Skip to main content

U.S. Government Wants V2V Technology In All New Cars To Reduce Crashes

The U.S. Department of Transportation announced that it will require all new cars to implement Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) communication to reduce car crashes by up to 80 percent. The technology will be phased in over a number of years.

V2V technology, which has often been associated with self-driving cars, is not actually necessary for self-driving cars to work, but it could be another way in which to identify obstacles in traffic. It could also be used in regular cars, which combined with some kind of automatic assistance could drastically reduce accidents.

The V2V technology is essentially a wireless signal through which cars can communicate with other vehicles in proximity to them. They will share things such as speed and direction, and if there’s any danger, the drivers can be warned about it or the automatic assistance can be engaged to avoid an accident.

Cars that use V2V technology may also be able to communicate with infrastructure such as stop signs, letting drivers know how long until the light changes.

The new proposed rule will be adopted over a period of years, after it clears administrative hurdles and after the public had enough time to comment on it. Although it has a major positive in that it can significantly reduce crashes, the technology could potentially be used by malicious actors to hack other cars or track certain cars over wide areas. Private corporations may also be able to use that information for their own purposes unless there are strict regulations against it.

That’s why both the technology and the regulatory framework will need to be robust enough by the time it’s deployed in all new cars.

Lucian Armasu is a Contributing Writer for Tom's Hardware. You can follow him at @lucian_armasu. 

Follow us on FacebookGoogle+, RSS, Twitter and YouTube.

  • hoofhearted
    This will be the first thing I rip out of my new car!
    Reply
  • hoofhearted
    And you thought red light cameras were bad! Police can determine speed and give tickets wirelessly. Running a redlight, etc. Screw this!
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    And the tinfoil hats already make an appearance in the comment section. Awesome.
    Reply
  • blitzkrieg316
    And big brother can record your driving habits and relay that to the insurance companies. Oh, you said you drive less than 10k a year, but we have you at 10,201... INSURANCE CANCELLED. Erratic driving; signal the cops because you might be drunk. And the list goes on...

    In theory, if this was used in the best of intentions it's great, but you know that'll never be the case.
    Reply
  • whiteruski
    We already use driving behavior to reduce insurance costs i.e. Progressive's Snapshot or Allstate's Drivewise.
    Reply
  • TechyInAZ
    This will be the first thing I rip out of my new car!

    Haha, I don't care if it's in it. All I care about is if I can turn it off if I want to.
    Reply
  • Matt_550
    This will be the first thing I rip out of my new car!

    Get ready for a hefty fine for illegally modifying the vehicle. Hope you can afford the feed for the horse your going to need.
    Reply
  • DrakeFS
    Driving is a privilege, not a right.

    While I would love for V2V to implemented with no human interaction (other than defining how, what, and who it communicates with) after the fact, we all know this will not be the case. LEO will want a kill switch (which will probably be abused somehow), Multiple agencies will want the data we generate while driving and few agencies will want the ability to track in real time.

    Even so, in my opinion, it would be worth it if V2V reached a 40% reduction in automobile accidents.
    Reply
  • maxiim
    As someone who actually enjoys driving, this is a pretty poor step forward. Folks who buy cars because they have to drive, to get to work or school etc, may needs this as driving isnt something they are good at or interested in. But people who do drive for sport or enjoyment this "automatic assistance" is quite detrimental.

    EDIT:An off or opt out option on vehicles would be much more useful, and perhaps would allow insurance companies to stop gouging folks when they have such "safety/tracking" equipment.
    Reply
  • hdmark
    I would love it for the warnings but I would want to disable the automatic control.

    knowing that the car 2 cars in front of me hit the breaks, or if the guy to my left is merging into my lane would also be very useful things to appear on the dashboard or even be projected to the windshield somehow . but ya... I don't want my car to drive for me just yet
    Reply