ANCAP to raise standard from 2012

[vztrt]

http://www.caradvice.com.au/91282/an...ess-from-2012/

ANCAP to Raise the Standard for Five-star Crashworthiness from 2012
By John Cadogan | November 15th, 2010

The coveted five-star ANCAP safety rating is about to become significantly harder to achieve. From 2012, the independent vehicle safety ratings organization will include minimum scores for whiplash protection and pedestrian impact protection in its five-star determinations. From 2014, the five-star rating will also include minimum requirements for roof-crush protection, which closely correlates with rollover death and injury risk. The five-star bar is about to be raised considerably.

ANCAP (the Australasian New Car Assessment Program) will also require an ongoing increase in what it calls ‘safety assist technology’ from 2012 – although the specific equipment and systems requirements are yet to be released. In 2008, ANCAP added electronic stability control (ESC) and audible seatbelt reminders to the minimum equipment list for five stars.

On the drawing board are emergency brake assist, three-point seatbelts in every seating position, daytime running lights, intelligent speed assist technology, head-protecting side airbags, alcohol-ignition interlocks, and top-speed limiters. Nothing, as yet, is off the table officially, and in future the five-star rating might also be contingent upon a smorgasboard of safety systems like Volvo’s City Safety auto braking system, automatic crash notification like GM’s ‘On Star’ in North America, pre-emptive collision preparation systems like Audi’s Pre Sense, forward collision warning, lane departure warning, blind-spot warning, tyre pressure monitoring, reversing cameras or even night vision technology.



ANCAP already conducts pedestrian impact tests under a separate testing regime, which assesses both child and adult head impact and adult leg impact injury risks. It awards a score from zero to four stars based on the likely outcomes. From 2012, a two-star pedestrian rating of ‘marginal’ (ie mid-way from zero to four stars) will be required for a five-star overall safety rating.



A standard test like those already conducted by the NRMA will be used for whiplash assessment from 2012. These tests put the whiplash risk into four categories: ‘good’, ‘acceptable’, ‘marginal’ and ‘poor’. A whiplash rating of ‘acceptable’ will be required for five stars from 2012.



The roof strength tests, which will be incorporated into the five-star ANCAP rating from 2014, will be based on Insurance Institute for Highway Safety tests already conducted in the USA. These tests apply a load to the corner of the roof near the driver’s head, measuring the strength-to-weight ratio of the roof. Ratings of ‘good’, ‘acceptable’, ‘marginal’ and ‘poor’ are measured, and a minimum rating of ‘acceptable’ will be required for five stars. What this means in reality is that the roof of future five-star cars must withstand at least 3.25 times the weight of the car itself to qualify for the five-star rating.



Above: During this decade, the proportion of five-star cars has more than quadrupled, while the proportion of cars achieving three stars or fewer has dropped by more than 33 per cent.

At the same time as roof crush ratings are incorporated by ANCAP, the minimum pedestrian impact rating for five stars will move from ‘marginal’ to ‘acceptable’, and the minimum rating for whiplash will move from ‘acceptable’ to ‘good’. Minimum pedestrian protection and whiplash standards for four-star cars will also be introduced from 2014.

The full list of safety equipment required for five stars in 2012 will be announced officially early next year.

COMMENT

This ANCAP bar-raising announcement was delivered at the RTA’s impressive Crashlab facility last week. Only a few motoring media attended. It’s an appropriate place for such a story to be released. As a part of the exercise, an ANCAP offset frontal crash test was conducted. The vehicle can’t be named, pending the results, but I’ll go so far as to call it an antiquated light commercial, with a body on the chassis. What might be considered a big, solid ‘tank’ in some camps.

In the offset frontal crash test the impacts an immovable barrier, fitted with a crushable aluminium face, at precisely 64km/h. Only 40 per cent of the front of the car hits the barrier – the 40 per cent on the driver’s side. It’s meant to simulate a defining kind of head-on highway collision. (The test pictured above is the pole test, currently an optional test paid for by the manufacturer and required for a five-star rating only. In my opinion it’s the most dramatic of the three ANCAP crash tests – despite being conducted at the lowest speed – 29km/h.)

Ten people worked for about a week to scientifically control the offset frontal crash we witnessed last week, and record the data for about one-tenth of a second during which the critical risk of injury occurs. To be blunt, with crash tests it’s an overload of foreplay and not very much sex … but the latter is at least extremely intense.

I’ve seen more than a dozen crash tests on four continents. Standing on the observation gantry at Crashlab, you see unequivocally that even a 64km/h crash that is effectively just an overgrown science experiment is a very sobering experience. There is a moment of silence – unscripted. Dummies feel no pain, but it’s hard to put yourself in their position mentally. And we all drive on country back-roads at 100km/h with nothing more than two whit lines keeping the oncoming traffic at bay – sometimes not even that. It makes you think.

Results are not known on the spot. It takes a great deal of time to process the reams of data, and validate the process. It’s even more sobering to walk out to the carnage and poke your head inside the crashed vehicle. My only on-the-record comment at this point is: Everyone who thinks a big, heavy tank offers adequate protection should be given an inspection opportunity like this.

Vehicle safety is very, very complex. In part, this is because there are so many different kinds of crashes you can potentially be involved in. They’re all incredibly chaotic, and bespoke in their own way. The results of a crash test are extremely complex.

What ANCAP does is make sense out of the complexity. It pulls a semblance of order out of the potential for chaos and makes it digestible for ordinary people who didn’t enroll in advanced mathematics, physics and engineering courses at university.

The ANCAP message is very simple: Buy a five-star car. It’s the safest. ANCAP chairman Lachlan McIntosh tells me there are more than 100 five-star cars currently available. “There’s no reason not to buy one,” he says. “There’s not even a price premium on five-star safety any more.”



Above: From two stars to five your risk of serious injury gets cut in half; from three to five stars serious injury risk drops by about one third. Worth remembering if you’re in the market for a car right now.

The other thing ANCAP is doing is, broadly, bypassing the Federal Government’s antiquated minimum safety standards for new vehicles. Car manufacturers know how important that five-star rating is to sales these days, and most go to great lengths to achieve it, even though a much lower minimum standard is in place for registration.

ANCAP plus the car industry’s vested commercial interests are, these days, doing a better job than federal legislation to make cars safer for the public. This is a good news story for ANCAP and the FCAI, but a sad indictment of the Department of Transport and Regional Services – and the use to which our tax dollars are put.

Sadly, because a good ANCAP score is not mandatory, some vehicles do fall through the cracks – vehicles like the Proton Jumbuck, Ssangyong Actyon and Mitsubishi Express, which purely from sa crashworthiness perspective really have no place in a modern new car showroom. And maybe also the vehicle I can’t tell you about from today…

[Keepleft]

The DRL's are not a mandatory fitment ADR, they may or may not be depending on ongoing outcomes OS.

The roof crush business will simply reflect UNECE regulation.

[vztrt]

Seems 2015 is gonna get interesting.

[QUOTE]
http://theage.drive.com.au/motor-new...218-1az42.html

Restrict cars to 120km/h top speed, says crash body
Toby Hagon
February 18, 2011 - 3:23PM

Vehicles will be encouraged to fit speed limiters and alcohol interlocking devices as part of a radical overhaul of the Australasian New Car Assessment Program.

Australia’s only independent crash test organisation will encourage car makers to fit controversial new technologies such as alcohol interlock systems, 120km/h top speeds and smart keys that can change the way the car drives depending on the time of day or driver.

The sweeping changes to the Australasian New Car Assessment Program as part of a “road map” that looks out to 2015 will also incorporate two new crash tests and encourage the fitment of advanced crash avoidance technologies.

ANCAP business manager Nick Clarke said it was the crash test organisation’s job to push for changes and encourage debate on topics such as drunk driving and speeding, even though such additions to new cars seem unlikely without a mandate from governments.
Advertisement: Story continues below

“Something like 28 per cent of our fatal accidents involve alcohol,” said Clarke. “If went down the path of fitting interlocks … does that not mean we could reduce the [national] road toll very quickly by 300 or 400 people?”.

The 120km/h speed limit will no doubt be controversial, particularly because it’s 10km/h below the 130km/h top speed of the Northern Territory.

Key to the ANCAP crash test changes are the implementation of two new crash tests - one testing for roof strength in rollover crashes and the other in the ability of a vehicle’s head rests to cushion the head and reduce whiplash injuries.

The roof crush test is likely to put pressure on manufacturers of four-wheel-drives, which have a higher propensity to roll due to a higher centre of gravity, while their weight can more easily crush the roof.

The whiplash test could also force car makers to fit whiplash reducing seats; Holden used to fit them to the Commodore but removed them recently to reduce costs.

ANCAP is also listing a number of mandatory safety features – such as additional seatbelt warning indicators and side curtain airbags – that will be required to give the car a maximum five-star safety rating.

Ford’s Falcon is one car that managed to get a five-star safety rating by cleverly designing the front-side airbags and omitting them as standard in the rear seats on most models.

ANCAP is also mandating a minimum number of additional features (the number increases year on year) required to give a car a five-star rating.

“This is a watershed moment for ANCAP because we’re really leaping forward into the technological future,” said ANCAP business manager Nick Clarke. “We’re recognising that technology is moving ahead at a rapid pace and we are making sure that to get an ANCAP five-star or four-star score … we include that technology in the ratings.”

He said new processes put in places to change and adapt the testing criteria and a focus on higher levels of vehicle safety meant that “ANCAP is always going to be in a position to move much faster than the government regulators”.

“We can deliver the technology results and life saving results to consumers very quickly.”

However, the ANCAP ratings – from one to five stars for overall vehicle safety taking into account its occupant protection, ability to avoid a crash and protection to pedestrians – still won’t be as simple as just absorbing the star rating.

Older vehicles that achieved a five-star rating won’t be retested or judged when stricter testing criteria come in, meaning that a five-star car from, say, 2013 is not as safe as one with an identical rating from 2015.

“Once you start going back and re-rating you’re creating more problems than you resolve,” said Clarke defending the move, emphasising there would be a marketing campaign in place and dates attached to the ANCAP rating to give consumers more information.

ANCAP will also not be independently testing the new features, instead relying on international standards to determine whether they’re effective.

Safety pioneer Volvo – long critical of some of ANCAP’s testing methodologies and sluggishness in keeping up with vehicle technologies and development – has welcomed the changes.

“It’s good to see ANCAP is moving in the right direction with the introduction of its roadmap. However, the real impact of the changes won’t be felt for another few years,” said Volvo public affairs manager Laurissa Mirabelli. “That means it will continue to be difficult for consumers to differentiate between cars because they will continue to all have five stars.

“What we should be doing is giving credit where credit is due to manufacturers like Volvo, who can already tick the boxes on the safety technology required. This is another reason Volvo maintains it has safety beyond stars.”

Some car companies are also quietly questioning how some of the so called safety assist technologies count as safety features. Hill start assist – which acts as an automatic handbrake to stop a car rolling back on a hill – is one example.

[Bossxr8]

This country is becoming a total nanny state.

Enough already FFS.

[theboxmike]

Ridiculous views some of these so called "experts" have.

I say we march on Canberra!!

[Ford_The_Win]

That's the inner city socialist brigade for you. Most of these "experts" probably don't even own a car, ride their bikes to work in order to reduce their climate footprint and don't watch TV because it's not intellectual enough for them. Hummus anyone?

[Olbucko]

What happens when the speed limiter cuts in when your halfway though passing a B Double? Couldn't imagine a much more dangerous situation!

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by RPI

What happens when the speed limiter cuts in when your halfway though passing a B Double? Couldn't imagine a much more dangerous situation!

I find it interesting that they wanna limit the cars under then the maximum limit of the country.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by RPI

What happens when the speed limiter cuts in when your halfway though passing a B Double? Couldn't imagine a much more dangerous situation!

this argument will never hold up in court, ever.

trucks are speed limited to 100 and yet they still manage to overtake each other. its never nice to stay too long on the wrong side of the road - agreed, but you just have to be more patient and wait until there is ample opportunity to get around whatever vehicle it is that is holding you up.

speed limiting cars is always a touchy subject, and i'm not in favour, but using the overtaking argument won't work.