back to article Sixty-five THOUSAND Range Rovers recalled over DOOR software glitch

Jaguar Land Rover is recalling no less than 65,000 of its SUVs due to a software problem that caused the cars' doors to unlock themselves - potentially while in motion. The issue, which potentially creates a heightened theft-by-hijack risk, affects Range Rover and Range Rover Sport vehicles sold in the UK over the last two …

Page:

  1. Pen-y-gors

    Experts?

    "Experts predict problems of this type will become more commonplace as cars rely more and more heavily on digital technology"

    You really don't need to be an 'expert' to predict that!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Experts?

      Not to worry, Adobe will issue a patch ASAP.

      Oops, wrong thread, or was it?

    2. lambda_beta
      Linux

      Re: Experts?

      You mean the same "experts" that design this crap?

  2. Yugguy

    As I've commented previously

    http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2015/07/08/ford_car_software_recall_analysis/

    The more of this I read, the less I want a modern car.

    Too much concentration on the shiny and not enough on keeping basic functions simple and robust.

    1. John H Woods Silver badge
      Stop

      Re: As I've commented previously

      I can understand a car engine not stopping immediately when the key is removed, but I cannot understand why such a vehicle would lack a non-defeatable stop switch. I cannot think of any piece of remotely heavy machinery that does not have a big red STOP button on it (isn't it a legal requirement?)

      Of course, you have to guard against accidental presses (I do recall an account of a noob, leaving a datacentre with a co-worker and being asked to 'get the lights' pressing the STOP switch!) but nevertheless ...

      BTW, quick shout-out to all the old fogeys who remember what a BRS reset is ... or a Molly guard!

      1. Nolveys
        Go

        Re: As I've commented previously

        a big red STOP button...you have to guard against accidental presses

        There are times when you definitely don't want a guard on the big red stop button.

        I used to work at a company that manufactured mining equipment. Think big, four-wheeled tractors covered with 1/4" plate with oddball equipment attached to them. At this company there was a worker there who was famous for doing things like falling through ceilings, almost electrocuting himself, impaling random things with forklifts, etc.

        One day he decided that he needed to move one of the mining machines. He started it up, immediately lost control of it and had it speeding on a collision course with one of the bay doors. Luckily he thought to hit the Big Red Button, you know, the Big Red Button that causes an explosion of fire retardant. And through the door it went.

        That was a good day.

      2. Bob Wheeler
        Happy

        Re: As I've commented previously

        Going into BRS mode.....

      3. batfink

        Re: As I've commented previously

        Back in the day, I used to be able to pull the key out of my old Holden with the engine still running - for example, if I wanted to go and get something out of the boot (which of course you needed the key to open) So, this doesn't seem strange to me. It was the position of the switch, not the presence/absence of the key, which was the controlling factor.

        1. PNGuinn
          Go

          Re: As I've commented previously

          Ah, yes - worn key and lock syndrome.

          Began to happen to me on my old Austin 1100. Mind you, the 3 cwt of keys on the ring(s) attached to the car key probably didn't help much.

          Did something about it (new key - not many pence cost) when the whole kaboodle fell out of the ignition driving through Barking one day.

          Simple problem - simple solution.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: As I've commented previously

          According to the Darwin Awards at least one light aircraft pilot has been killed by taking off with the wind lock in place and then being unable to get the key off the ring with the ignition switch on it.

          Security features and safety features do not always work well under all circumstances.

          (At one time I had an old British motorcycle which continued running after the ignition was turned off, but I then decarbonised the cylinder head and it stopped doing it after that.)

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: As I've commented previously

        "a big red STOP button...you have to guard against accidental presses"

        Yes, but how do you guard against Father Dougal?

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: As I've commented previously

        Yup, so have I.

        Not to pull the most painful card out of the box, but has it ever dawned on people how stupidly simple it now is for playing kids to drive away with a car and get themselves in serious danger? You just have to be near the car and the engine start button will work :(.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: As I've commented previously

          ... but has it ever dawned on people how stupidly simple it now is for playing kids to drive away with a car and get themselves in serious danger?

          You seem to have mistaken shit parenting for shit software - not that there's any real difference, it's always someone else's fault, right?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: As I've commented previously

            You seem to have mistaken shit parenting for shit software - not that there's any real difference, it's always someone else's fault, right?

            You don't appear to have kids, unless you're outsourcing the job.

            Kids like to play, and a good parent encourages that but ensures it's as safe as possible. I have no issue with them occasionally involving the car in their play (although that may have to do more with the fact that I'm washing it and it becomes a sport to challenge me to get them soaked), because I have one which needs a key so all the dangerous stuff is impossible, and I have yet to forget the key in the car in 30+ years of driving.

            With a keyless car you may accidentally have the keyfob in your pocket as it will be on the same ring as your house keys, and some of these things work from quite a distance. I don't like them. I prefer to have control over what close to 2 tonnes worth of steel does in my name.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: As I've commented previously

          Then that is a retarted key less system. With my key less car (Subaru forester) the fob/key needs to be inside the car, you can hold it 1 cm outside the car door window and it will not start, move it in and it will. You step outside of the car while the engine is running, close the door the car beeps at you telling you there are no more keys in the car and if its going to be driven off they could be in trouble as they cant start it again.

      6. annodomini2

        Re: As I've commented previously

        The big red button is there for 2 reasons:

        1. Liability indemnity, puts the responsibility on the operator.

        2. Cost, due to 1, less safety required in the control system.

        Recent changes to the safety regulations have rendered this redundant.

        In a car there is a bigger risk of someone you don't want pressing the button at an inappropriate time e.g. escaped 5yo from their car seat, idiot teenagers.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: As I've commented previously

          Big red buttons are still required for some equipment, and are hardwired stops in many cases. Seen why first hand when the newly installed PLC's were considered so good all hardwired and analog controls were removed.

          Nothing quite like the look on an operators face when they lose monitoring and control of a 100,000hp machine and the red button does nothing.

          1. Ole Juul

            Re: As I've commented previously

            Nothing quite like the look on an operators face when they lose monitoring and control of a 100,000hp machine and the red button does nothing.

            Don't want to be too pedantic, but what kind of machine has 100,000hp? The Komatsu D575A is billed as the world's biggest bulldozer (24' bucket) and it only has 1,150 horsepower. The world's biggest machine, Bagger 288 doesn't even come close to 100,000 hp - though it probably has more than one red button.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: As I've commented previously

              "Don't want to be too pedantic, but what kind of machine has 100,000hp"

              The Warsila-Sulser 14 cylinder design marine Diesel engine. Does a supertanker have an emergency stop button? You'd need to be very brave to push it.

              MAN have a design which in the largest possible size would rate 100 MW. Now that's an engine; and it's a two stroke.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: supertanker

                " Does a supertanker have an emergency stop button? You'd need to be very brave to push it."

                And somewhat prescient, given that if it's the boat's motion (rather than some other engine effect) you want to stop, it'll take a quarter of an hour or so between gearbox to neutral and boat stopping. (Some of these words may not be quite the right ones, but I think the principle is sound).

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: supertanker

                  "it'll take a quarter of an hour or so between gearbox to neutral and boat stopping."

                  Supertankers don't have gearboxes; the engines are direct drive to the prop. Gears don't like what happens when the prop gets whacked by a heavy sea, and electrical drive (which has an airgap) costs more to operate due to lower efficiency. These very large engines are running at over 50% thermal efficiency and there is constant pressure on the makers to do better.

                  You crash stop one of these things by reversing the engine, and it the takes around 15 minutes. Just stopping the engine, even with the prop drag, would still have it continuing for 15 miles or more. The old idea of steam giving way to sail isn't exactly practical.

                  My comment was that, given the operating cost of a large container ship or tanker, which is enormous, stopping the engine as part of an unplanned manoueuvre would actually require balls of steel. The engine management system should be monitoring every parameter of every cylinder continuously so a sudden problem is unlikely.

                  1. Vic

                    Re: supertanker

                    These very large engines are running at over 50% thermal efficiency

                    Got a source for that? Because it would require TH of roughly 600K to achieve, and that doesn't feel right...

                    Vic.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: As I've commented previously

              "but what kind of machine has 100,000hp?"

              Grid electrical generators spring to mind.

    2. Ole Juul

      Re: As I've commented previously

      Still running a 1987 Reliant here. The doors are manual. I open them. I close them. It's a very elegant engineering solution.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: As I've commented previously

        "Still running a 1987 Reliant here. The doors are manual. I open them. I close them. It's a very elegant engineering solution."

        I suspect however that thats the point at which the word "elegant" and anything built by Reliant part company.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: As I've commented previously

          "I suspect however that thats the point at which the word "elegant" and anything built by Reliant part company."

          Even the Scimitar?

          1. Yugguy

            Re: As I've commented previously

            Gorgeous car. That and the Jensen Interceptor are my ideal car shapes.

            1. Pookietoo

              Re: Gorgeous car

              I'm quite fond of the GT6.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: As I've commented previously

        You don't need security for a Reliant as anyone unwise enough to steal one would have a hard time getting away with it, if they could see through the tears of laughter. Newer cars need the security.

        I expect the Range Rover software is based on Windows. The poor car probably tried to download a critical Flash update or a vital fax driver or some other nonsense, and is now stuck trying to pump blue screen bytes down a diagnostic port.

      3. Vic

        Re: As I've commented previously

        The doors are manual. I open them. I close them. It's a very elegant engineering solution.

        I used to have an old Renault - can't remember which model.

        THe central locking was about the only things that actually worked on the car - even though you could easily reach both doors from the driver's seat...

        Vic.

    3. LucreLout

      Re: As I've commented previously

      Too much concentration on the shiny and not enough on keeping basic functions simple and robust.

      Agreed. I used to chuckle at people that couldn't fathom what the ECU did, or that under all the sensors was an engine that worked just the same as when it was fed by a brace of carbs and fired by rotor arm and dizzy cap. Suck, squeeze, bang, blow.... Its still the route to happiness.

      But now, things have gotten silly. The list of parts that need coding in at a stealership is horrendous. If I stripped the loom out of an equivalent model car, I could probably drive mine 0-100-0 inside the length of the loom.

      Fixing a non-starting car used to be as simple as check for the spark, if its there, check for fuel. One or the other would be missing, or if both were present you had usually a carb issue. While I'm quite happy to plug my car into my laptop and interpret sensor logs and fault codes, I actually do most of my fault diagnosis on Google.... which just seems wrong to me.

      I can't imagine why much of the tech is present or why its doing a better job than its replacement. Fueling and firing I get, but what does the gearbox need its own ECU for, and why does the airbag need its own ECU? Why is fitting towbar electrics so difficult and what advantage is it bringing? Why does the steering need to be fly by wire? Or the brakes? I love technology. I love cars. But I don't see why they have to be endlessly blended together for little tangible benefit.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: As I've commented previously

        "I love technology. I love cars. But I don't see why they have to be endlessly blended together for little tangible benefit."

        I would argue about the little tangible benefit. There are other factors as well but when I started driving nearly 8000 people a year were killed on the roads. Now it's under 2000. This despite the fact that car ownership has been democratised to the point that the average driver is far less intelligent than was the average 1960s driver.

        Car electronics may not pass the Turing test, but compensate very well for the maladroit.

        1. LucreLout

          Re: As I've commented previously

          I would argue about the little tangible benefit. There are other factors as well but when I started driving nearly 8000 people a year were killed on the roads. Now it's under 2000. This despite the fact that car ownership has been democratised to the point that the average driver is far less intelligent than was the average 1960s driver.

          I quite agree that these improvements have happened and are wonderful. I disagree that they are due to in car technology. Mostly it is chassis design, mandatory seat belt use, motorcycle helmets, crumple zones, air bags (a sensor sure, but a whole ECU??), and body shape (throws peds into the air rather than running them over).

          There's a long list of in car tech that just doesn't do anything useful (safety, performance, or emissions for the green). Fly by wire steering hasn't helped those. Fuel injectors coded to the specific ECU? Heated seats? Heated mirrors? Electric mirrors? Rain sensing wipers. Auto dimming rear view mirror. DRLs. Reversing sensor. Keys that aren't, well, keys. Auto parking..... there's so much extraneous and unneccessary guff in cars these days, I'm not surprised there's so many recalls and faults.

          1. MJI Silver badge

            Re: ECUs and Injectors

            I have come across ECUs having the injectors coded to it, as there were a range of tolerances and these were used to improve fueling

      2. MJI Silver badge

        Re: As I've commented previously (Lucrelout)

        Gearboxes are better with an ECU, compare a modern controlled torque converter box with a 1960s or 70s version.

        Often VERY similar boxes, but computer control enables learning, alternate shift patterns, different maps for different engines.

    4. Fungus Bob
      Facepalm

      Re: As I've commented previously

      "The more of this I read, the less I want a modern car."

      The electric sliding door on the Chevy Venture van actually had a reset procedure because the wee little lizard brain in the alarm circuit could get confused and trigger the alarm even if the door was properly shut.

      We've had doors figured out for how long? Thousands of years? Open-shut-open-shut-open-shut-open-shut, no problem And Chevy comes along and fucks it all up.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    Love this...

    "It’s positive to see automotive firms taking the proper steps to address evolving criminal threats."

    What wait a few years until it gets so hard to insure them, that people probably stop buying them THEN do something about it?

    1. Fatman

      Re: Love this...

      <quote>What wait a few years until it gets so hard to insure them, that people probably stop buying them THEN do something about it?</quote>

      Where I live, there is a prominent legal firm whose TV advertising points out the need to have the vehicles involved in a serious crash inspected by automotive experts.

      With "things" like ignition switches that fail, brakes the don't work due to software glitches, and cruise controls that do not disengage; they want to impress potential clients that """accidents""" are not often such a straight forward issue of solely driver negligence.

  4. djstardust

    Ahem ....

    What about the thousands that were nicked as this problem has been known about for quite some time. how are they going to recall them?

  5. wolfetone Silver badge

    A friend of mine works for Land Rover building these cars/SUV's. He said he'd never buy one because he's seen first hand how they're built. You can't get a better stamp of approval than that in my book.

    Zim zimmer, who's seen the keys to my Honda?

    1. Anonymous Custard

      I think that's fairly standard across most makes though.

      Over the years I've had similar discussions with mechanics who have services my company cars (VW, Vauxhall Peugeot and Ford) and they've all said the same thing. And if you look at the cars those mechanics drive, it's very rarely the make that they are employed to work on...

      1. David 132 Silver badge

        I think that's fairly standard across most makes though.

        Yup.

        This would be an opportune moment to relate a story told to me by a good friend who used to work for a particular Japanese car manufacturer in Swindon (won't name them to spare their blushes, but they're a source of Civic pride).

        Seems they had a car-park full of newly-built cars awaiting transport to the docks, and a metal water-tower that towered (heh) over the area.

        Contractors were hired to re-paint the water tower, and were expressly warned not to do so if there was any breeze. They ignored that warning.

        Cue my friend and several colleagues spending hours in the car-park with a handful of microfiber cloths and cans of solvent, cleaning beeellions of tiny Hammerite splatters off all those shiny new cars...

        Still, he said it was good money while it lasted.

    2. TRT Silver badge

      Oddly my brother, an ex-army vehicle mechanic, said the same when he found a post on the Evoque assembly line.

    3. Cpt Blue Bear

      Meh, the fact that every time we go four wheel driving with someone in a Disco we end up towing the broken Landy is enough for me. Last one did the transfer case climbing out of a creek bed.

      At least they don't catch fire like Jeeps.

  6. JeffyPoooh
    Pint

    "...doors can remain unlatched even when in the 'closed' position..."

    That's a fundamental hardware conceptual design flaw.

    Obviously the up-and-down dock lock button thingy on some cars is now just a separate human interface device that apparently is controlled by dodgy software. As opposed to being hardware link by a rod.

    Conceptual design fail.

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: "...doors can remain unlatched even when in the 'closed' position..."

      On the first car I had with central locking, pressing the 'lock' button resulted in whirring and clunks as various motors did their stuff. My wife's new Peugeot just makes a tiny 'click'. I still end up trying the handles, I just can't accept that something as supposedly secure as locking both doors can be done without something solid and mechanical moving.

      1. Shades

        Re: "...doors can remain unlatched even when in the 'closed' position..."

        I'm guessing that your wife's new Peugeot may use a similar system to my car*, which uses hydraulics to engage the locks. That too makes absolutely no discernible noise other than, in my case, a reassuring 'clunk' rather than a 'click'.

        * Not a Peugeot, but I received a myriad of childish downvotes just for mentioning the car I choose to drive. Not making that mistake again.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
          Childcatcher

          Re: "...doors can remain unlatched even when in the 'closed' position..."

          "a reassuring 'clunk' rather than a 'click'."

          ...as a certain dead ex-DJ used to say. Shame he never got caught clunking while alive.

          1. Shades
            WTF?

            Re: "...doors can remain unlatched even when in the 'closed' position..."

            As that is not what a certain dead ex-DJ used to say I find the raising of that particular subject at this juncture to be a bit odd. Unless you were trying to be funny in which case you failed. Hard. Every time you hear the word "Kangaroo" do you awkwardly bring up a certain Australian TV host?

            1. Vic

              Re: "...doors can remain unlatched even when in the 'closed' position..."

              As that is not what a certain dead ex-DJ used to say

              Errr - do you not remember the "Clunk Click Every Trip" advertising from the '70s? That was him...

              Vic.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon