[AROO7]

However good the intentions of the Government be but unless they understand the difference between Active and Passive Safety features, we as a country won't be improving road safety or reducing the accident rates. The Babus sitting up and coming up with these rules which force the manufacturers to give 'n' number of airbags and all should first understand that they are attacking the wrong side of the problem. A vehicle with better active safety features like ABS, EBD, ESP, AEB, etc as standard would reduce accidents in the first place from happening. After they achieve this then they should focus on passive safety features which only come into play when the accident has happened.

A good example of the same was seen recently in the initiative by IIHS where it made the automakers take the pledge to equip most of their vehicles with Automatic emergency braking as standard in the U.S. For those looking to read the full story here is the link.

A bit off-topic-

Although adding these features might increase the initial cost but as they get a large number of vehicles equipped with active safety features the prices will come down and then even entry-level vehicles could be benefitted from these features. Because it's always better to have thousands of safe cars plying on-road than millions of unsafe cars plying on the road just in the name of affordability.

[Godzilla]

This is so absurd.

I am assuming that a bunch of people who have the shallowest understanding of road safety sitting at the helm of Ministry of Road and Transport making these decisions.

Firstly, I applaud the intent of making cars safer. However, it is laughable that there is no proper research and data based decision making. The Govt should get guidelines/suggestions of making Indian roads safer from a reputed consulting firm/consultants who specialises on road safety. The firm should do data collection and research on many different parameters to improve road safety.

https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/t...-safety-audits

https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api...ion/812967.pdf

https://www.fiafoundation.org/blog/2...bility-control

I would rather vote for making ESP mandatory on all cars. This was made mandatory in EU 8 years ago (2014). These sort of tweets/decisions appears so juvenile, the policy makers seems to make these decisions on hearsay in a house party or may be they like air bags cause is soft and fluffy?

[ron178]

Originally Posted by AROO7

A good example of the same was seen recently in the initiative by IIHS where it made the automakers take the pledge to equip most of their vehicles with Automatic emergency braking as standard in the U.S. For those looking to read the full story here is the link.

Somewhat related to the topic:

Similarly in 2017 twelve Chinese OEMs, some of whom incidentally make affordable cars, mind you, committed voluntarily to fit all their cars with ESC as standard, well ahead of any regulation.

News article

I look forward to SIAM doing something similar in India instead of making excuses and conspiracy theories and lobbying against improvements every time the topic comes up. It doesn't have to be ESC. It could be any technology that has the potential to save lives, like the topic at hand: side body and head protection. Vehicle safety might not be the entire picture, but it definitely is a big part. Safer vehicles + better drivers + safer infrastructure = safer roads. It won't be complete without any one but that shouldn't mean progress on any one of the three should be stalled.

I think a good idea would be to make it mandatory for performance-based side impact body and head protection and ESC to be available on every model sold at least as a stand-alone option, not bundled with anything else. That would also mean that new models would have to be developed be able to accommodate these systems (which is good news for the future) but at the same time it won't hinder those upgrading from a motorcycle who might otherwise be prevented from buying a car because of the cost of the added safety systems. In the higher-up segments the cost structure would likely prompt manufacturers to just make the systems standard instead of producing two separate versions, but in the lower segment buyers will still be able to opt out of the added expense of the systems if they want to.

Of course, all I've said is a layman's perspective and I'm sure there must be statistical data behind the actual regulation.

Originally Posted by Godzilla

the policy makers seems to make these decisions on hearsay in a house party or may be they like air bags cause is soft and fluffy?

Exactly what I was worried about in my last statement. I hope they're reviewing data rather than just willy-nilly making decisions because some regulator might feel like it.

The number of lives that can be saved by ESC and curtain airbags and AEB is probably underestimated by vehicle buyers because when consumer programs test for these (internationally, not in India just yet), they only test them if the system is present and consumers usually say "I wish they weren't testing these electronic gizmos, these NCAP tests are a joke now". The only way to convince consumers how effective these systems are are to show them a vehicle spinning out of control in a sine-dwell test on vehicles without ESC, or to show a vehicle without AEB smashing the vehicle target or running over pedestrians (dummies!), or showing a vehicle without LSS drifting off the road or showing the head hitting the pole in vehicles without side head protection. That IMO is the reason some consumers in recent years have been giving decreasing importance to independent safety test results around the world.

It's the same reason it was so important that Global NCAP crash tested vehicles without front airbags and made the videos public instead of just awarding them zero stars directly. Unless you show buyers what happens without the system it's hard to convince them.

[fhdowntheline]

I think it is a move in the right direction. They are just increasing the threshold to comply with the safety equipment. With regard to NCAP, standards will keep changing. I dont think the government will be able to educate the consumers- its for consumers themselves to choose wisely at any point of time.
Also, I dont believe that governments define the legality of car registration basis of the Safety rating. I dont recollect for instance that a 2-star Euro NCAP car is struck down from the European streets.
All this will ensure is that a Kia Carens cannot exclusively brag about having Safety features. Which is fine in my opinion. The debate on whether a car has 6 airbags or ABS/ESP as a distinguishing selling point is now practically over in most advanced car markets. They are now into AEB and other aspects. Thats where we should also head towards.

[landcruiser123]

All well intended and good for saving lives. The need of the hour is to tune the 1.4 kg organ between the shoulders to drive properly.

[WhiteKnight]

Originally Posted by Axe77

But all of the above is a lot more hard work and accountability in the government’s hands. So much easier to lay down empty diktats like adding more airbags and what not.

Thank you. You nailed it. Two more very important points
1. Standardize and implement stringent qualification criteria for licensing. I do not think majority of drivers know, even basic road signs and markings. Complement it with punishments for violations.
2. Make road safety, traffic rules as mandatory paper for primary education. Even more, teach civic sense. Teaching kids may make at least some of them remember and improve the society.

[JReacher13]

While this a positive development, I believe first road/ car users need massive education and disciplining in terms of road safety, safety features and consideration for fellow users.

I have seen handful number of car users I'm my own circle, by passing the seat belt reminder in innumerable creative ways to disable the beeping. What's the point in having a 20 lakh car with 6 or 7 bags, but they don't even want to wear a seat belt.

[Lobogris]

Originally Posted by JReacher13

While this a positive development, I believe first road/ car users need massive education and disciplining in terms of road safety, safety features and consideration for fellow users.

I have seen handful number of car users I'm my own circle, by passing the seat belt reminder in innumerable creative ways to disable the beeping. What's the point in having a 20 lakh car with 6 or 7 bags, but they don't even want to wear a seat belt.

This is a great move. Why should other people suffer from a lack of safety if some people decide not to use the safety systems available in their vehicles? With your logic, we should also remove the front 2 airbags as many people don’t wear seat belts. Regardless of any other consideration, any legislation requiring more safety aids should be warmly welcomed.

[McLaren Rulez]

Not sure why there's so much of let's-fix-random-other-problem-first before mandating six airbags.

Yes, there is much that is wrong with cars and safety in India.

Yes, making six airbags compulsory might not be the most pressing of those issues.

That still doesn't make this a bad idea.

[JReacher13]

Originally Posted by Lobogris

This is a great move. Why should other people suffer from a lack of safety if some people decide not to use the safety systems available in their vehicles? With your logic, we should also remove the front 2 airbags as many people don’t wear seat belts. Regardless of any other consideration, any legislation requiring more safety aids should be warmly welcomed.

Not sure where my logic pointed that this should not be done.

I am only emphasising on the need for educating users on safety features and road safety. Whether it's for self or fellow users, unless one follows / uses them , there's no point. I am all positive for as many safety features companies can provide.

[anb]

There is no point in adding more airbags if the structure of the vehicle is not stable. Frist govt should make sure that the structure of the vehicle is stable enough.

[Lobogris]

Originally Posted by JReacher13

Not sure where my logic pointed that this should not be done.

I am only emphasising on the need for educating users on safety features and road safety. Whether it's for self or fellow users, unless one follows / uses them , there's no point. I am all positive for as many safety features companies can provide.

Apologies. With so many people posting views opposing this development, I misunderstood your point. I do agree with you.

[vgaquarius]

IMHO airbags should not be considered to be the only parameter which increase the well being of the occupants in case of an incident uncalled for. Add as many airbags as you want but an uneducated driver (with no road sense) would end up harming himself and the others on road too! Moreover, an unsafe body shell would end up causing more damage as already seen in some vehicles with 6 airbags split into 2 pieces! Some cars with airbags have fetched a zero star safety rating.

Crash test ratings provide us with a fair idea of the well being of the occupants in the passenger capsule but on the downside are a much less comprehensive way of determining the real life safety standards of a vehicle as they are a mere attempt to replicate a theoretical accident.
People need to understand: Having a 5 Star crash test rated vehicle with 6 airbags doesn't mean you can ride like a Hoonigan at 3 figure speeds that too on Indian roads.

In a country like India, people have been involved into accidents even because of poorly engineered or unmaintained roads and inappropriately placed speed bumps as well.
Even when You are driving safely in your own lane and abiding by the speed limits, you are at a potential risk of being involved into an accident. So, safety seems to be a subjective term.

I believe implementing traffic rules in a more effective way and improving the road infrastructure should be the priority as of now. An increase in the number of airbags in a vehicle should be looked upon only if a significant increase in occupant safety is observed post that addition else it would simply be a burden on the customers pocket with a pseudo-safety assurance.

Summing it up, the decision of adding 6 airbags should either be regulated not mandated or should be left in the hands of the manufacturers.

[fhdowntheline]

Originally Posted by vgaquarius

I believe implementing traffic rules in a more effective way and improving the road infrastructure should be the priority as of now. An increase in the number of airbags in a vehicle should be looked upon only if a significant increase in occupant safety is observed post that addition else it would simply be a burden on the customers pocket with a pseudo-safety assurance.

Summing it up, the decision of adding 6 airbags should either be regulated not mandated or should be left in the hands of the manufacturers.

Why do we want to boil the ocean to make a better cup of tea?
Driver behavior and circumstances can never be controlled even in the best of infrastructure. Car body shells may be designed rigid but can have certain long term structural issues due to bad driving,( rough usage) minor accidents. But the probability of active and passive devices working is higher in most severe circumstances . And that's all a government can mandate. Otherwise they would have to order a detailed yearly inspection of all running vehicles. That's impossible to manage.

[vgaquarius]

Originally Posted by fhdowntheline

Why do we want to boil the ocean to make a better cup of tea?
Driver behavior and circumstances can never be controlled even in the best of infrastructure. Car body shells may be designed rigid but can have certain long term structural issues due to bad driving,( rough usage) minor accidents. But the probability of active and passive devices working is higher in most severe circumstances . And that's all a government can mandate. Otherwise they would have to order a detailed yearly inspection of all running vehicles. That's impossible to manage.

I agree to your perspective that these factors can't be controlled. The long term structural rigidity is too much to think of at this stage because India has diverse climatic conditions and driving cultures too! A detailed yearly inspection of any system in a vehicle is impossible for the government and for the same purpose, On-Board Diagnostics were introduced to regulate emissions. Sadly, OBD-II protocol can't look into the structural stuff but hoping for OBD-III to bring about a change!

All I believe is that if a decent implementation of traffic rules is carried out, everything is possible and I've seen Chandigarh for an example. If the local authorities maintain law and order (without corruption of course), the situation will surely be under control.

As far as the number of airbags are concerned, many vehicles without airbags scored much less in adult occupant safety when compared to the same models equipped with airbags in GNCAP crash test. If increasing the number of airbags increases the occupant safety, then why not go for them?

But if a vehicle doesn't score well with no airbags, 2 airbags or even 6 airbags for a matter, it is an issue which cannot be resolved with airbags alone. They're not acting as airbags, but just expensive one time use fabric balloons.



All I realise is that the manufacturers are not going to compromise on the comprehensive list of equipment on offer to attract customers but would cut the costs in a hideous way to keep the ex-showroom prices within the limits which might question the long term reliability of that vehicle.

So, 6 airbags shouldn't be made mandatory by the government for all vehicles. They should instead be regulated or mandated only for the vehicles which actually benefit from that addition.