[Cliff9091]

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

Came across this interesting piece of news in today’s Times of India, that too printed on the inside pages as a footnote. The government wants to make six airbags compulsory in all vehicles. While the move is laudable indeed, what struck me is the cost mentioned in the article. According to the article, the necessary changes and fitment of four additional airbags would cost around ₹8000-₹9000 !!



While this is a laudable move, I wonder whether the cost mentioned is feasible or not considering the fact that if airbags are such cheap items then what stopped the auto manufacturers from providing them at the first place ?? In a country where majority of people wear seat belts just to avoid the fines, how much of this will help is anybody’s guess. But if this move materialises then many lives will be saved provided they do wear seat belts.


Link- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/88676496.cms

The Transport Ministry must lay emphasis on the structural integrity of cars rather than mandating a certain number of airbags to be fitted, A certain score in crash test rating should be set as a precedent for every segment of cars sold in the market or something similar on those lines.

[tiagoatrix]

https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/au...s-7939011.html


Just came across this news. Draft for implementation of 6 airbags in bigger cars approved.
If this becomes a law, the price of 6+ seater car will rise significantly. Imagine buying a base model of Innova for 25 L and top end costing 35 lacs.

My opinion is that, no matter if you cover the entire car with airbags, a poorly built car is going to do more damage to its occupants.

Why don't the ministry propose, implement and mandate stringent crash test for all cars sold in india.

Form an World class agency like Euro NCAP/GNCAP, InNCAP maybe?

[ron178]

Originally Posted by tiagoatrix

Why don't the ministry propose, implement and mandate stringent crash test for all cars sold in india.

Form an World class agency like Euro NCAP/GNCAP, InNCAP maybe?

There already are minimum front and side crash tests applied, somewhat equivalent to the UN regulations in developed markets. The impending Bharat NCAP is a separate issue altogether.

Originally Posted by tiagoatrix

My opinion is that, no matter if you cover the entire car with airbags, a poorly built car is going to do more damage to its occupants.

I think the minimum AIS regulations have ensured that all cars on the market have at least a reasonable level of structural integrity. Even in the more demanding NCAP tests you'll no longer see passenger compartments catastrophically collapsing in frontal impact and I'm reasonably sure we'll see something similar in side impact and that is a clear signal that more airbags will make a difference.


It's very nice to see that they're doing something more for side impact protection but I really hope there's performance-based evaluation.

I think only the US currently has a mandate on using airbags specifically and even there they have a pole test as part of type approval.

A mandate for curtain airbags without a pole test to verify their performance might just be a recipe for disaster. I believe ASEAN NCAP uses solely a geometric evaluation of the coverage of the head protection device like this, and that's because their main test lab (MIROS PC3) does not yet have the capability to conduct a pole test.

In most markets (Europe included) where there is regulation for side impact protection there is generally no restriction on the technology that must be used to protect the head. Both, the regulatory (ECE R135) and consumer (Euro NCAP) tests are performance-based and don't require a certain number of airbags. Quoting Euro NCAP:



It is kind of sad that the Government thinks regulation is the only way to push for more standard equipment. If we had a Bharat NCAP many manufacturers would voluntarily strive to fit whatever technologies would be required for a high star rating and the best part is it wouldn't be mandatory - just driven by intense consumer pressure, so no lobbying or complaining (if you don't want to, don't do it, you'll just lose some sales). It then normally works out more cost-effective for the manufacturer to fit the system because low star rating=huge drop in sales (and no, the "Indian buyers are different" excuse is fast losing validity). It's a formula that has worked wonders elsewhere and if Global NCAP's pilot project for India is proof of anything, it looks like it would work in India too. Regulation is where the more-people-would-stay-on-scooters theory actually makes a difference. Consumer tests nullify that excuse.

Originally Posted by fhdowntheline

I am sorry to say this next point, but for all the progress in the Indian car market, we are not yet a mature set of vehicle buyers or users.

I do see your point, and I have to agree because I've seen it myself (I still won't blame or shame consumers who don't have safety as a priority but I will be happy if more people do). But the market is changing, and fast. Of course, there are drawbacks to that too, like a lot of unscientific stuff like the 'build quality checks', for example. But there is a steadily growing market for consumer-test safety ratings. Don't believe me? Check the replies on manufacturers' social media handles.

Originally Posted by fhdowntheline

How many instances do you recall where corrections have been formally acknowledged and applied to vehicles based on consumer feedback

All of these happened well before regulation:
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-...all-trims.html (Maruti Suzuki Alto 800 and Alto K10 get optional driver's airbag on all trims)
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/india...ml#post3669156 (Datsun Go will come with driver side airbag)
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-...x-s-cross.html (Maruti's safety updates: Standard driver airbag in Swift, ISOFIX for S-Cross)
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/india...ags-india.html (All Toyotas to get Airbags in India!) (after the first round of Safer Cars for India independent crash tests)
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-...t-airbags.html (Volkswagen halts sales of base Polo version without airbags)
https://www.businesstoday.in/auto/st...657-2016-03-04 (Note: That announcement was in the exact week Global NCAP was testing the Mobilio with no airbags. It's not a coincidence.)
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/india...ml#post3903712 (Hyundai Verna and i20 to get touchscreen infotainment systems)
The Kia Carens gets six airbags and ESC as standard equipment.

All the same, I agree with you, because it's always hard to achieve 100% fitment without regulation. (There is one exception - Denmark and its tax benefits on ESC - see Euro NCAP's ESC fitment rate surveys)

[fhdowntheline]

Originally Posted by ron178

It is kind of sad that the Government thinks regulation is the only way to push for more standard equipment. If we had a Bharat NCAP many manufacturers would voluntarily strive to fit whatever technologies would be required for a high star rating and the best part is it wouldn't be mandatory - just driven by intense consumer pressure, so no lobbying or complaining (if you don't want to, don't do it, you'll just lose some sales).
Regulation is where the more-people-would-stay-on-scooters theory actually makes a difference. Consumer tests nullify that excuse.

I think the consumer movement in India is a bit disorganized, driven these days largely by social media pressure. How many instances do you recall where corrections have been formally acknowledged and applied to vehicles based on consumer feedback? I am sorry to say this next point, but for all the progress in the Indian car market, we are not yet a mature set of vehicle buyers or users. Most consumers will instinctively choose a base version of a car without airbags if they had a choice, but install all sorts of useless gadgets , wrecking the car wiring. Or indulge in something more hazardous like after-market CNG kits. Any additional safety equipment is seen as a pain-in-the-rear for maintenance and replacement, never mind that the car itself may have cost an arm and a leg.
Heck, auto manufacturers do not feel compelled to provide rear washer/wipers to hatches and crossovers/SUVs unless they are selling mid/higher variants. But they will gladly give a most useless fog/cornering lamp, on which the consumer gets sold. How many car buyers have raised this basic issue?
Under the circumstances, regulation is the only way to improve things. The way I see it is that with 6 airbags being made compulsory, some cars will automatically lose their road-worthiness (read sub-compact hatches).
Next step should be compulsory single channel ABS for 2-wheelers above 80cc and dual channel ABS above 135cc ( or their electric equivalents) .

[ron178]

Originally Posted by fhdowntheline

Under the circumstances, regulation is the only way to improve things. The way I see it is that with 6 airbags being made compulsory, some cars will automatically lose their road-worthiness (read sub-compact hatches).

You're right, I probably sounded a bit too critical in my last post. Perhaps I let my frustration (of there not being a performance test and the mandate being for the number of airbags) wander around.

Now that I think of it, I'm actually quite thrilled about this. I've actually fantasised about this mandate happening for a long time and I don't know what got into my head that led me to be so pessimistic about it.

I still maintain that there needs to be a performance test, and there should be provisions for alternative head protection devices and not necessarily just 'six airbags', or we might lose two segments of vehicles: convertibles and off-roaders, which often cannot fit head curtains.

But as a regulation, I will take this opportunity to applaud the Government for this. It takes something to resist fierce pressure from industry associations and go ahead with this mandate.

And I thought about the technical limitations of not being able to engineer existing regular, hard-top cars to fit curtain airbags, and realised that there are cars that don't currently have them as options but have/had them internationally (I'm talking Swift, i10, Polo, Jazz) which is obviously not a technical limitation.

Need more proof? Renault secretly knows how to fit curtain airbags to a Kwid.


(Photo: Euro NCAP Newsmarket: Dacia Spring - Side Mobile Barrier test 2021 - after crash)

[kushagra452]

The Hon'ble Minister for Road Transport & Highways has tweeted today about approving a draft notification regarding making 6 air bags compulsory for vehicles carrying upto 8 passengers.

[Candy$Cars]

Waiting for manufacturers to come up with plastic chassis and 6 airbags and claim that they meet domestic crash requirements while shooting up the already shooting prices... Cause why not?

The need of the hour is to have our own NCAP which mandatorily tests all cars on sale fairly. But that will be a much bigger drain on govt finances than making 6 airbags compulsory and draining us consumers wallets instead.
P.S. brownie points for appearing to be a safety conscious minis'BHP

P.P.S. just a satire. I wholeheartedly welcome

[anjan_c2007]

These are a part of quite a few of his impractical and irrational utterances that emanate most regularly from his home town at the rate of one a fortnight or sometimes with a greater/rarely lower frequency.

Next we can expect ethanol blending with engine /gear/brake/hydraulic oils. Perhaps he is not aware of such lubricants for automobiles and someone from his coterie could soon prompt him to make such a policy.

[CARDEEP]

I believe this is a wonderful suggestion/ addition. It seems this government makes certain decisions that appear to affecting us badly but prove to be positive steps in long run (just a personal opinion, please do not start a public debate on this feeling).

However, for the chassis should also be safe & compliant to additional airbags. We have seen chassis that barely take the impact of 56 kmph test, there's no side + rear impact tests. How would such untested &/ or unsafe chassis become safe just by adding few more aur bags. In fact, i believe these vehicles will be more unsafe with proposed additions.

Lot has to be done from manufacturers & equal effort has to come from Government in making policy that ensures safer vehicles.

Lest it may end up becoming lip service than real improvement (s).

[novice]

I think part of the blame for poor quality and safety standards lies with government. High tax rates forces manufacturers to resort to cost cutting to keep prices sane.

In most developed and some developing countries a car is a basic necessity but our government treats it as luxury and taxes people for it.

[Nilesh5417]

Build those highways calling it infra push yet take insane tolls, tax the fuels, cars to the moon and pretend to make them safer adding to the already sky-high costs - not sure what is the plan?
Not that it is a bad move in isolation but there is a laundry list to be fixed and this doesn't deserve the priority.

[kushagra452]

This is a step in the right direction. However, as is the case with almost every policy decision there are unintended consequences. For starters, the price of cars (which are already insanely overpriced!) is going to increase. Even the humble Alto will see starting prices inch up close to 5L.

The govt. should seriously consider rationalizing taxes on passenger cars. The plethora of taxes and cess that an average automobile owner pays in India is mindboggling. It seems the govt is indirectly signaling that it does not want people to go out and buy cars for personal transport. As soon as the EVs start becoming mainstream, I expect the govt. to again jump in and start increasing taxes/cess on the same (don't be surprised to see a cess charged for charging at DC charging points!).

For people residing in the NCR region, the steep increase in car prices combined with a 'shelf life' of merely 10 yrs and 15 yrs for diesel and petrol cares respectively, it would make a lot more sense to purchase used cars.

[reppy]

Would have been better if the Government had come up with a comprehensive draft safety policy, including Indian test standards and ratings. Then afterwards he could have mandated a minimum 3 or 4 star rating on passenger cars to improve overall safety.

As usual, the Indian Government, BJP or otherwise, keeps an 'all or nothing' strategy. It seems they think only their version of forced regulations work in India.

I prefer 6 airbags. I just wonder how this will be implemented in say, a Maruti Eeco!

[84.monsoon]

I would support this move from the minister. He makes what may sound unrealistic and audacious suggestions, but I actually think most are quite futuristic ideas, which will help our transportation sector leap frog ahead of developed countries.

For example, while the High court of Madras wanted to bring down the speed limit on our national highways to 80 km per hour and take us back to the 1970s, the minister wanted to increase it to 140 km per hour. Many of our Highways in states like TN, AP etc. are well capable of speeds like that, if other safety issues like poor lane discipline and traveling on wrong side are addressed.

By elevating safety standards of cars, we not only reduce accident rates but also make it easier to improve speeds on our highways. Each 1% improvement in speed of road freight traffic adds multiple percentage points in value of output realisation of the product transported, due to increase in freshness, lower level of inventory locked up in transportation, premium commanded for faster deliveries, reduction in need for air freight etc. Ultimately, higher speeds mean fewer cars on the road, as people reach their destinations faster and don't have to spend so much time en-route.

However, his safety uplift plan should not be limited to just airbags. Having a National Crash Test system similar to NCAP that every new car should be mandated to clear with a minimum number of stars is required. This will ensure that manufacturers do not game the system by simply providing more airbags but cost-compensate by cutting corners on strength of chassis, using cheaper materials and thinner sheet metal. Also, electronic stability control should be made mandatory. These steps would make for a more holistic approach towards safety.

However, the move towards 6 airbags, if actually mandated by the government, will pose massive short and medium term issues to the industry. Many of the current cars are not designed to accommodate 6 airbags, especially the ones from Maruti Suziki. Even their top end variants do not have 6 airbags.

I expect the routine rant from RC Bhargava complaining about this idea and why it is so anti-industry and anti-consumer, why India does not need this with our low speeds etc very shortly. The Japanese bosses at Suzuki must be worried sick about their bottomline impact of a change like this and would have probably rung Mr. Bhargava many times already on how to nip this crazy idea of Mr. Ghadkari in the bud. In fact, Mr. Bhargava may already be preparing his speech, copy-pasting from all his previous speeches and interviews, against any and every piece of progressive legislation introduced for the automotive industry, whether it be BS6 transition or when front airbags were made compulsory.

But the fact remains it will be massive rework for many of our popular car models. The chassis and roof design would have to be modified to accommodate sensors and airbags. This will be a big makeover for B-segment car makers. Even other manufacturers like M&M would lose a factor they use today to differentiate their higher variants from lower variants. For example, only the AX7 variants of the XUV700 get 6 airbags and now this will need to be provided right from MX upwards!

[chittybang]

Although I beleive that a clear and comprehensive plan is needed with regards to improving safety standards on Indian roads, this is still a very relevant step in the right direction. I know airbags alone is not enough but it sure helps.
I don't care what Suzuki or any other brand will have to do to overhaul their models. If they haven't introduced these options it's because they didn't bother to. This will increase costs and force modifications to their products. It's their problem. I am just worried they will find a loophole and work around the rule.
Hoping that there are rules that focus on structural safety of vehicles as well.