From: Obveeus on 25 Mar 2010 21:51 "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 25 Mar 2010 21:52 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$1_2(a)news.tm.net.my>, "TE Cheah" <4ws(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 15 yr ago I read of 1 car in USA using auto cruise control drtve >>> past a truck using CB radio, this car @ once got unintended >>> acceleration, this driver switched off his auto cruise & ended this >>> problem. He told medias to warn users of auto cruise control >>> against CB radios. >> Maybe fifteen years ago, but EMI suppression has advanced since then in >> the automotive industry and many other industries too. > There was ONE model of cruise control I heard about that was > extra-fussy about CB Radio interference and IIRC it was OK with a 4 > watt unit installed in the vehicle, but a 100 watt Linear amp in a > vehicle within a couple hundred feet could "jam" it. > > Those cruise control units were VERY primitive compared to anything on > the market today. The affected unit was made by ARA if I remember > correctly and the problem only occurred if using the engine speed > sensor option instead of the magnets on the driveshaft - and that was > closer to 20 or 25 years ago (very early 1980s - early Chevy Citation > comes to mind. Cruise control usually used vehicle speed rather than engine speed. If the car kicks in a lower gear (e.g., when going up hill), then the car would slow down to keep the engine speed constant. I am not saying that there weren't any cars that used engine speed rather than vehicle speed, but I would think that there are few. Jeff
From: dr_jeff on 25 Mar 2010 22:27 Obveeus wrote: > "Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message > news:hoh1a5$jpd$1(a)panix2.panix.com... >> In article <4babdcf1$1_2(a)news.tm.net.my>, TE Cheah <4ws(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> 15 yr ago I read of 1 car in USA using auto cruise control drtve >>> past a truck using CB radio, this car @ once got unintended >>> acceleration, this driver switched off his auto cruise & ended this >>> problem. He told medias to warn users of auto cruise control >>> against CB radios. >> It's not just cruise control... there are a huge number of trucks out on >> the road that are violating the FCC emission regulations by three orders >> of magnitude. Consequently anything that isn't very carefully shielded >> with proper grounding design can have serious problems. > > But if this was the real issue it would be much more easily detected and > repeatable. Wow! People are using CB radios with 12,000 W of power. That would require a 1000 AMP alternator just for the radio (12 V x 1000 A = 12,000 W). Note: the FCC limit is 12 W and 3 orders of magnitude is 1000 (10 x 10 x 10). Jeff
From: Obveeus on 25 Mar 2010 22:43 "dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message news:u-SdnfydAeo1hjHWnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > Obveeus wrote: >> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge(a)panix.com> wrote in message >> news:hoh1a5$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 25 Mar 2010 23:04
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 |