According to documents from NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation, the agency is examining five incidents involving Comma 3, Comma 3X, Comma 4 and Openpilot. In several of those cases, the vehicles reportedly collided with stationary or slowly moving vehicles in the same lane.
One of the incidents involved a vehicle that was reportedly using Comma technology when it struck a first responder’s vehicle. The crash resulted in three deaths, according to the investigation information cited by TechRadar.
The investigation does not, by itself, establish that Comma’s hardware or software caused any of the crashes. NHTSA says it intends to gather additional information about each incident, including whether the system was active at the time and how it performed.
The agency is also expected to examine the safeguards designed to make sure drivers remain attentive and able to take control when necessary.
That distinction is important because Comma’s technology is classified as a driver assistance system rather than a fully autonomous driving system. The driver remains responsible for operating the vehicle, even when the software is controlling functions such as steering and acceleration.
How Comma’s system works
Comma has taken a different approach from traditional automakers. Instead of buying a new vehicle with advanced driver assistance technology built in, owners can install a Comma device in compatible vehicles.
The hardware is mounted near the rear view mirror and uses cameras to monitor the road. A wiring harness connects the system to the vehicle, allowing Openpilot software to interact with the car’s existing controls.
Depending on the vehicle and software configuration, Openpilot can provide features including adaptive cruise control, lane centering and automatic lane changes.
The system supports hundreds of vehicle models from dozens of manufacturers. Comma says more than 30,000 drivers use Openpilot, with hundreds of millions of miles accumulated by its users.
That scale makes the NHTSA investigation particularly significant. The agency is not examining a small experiment limited to a handful of vehicles. The technology has developed into a sizeable aftermarket ecosystem with a large community of users and developers.
Openpilot is also open source, meaning parts of its development involve a wider community rather than following the same development and validation process used by conventional automakers.
The growing concern around hands free driving
The investigation also highlights a broader problem affecting the entire driver assistance industry.
Modern systems can make long highway journeys considerably less demanding. Lane centering and adaptive cruise control can handle many routine driving tasks, but they do not remove the driver’s responsibility.
The danger arises when drivers begin treating assistance systems as autonomous driving technology.
The wording used to market these systems can make that distinction difficult for ordinary drivers to understand. Comma promotes its technology around the idea of hands free driving, while the actual capabilities and limitations depend heavily on the vehicle, software and driving environment.
A driver may therefore become overly comfortable with a system that is still capable of making mistakes.
That issue is not unique to Comma. Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self Driving systems have also faced scrutiny over how drivers use advanced assistance technology. Reports and investigations have repeatedly raised questions about drivers becoming distracted or relying too heavily on automated features.
The underlying issue is straightforward. A system can be capable of steering a vehicle for extended periods without being capable of handling every situation a human driver may encounter.
What happens next for Comma
NHTSA’s investigation should provide more information about whether there is a recurring technical or operational problem involving Comma equipment.
Investigators will need to establish the circumstances of the five crashes, determine whether the systems were active and examine what the software and hardware were doing immediately before each collision.
The agency will also need to consider whether the existing driver monitoring and safety measures are sufficient.
For Comma, the investigation could become an important test of how regulators treat aftermarket driver assistance technology. Unlike conventional factory fitted systems, products such as Openpilot can involve hardware supplied by one company, software developed by a broader community and vehicles produced by completely different manufacturers.
That creates a complicated safety environment.
The investigation should therefore be viewed as a fact finding process rather than proof that Comma technology is responsible for the reported crashes. At the same time, the incidents reinforce why drivers should not confuse hands free assistance with a vehicle that can safely take over every aspect of driving.
Until genuinely autonomous systems capable of operating without human supervision become widely available and legally approved for those conditions, drivers remain an essential part of the safety system.
Follow TechBSB For More Updates
