wrote
Correct, while it is not practical to practice, it is very possible to think about what to do. How to open a door or window, equalizing pressure, the air bubble that will remain, using a cell phone, etc. Yes, it is stupid not to think about it.
Start here
she was trying to cover her ass. If you're going to try and bilk a several millions dollars out of a multinational corporation, you can't admit any fault. Just like the demon possessed audis of twenty years ago.
Douglas Johnson wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
It's the JOB of government to defend the nation,and that requires a big powerful military. The "War on Terror" is necessary and proper."warrantless wiretaps" is a misnomer,as the gov't does get warrants,but they also need to be able to act in a timely manner.Unlawful enemy combatants do NOT get the same rights as regular military or ordinary citizens,for GOOD reason. Of course,if you read Andrew C. McCarthy's many writings on these subjects,you might know something accurate about these things.
No,it -protects- the freedoms of Americans by protecting marriage from the homos destroying it,as is their intention.The homos have an agenda,and their "marriage" shtick is about "normalizing" their perversity,nothing more.
Not as the Constitution is written. Problem is,the "progressives" don't believe in the Constitution and are constantly whittling away at it. They've been working at it since the early 1900's. DemocRATs (as a group)only give lip service to the Constitution. They are FAR more of a threat to the Constitution than Republicans.People are beginning to awaken to that reality,since Obama has revealed himself for what he truly is.
Apparently not.
except that when actually VOTING,DemocRATs are mostly sticking with the "progressive" insanity of their leadership.
IMO,you've RATIONALIZED the DemocRATS into being morally equivalent to Republicans. they are not. I do believe the Republicans have drifted away from their core beliefs,but still are the much lesser of two evils.
snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote in news:hmmj9s$jk0$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:
you debate dishonestly. You have never mentioned any additional computer or other method of execution of your additional override code.
Jim Yanik wrote in news:Xns9D30A2CE85638jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44:
you also never mention how you would have this additional computer interface with the existing system.
you debate dishonestly.
Do you? I am a computer tech by trade and training, as well as a licenced auto mechanic.
The explanation was not meant to be detailed and 100% accurate - but to cover the basics.
I did.
Not necessarily. If it was an "electronic problem" it would set a code. If it is a mechanical [problem it won't set a code (usually).
If someone gets inside the computer and starts fooling around, it is quite possible he could get tit to accellerate without showing a code because he is "faking" a legitimate signal - which is extremely unlikely to happen by itself in the real world.
I'm not saying it is impossible - but it would be extremely unlikely - and certainly not common ( occurring on many different vehicles under different conditions in different areas)
Shutting the fuel off will NOT cause "lean overheating". Can't damage the cat or valves.
You are ASSuming there is a code problem (software). No evidence to support that assumption at this point. And GENERALLY, solid state and particularly digital electronics is far less likely to cause problems than mechanical controls.
No, not necessarily. It is a case of what everybody wants and thinks is necessary for safety. ABS is a crock - yet everyone thinks all cars should have it. Traction control makes it possible to drive in slippery conditions with the ridiculous wide tires everyone seems to want on their cars. Same with Stability control.
Better to just put the proper tires on the car and be done with it.
More parts that COULD fail, but a significantly lower probability that ANY would. Having owned and driven vehicles with mechanical brakes I can attest to the fact that "juice brakes" are infinitely more reliable and effective.
Won't argue with you there - but again the incidence of power brake failure is EXTREMELY low, as the system is dead-nuts simple.
Again - a HUGE increase in safety, because now you need at least 2 simultaneous failures to render the braking system inopperative.
A royal pain in the behind - trouble prone and un-necessary.
No, not even a model T (which, by the way, had only brakes on the rear wheels and the transmission.) Even a 2 wheel braked car had more parts in each wheel than either a hydraulic drum or disk brake when you count all the clevises, pins, etc that were required - and EVERY ONE of them was critical. Many juice drum brakes today have only 4 moving parts per wheel. 2 pistons and 2 shoes. The master cyl has 2 - the primary and secondary piston.. It's MOVING parts that are critical because they wear, jam, and fail.
Both my '49 VW and my '28 Chevy had 4 wheel mechanical brakes. The Chevy service brakes were external bands on the rear drum, and internal shoes on the front - with internal shoes on the rear for the emergency brake. To stop it from speed required yanking the handbrake and stomping the pedal at the same time to keep from throwing the rear drums out of shape. The VW would go wherever it wanted when you first touched the brakes.
The computer cannot lock the shifter in gear. At least not on the Lexus ES 300. It can lock it in PARK on some cars - which is a PAIN, but not a sefety issue.
de quoted text -
Actually, that the Lexus can be stopped by shifting to neutral under runaway conditions has been proven. It was proven TWICE and both were cited in this thread.
Again. The cause of the runaway was a manufacturers fault. That people died becuse of it is the DRIVER'S fault for not knowing what to do.
Someone who drives a runaway for minutes and crashes without doing such a simple thing as shiftint to nuetral...
Harry K
In the case of Toyota, it was proven twice that it can easily be shifted to nuetral.
Harry K
And in FACT, on most current production vehicles, there is either one or 2 computers that control everything. Common practice seams to be a PCM (Powertrain control module) and a BCM (Body control module). The PCM handles engine and transmission and all related functions - often including cruise control, stability control, ABS, etc, while the BCM handles the AC, power windows, sometimes cruise control etc, and the instrument panel, among others.
SOME vehicles use only one computer to handle everything (including, apparently, the RADIO.
Yep, If the service brakes won't do it, the parking brake for sure won't.
Now, if the parking brake is on a separate drum or disk, or something that hasn't already been heated up by the service ones, the parking _might_ finish stopping the car if it was already down to slow speed by the service brakes. That's about it.
Harry K
e
Ah, but I have been called stupid for sayign the deaths were driver's fault. Of course I wasn't careful enough to distinguish between teh cause of the runaway (Toyota) and the cause of death (driver). Didn't make it simple enough for them.
Harry K
UNLESS the throttle itself is stuck open - in which case fuel cut is the ONLY viable method (ignition cut would damage the converter and could cause a fire)
Nope - unless you count all the CanBuss controll modules - and even then 30 would be stretching it.
Your assumptions are wrong 1994 was pre OBD2 - with the mandated OBD2 system the entire power train is controlled by one computer.
But that does not meet the OBD2 requirements.
>HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.