Life-saving emergency eCall system should be mandatory, EU
Discussion
So our government of the EU has decided that the voluntary adoption of the eCall system has not been good enough and therefore is should be made compulsory by 2015 for all new cars sold.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/pressroom/co...
What it says:
All new cars must be fitted by 2015 with eCall devices to alert the rescue services to road crashes automatically, using the 112 public emergency call system, say MEPs in a resolution adopted on Tuesday. This system would enable rescue services to arrive faster, saving lives and reducing injuries, adds the non-binding resolution.
"The European Parliament has given its clear support for all motorists in Europe to benefit from an emergency call system free of charge. Since the voluntary approach has failed, we urge the Commission to propose legislative measures as soon as possible to ensure the eCall system will be mandatory in all EU countries by 2015", said co-rapporteurs Olga Sehnalova (S&D, CZ) and Dieter-Lebrecht Koch (EPP, DE).
The resolution regrets delays in the voluntary deployment of eCall to date and the small proportion of cars fitted with it (only 0.4%). It urges the European Commission to table legislation to make the eCall system mandatory by 2015. MEPs also call on the Commission to consider extending this system to other vehicles, such as motorcycles, buses, coaches and trucks in the near future.
Golden hour
The in-vehicle eCall system uses 112 emergency call technology to alert the emergency services automatically to the location of serious road accidents. This should save lives and reduce the severity of injuries by enabling qualified and equipped paramedics to get to the scene within the first “golden hour” of the accident, says the resolution.
The eCall system could save up to 2,500 lives a year and reduce injury severity by 10 to 15%, it adds.
Free of charge
MEPs believe that the public eCall service should be mandatory and available free of charge to all drivers in Europe, irrespective of the make of their vehicles.
Technology is ready
MEPs point out that the necessary technology is available and that common EU-wide standards have been agreed. They therefore call on the Commission to table legislation requiring EU member states to upgrade their emergency response service infrastructure so that it can handle eCalls by 2015.
Data protection
The resolution stresses that the eCall service must not be used to monitor a person’s movements or determine his or her location unless that person has been involved in an accident. The main purpose of the system is to improve incident management, the text adds.
The resolution was adopted by a show of hands.
Not it is a recommendation to make it mandatory. Also, apparently, 'free' though I assume we pay somehow at some poinit and, presumably, extortionately.
The benefits seem minimal when taken in the context of the whole EU area. A cost benefit analysis probably would not stack up at all.
However since the technology presumably relies on cell phone technology (hmm, a few problems there perhaps but I'm sure the phone boys will find a way of making it pay for them) it also provides the basis for vehicle tracking and, through the back door, road charging since eventually nearly all cars would be equipped with the technology which, I assume, would than have to be working before the car would be legally usable on the road. In fact one could imagine that there may be some way to make the car 'logon' for authorisation befoe it would start. Extreme perhaps and not without flaws, but possible technically. So it will come up at some point.
Hopefully I will be dead by then, but you never know how much or how little time there might be before the next bout of insanity afflicts the world's populace.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/pressroom/co...
===============================================================
What it says:
All new cars must be fitted by 2015 with eCall devices to alert the rescue services to road crashes automatically, using the 112 public emergency call system, say MEPs in a resolution adopted on Tuesday. This system would enable rescue services to arrive faster, saving lives and reducing injuries, adds the non-binding resolution.
"The European Parliament has given its clear support for all motorists in Europe to benefit from an emergency call system free of charge. Since the voluntary approach has failed, we urge the Commission to propose legislative measures as soon as possible to ensure the eCall system will be mandatory in all EU countries by 2015", said co-rapporteurs Olga Sehnalova (S&D, CZ) and Dieter-Lebrecht Koch (EPP, DE).
The resolution regrets delays in the voluntary deployment of eCall to date and the small proportion of cars fitted with it (only 0.4%). It urges the European Commission to table legislation to make the eCall system mandatory by 2015. MEPs also call on the Commission to consider extending this system to other vehicles, such as motorcycles, buses, coaches and trucks in the near future.
Golden hour
The in-vehicle eCall system uses 112 emergency call technology to alert the emergency services automatically to the location of serious road accidents. This should save lives and reduce the severity of injuries by enabling qualified and equipped paramedics to get to the scene within the first “golden hour” of the accident, says the resolution.
The eCall system could save up to 2,500 lives a year and reduce injury severity by 10 to 15%, it adds.
Free of charge
MEPs believe that the public eCall service should be mandatory and available free of charge to all drivers in Europe, irrespective of the make of their vehicles.
Technology is ready
MEPs point out that the necessary technology is available and that common EU-wide standards have been agreed. They therefore call on the Commission to table legislation requiring EU member states to upgrade their emergency response service infrastructure so that it can handle eCalls by 2015.
Data protection
The resolution stresses that the eCall service must not be used to monitor a person’s movements or determine his or her location unless that person has been involved in an accident. The main purpose of the system is to improve incident management, the text adds.
The resolution was adopted by a show of hands.
==============================================
Not it is a recommendation to make it mandatory. Also, apparently, 'free' though I assume we pay somehow at some poinit and, presumably, extortionately.
The benefits seem minimal when taken in the context of the whole EU area. A cost benefit analysis probably would not stack up at all.
However since the technology presumably relies on cell phone technology (hmm, a few problems there perhaps but I'm sure the phone boys will find a way of making it pay for them) it also provides the basis for vehicle tracking and, through the back door, road charging since eventually nearly all cars would be equipped with the technology which, I assume, would than have to be working before the car would be legally usable on the road. In fact one could imagine that there may be some way to make the car 'logon' for authorisation befoe it would start. Extreme perhaps and not without flaws, but possible technically. So it will come up at some point.
Hopefully I will be dead by then, but you never know how much or how little time there might be before the next bout of insanity afflicts the world's populace.
CampDavid said:
Good idea.
The tech is fairly basic and shouldn't cost anything to add into a car (we're essentially talking a packaged mobile phone and GPS linked in to the crash sensor, about $10 as a tech cost) so why not?
MmmmmmThe tech is fairly basic and shouldn't cost anything to add into a car (we're essentially talking a packaged mobile phone and GPS linked in to the crash sensor, about $10 as a tech cost) so why not?
What could you do with a mobile phone tied into a GPS
I can't think of any other uses of a device that gives speed and position of your car over the mobile network
thinfourth2 said:
CampDavid said:
Good idea.
The tech is fairly basic and shouldn't cost anything to add into a car (we're essentially talking a packaged mobile phone and GPS linked in to the crash sensor, about $10 as a tech cost) so why not?
MmmmmmThe tech is fairly basic and shouldn't cost anything to add into a car (we're essentially talking a packaged mobile phone and GPS linked in to the crash sensor, about $10 as a tech cost) so why not?
What could you do with a mobile phone tied into a GPS
I can't think of any other uses of a device that gives speed and position of your car over the mobile network
thinfourth2 said:
Mmmmmm
What could you do with a mobile phone tied into a GPS
I can't think of any other uses of a device that gives speed and position of your car over the mobile network
The EU originally wanted GPS in all new cars by 2009 and they wanted it for road charging (works fine in trucks in Germany, so don't say it'll never work) and for speed control (Leeds uni were involved in the trials of this).What could you do with a mobile phone tied into a GPS
I can't think of any other uses of a device that gives speed and position of your car over the mobile network
However there was a big push back so the EU switched tack and made it into a safety thing, hence we now have eCall.
EU pet project was never dead. ADAS trickling in.
CampDavid said:
Good idea.
The tech is fairly basic and shouldn't cost anything to add into a car (we're essentially talking a packaged mobile phone and GPS linked in to the crash sensor, about $10 as a tech cost) so why not?
I bet the manufacturers are behind this and I bet it is not FOC. The EU have been banging this road safety drum for years, part of the reason for the European GPS is improved road safety (or so they claim). Of course for that to work we all have to be plugged in, this includes speed control.The tech is fairly basic and shouldn't cost anything to add into a car (we're essentially talking a packaged mobile phone and GPS linked in to the crash sensor, about $10 as a tech cost) so why not?
CampDavid said:
Good idea.
The tech is fairly basic and shouldn't cost anything to add into a car (we're essentially talking a packaged mobile phone and GPS linked in to the crash sensor, about $10 as a tech cost) so why not?
Why is it good idea? It's been available for a while in the EU with a .4% takeup rate apparently. So no one wants it. If no one wants it, why is it a good idea?The tech is fairly basic and shouldn't cost anything to add into a car (we're essentially talking a packaged mobile phone and GPS linked in to the crash sensor, about $10 as a tech cost) so why not?
Similar systems in the states are run privately. The cost of the kit in the car may indeed no be not so great (but that as a built in device it will be - think sat navs) but that is not the cost of the service. To support it you need a total coverage system with a network of responders that get called automatically and appropriately as required. This to hit the alleged 'golden hour' that may, or may not, save a few lives (or create a larger groups of severely injured people for the health services to support) and reduce the severity (it is claimed) of some injuries. The benefits may not be entirely clear cut.
If the accident happens on a busy road ( as is very likely in, say, the UK comapared to the vast expanses of the USA where such a system may be more useful) then it seems likely that nearly all incident will be reported quickly anyway now that everyone has a phone.
If it is an remote region ... there is no guaranteed of mobile coverage. So what then for the benefits of such a service?
How many government sponsored enforced, no choices systems are introduced for the benefit of the population with absolutely no way for others, government or 'private' service providers, benefitting substantially from the arrangement? Especially on a pan-european basis.
More importantly - can you really envisage the Government of the EU sticking to any undertaking not to use the technology in other ways?
The article says it's mandatory for all NEW cars from 2015- surely it won't affect older cars anyway.
From a safety point of view it sounds good; but how many "false alarms" would there be for very minor accidents that do not require attendance of 3 fire engines, 2 ambulances and a host of panda cars?
I agree, I don't like the connotations of speed control/enforcement potential.
From a safety point of view it sounds good; but how many "false alarms" would there be for very minor accidents that do not require attendance of 3 fire engines, 2 ambulances and a host of panda cars?
I agree, I don't like the connotations of speed control/enforcement potential.
A long standing attempt to justify their Galilleo GPS competitor/vanity project. The original idea was to force all cars to have a galilleo receiver for location, to do the ecall thing. This is just the latest attempt to try to force it through in small stages.
Fine, you might say, it'll save lives. But that, IMO, is just the PR exersise. What it will also give them is every new car comes with a tracking device fitted, from which they can extract more money and exert more power over us. And it also gives them a good looking reason for spending untold billions of our money on a satellite system which nobody wants. With these w
kers, you always have to look at the long game, they are very good at obfuscating long-term goals things in the detail. And those goals aren't about making your life better.
Fine, you might say, it'll save lives. But that, IMO, is just the PR exersise. What it will also give them is every new car comes with a tracking device fitted, from which they can extract more money and exert more power over us. And it also gives them a good looking reason for spending untold billions of our money on a satellite system which nobody wants. With these w
kers, you always have to look at the long game, they are very good at obfuscating long-term goals things in the detail. And those goals aren't about making your life better.If they have to fit it the manufacturers will make it as cheap as possible. If Ford charge an extra £1000 and Peugeot charge £100, people will buy the Pug. As the tech just involves taking a GPS position and sending it through the air the mass production cost will be pennies (heres a GPS reciever for USB at £23, the production cost would be nothing - http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NEW-BLUENEXT-BN-903S-65-...
In terms of mobile infrastructure, it exists already and logging calls shouldn't be a massive project. The data could be sent through GSM,GPRS or 3G, depending on what's available. As emergency calls are not network dependant, coverage should be fine.
Tracking with this would be tricky. You'd need the device to constantly send data, which it certainly wouldn't need to do if it were for emergency use and thus manufacturers wouldn't design it in that way
In terms of mobile infrastructure, it exists already and logging calls shouldn't be a massive project. The data could be sent through GSM,GPRS or 3G, depending on what's available. As emergency calls are not network dependant, coverage should be fine.
Tracking with this would be tricky. You'd need the device to constantly send data, which it certainly wouldn't need to do if it were for emergency use and thus manufacturers wouldn't design it in that way
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff