From: Obveeus on

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message
news:hoh1a5$jpd$1(a)panix2.panix.com...
> In article <4babdcf1$1_2(a)news.tm.net.my>, TE Cheah <4ws(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>15 yr ago I read of 1 car in USA using auto cruise control drtve
>>past a truck using CB radio, this car @ once got unintended
>>acceleration, this driver switched off his auto cruise & ended this
>>problem. He told medias to warn users of auto cruise control
>>against CB radios.
>
> It's not just cruise control... there are a huge number of trucks out on
> the road that are violating the FCC emission regulations by three orders
> of magnitude. Consequently anything that isn't very carefully shielded
> with proper grounding design can have serious problems.

But if this was the real issue it would be much more easily detected and
repeatable.


From: dr_jeff on
clare(a)snyder.on.ca wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 17:28:15 -0500, dbu'' <nospam(a)nobama.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> In article <4babdcf1$1_2(a)news.tm.net.my>, "TE Cheah" <4ws(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 15 yr ago I read of 1 car in USA using auto cruise control drtve
>>> past a truck using CB radio, this car @ once got unintended
>>> acceleration, this driver switched off his auto cruise & ended this
>>> problem. He told medias to warn users of auto cruise control
>>> against CB radios.
>> Maybe fifteen years ago, but EMI suppression has advanced since then in
>> the automotive industry and many other industries too.
> There was ONE model of cruise control I heard about that was
> extra-fussy about CB Radio interference and IIRC it was OK with a 4
> watt unit installed in the vehicle, but a 100 watt Linear amp in a
> vehicle within a couple hundred feet could "jam" it.
>
> Those cruise control units were VERY primitive compared to anything on
> the market today. The affected unit was made by ARA if I remember
> correctly and the problem only occurred if using the engine speed
> sensor option instead of the magnets on the driveshaft - and that was
> closer to 20 or 25 years ago (very early 1980s - early Chevy Citation
> comes to mind.

Cruise control usually used vehicle speed rather than engine speed. If
the car kicks in a lower gear (e.g., when going up hill), then the car
would slow down to keep the engine speed constant.

I am not saying that there weren't any cars that used engine speed
rather than vehicle speed, but I would think that there are few.

Jeff
From: dr_jeff on
Obveeus wrote:
> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message
> news:hoh1a5$jpd$1(a)panix2.panix.com...
>> In article <4babdcf1$1_2(a)news.tm.net.my>, TE Cheah <4ws(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 15 yr ago I read of 1 car in USA using auto cruise control drtve
>>> past a truck using CB radio, this car @ once got unintended
>>> acceleration, this driver switched off his auto cruise & ended this
>>> problem. He told medias to warn users of auto cruise control
>>> against CB radios.
>> It's not just cruise control... there are a huge number of trucks out on
>> the road that are violating the FCC emission regulations by three orders
>> of magnitude. Consequently anything that isn't very carefully shielded
>> with proper grounding design can have serious problems.
>
> But if this was the real issue it would be much more easily detected and
> repeatable.

Wow! People are using CB radios with 12,000 W of power. That would
require a 1000 AMP alternator just for the radio (12 V x 1000 A = 12,000
W). Note: the FCC limit is 12 W and 3 orders of magnitude is 1000 (10 x
10 x 10).

Jeff
From: Obveeus on

"dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message
news:u-SdnfydAeo1hjHWnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> Obveeus wrote:
>> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message
>> news:hoh1a5$jpd$1(a)panix2.panix.com...
>>> In article <4babdcf1$1_2(a)news.tm.net.my>, TE Cheah <4ws(a)gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 15 yr ago I read of 1 car in USA using auto cruise control drtve
>>>> past a truck using CB radio, this car @ once got unintended
>>>> acceleration, this driver switched off his auto cruise & ended this
>>>> problem. He told medias to warn users of auto cruise control
>>>> against CB radios.
>>> It's not just cruise control... there are a huge number of trucks out on
>>> the road that are violating the FCC emission regulations by three orders
>>> of magnitude. Consequently anything that isn't very carefully shielded
>>> with proper grounding design can have serious problems.
>>
>> But if this was the real issue it would be much more easily detected and
>> repeatable.
>
> Wow! People are using CB radios with 12,000 W of power. That would require
> a 1000 AMP alternator just for the radio (12 V x 1000 A = 12,000 W). Note:
> the FCC limit is 12 W and 3 orders of magnitude is 1000 (10 x 10 x 10).

I wasn't addressing the reality of such a CB setup. I was addressing the
larger implication of any external signal (CB, overhead power line, 'noise'
from a failing alternator on a passing car, the Whimshurst static machine at
the local highschool, etc...) effecting the Toyota electronics. While 'sun
spots' might be random and unrepeatable events (though I doubt
focused/isolated to 'aim' at only one vehicle) the rest of these external
signal events are likely to be traceable/repeatable. Even beyond being
repeatable/traceable, I would guess that Toyota has tested for such extreme
external forces; if not before the product was ever released, then certainly
by now with all the bad press.

I still think that it (if there is a real problem) is far more likely to be
an internal electronic issue that puts the computer controls into an
unstable/unknown state.


From: cuhulin on
There is, or was, a guy in Alabama who built and sold some really super
duper CB radios.I heard a guy on the radio talking about that, about
fifteen something years ago.I heard that if somebody owned one of those
CB radios, all he would need to do is aim the antenna at whichever
vehicle and turn up the power and that vehicle would grind to a Halt,
fry the electronics, whatever.
cuhulin