hot oil spewing onto hot parts, causing smoke and flames to emerge from under your hood.

Please be advised you should stop the car and try to get out of it. [00:58:00]

[00:58:00] Anthony: Yeah, unless you’re being in a Mad Max type environment, then you just got to floor it. You just got to go as far as you can.

[00:58:08] Michael: Where’s that? I don’t know.

[00:58:10] Anthony: So did Ford just are they collecting all these all year round? And they’re like, Hey, no one’s paying attention in August.

Let’s just put them.

[00:58:16] Michael: That’s a huge concern and something that I think should be brought up here. How is it that all of these recalls are close? NHTSA has a. I believe it’s five days from the time that a manufacturer determines it has a defected vehicle. It has to report it to NHTSA as a recall.

And when you see a manufacturer come out with multiple recalls like this at once, it’s pretty clear that the manufacturer is, meeting, conducting a meeting, maybe quarterly, maybe every, every month. And they’re coming together and saying, okay, here are the safety problems. We need to decide what we’re going to do about these things.

So it’s, In many cases, the manufacturers aren’t notifying NHTSA when, on the date they’ve [00:59:00] actually determined or figured out that there’s a defect, they’re notifying NHTSA on the date at which they brought all of those concerns to the attention of whoever makes this decision at Ford and they said, okay, we want to do a recall now.

It, it really does call into question just how accurate NHTSA is. Manufacturers are being when it comes to the reporting of defects. I see similar behavior, I think from Chrysler and some other manufacturers you’ll see that report multiple recalls at once, which, should set off red flags in the mind of anyone that expects manufacturers to report defects as soon as they’ve discovered them.

[00:59:36] Anthony: Hey, we only have a safety meeting once a year, okay? Yeah, we don’t, and it just, it all happens, it happens in August while everybody’s on vacation. I had no idea. Hey, there’s a big other, there’s other news stories going on, so we just slip in there and no one pays

[00:59:50] Michael: attention. Yeah, look, let’s slip all these recalls in right after, right between the Republican and Democrat convention when all this mess is going on.

[00:59:58] Anthony: Exactly, but thanks to [01:00:00] intrepid listeners and donors like you, we’ll keep talking about it. Last recall. Not Ford.

[01:00:05] BMW Water Pump Recall

[01:00:05] Anthony: Hey, BMW. 720, 000. Plus vehicles. The, oh God, why do they BMW you make good cars. Like, why do you come up with these horrible names? The X one s drive 28 I,

[01:00:21] Michael: you’re never gonna get through the whole list.

No, I’m not gonna do, just quit. This is just like

[01:00:25] Anthony: there, it’s a lot of M bmw. If you got A BMW, just, realize, hey, maybe. Put your collar down, try not drinking bottled water, try, listening to something else besides Steely Dan Asia, great album, by the way, but expand your taste palette and stop driving that way you do.

And this is a water pump issue.

[01:00:51] Michael: Yeah, this is a water pump that isn’t sealed properly. And so it allows water to migrate through the [01:01:00] electrical connector to the water pump and disrupt the vehicle’s electrical system. It looks like it causes a short and Can’t produce a fire, so it’s a lot of BMWs and it looks like they’re going to be replacing the water pump if they find a leak and also installing a shield to prevent any fluid that does leak from the pump to get into the the electrical system of the vehicles.

[01:01:28] Final Thoughts and Safety Reminders

[01:01:28] Anthony: Hey, listeners, that’s it for us this week. And I know you listen to the show, you pay attention to your recall notices, you don’t ignore them. But I know you’ve got friends and family who are just like, No way, man! And then I apologize for sneezing there. Hopefully I edited that out. And edited out my apologizing for this.

Anyway, clearly I’m not going to. But to let your friends and families know that Hey, open your recall notices. They’re not trying to sell you anything. Get this stuff fixed. Get it taken care of. Where are your seatbelts?

[01:01:59] Michael: Just [01:02:00] go to NHTSA’s website and type in your license plate and they’ll tell you everything you need to know about open recalls.

[01:02:05] Fred: Exactly. And what is that NHTSA website, Michael? Higleywigley. com.

[01:02:11] Michael: If you just type in NHTSA. gov on their homepage, you will see a check for recall with the license plate number staring you in the face.

[01:02:22] Anthony: Thank you. Alright, thank you so much listeners. Until next week. Thank you. Thanks for listening.

[01:02:30] Michael: Bye everybody.

[01:02:31] Fred: For more information, visit www. autosafety. org.