At Tuesday’s hearing on two fatal crashes involving Ford’s Blue Cruise system, the NTSB recommended that Ford find ways to improve the way its system monitors drivers, and urged the federal government to establish minimum safety standards. Even though this investigation focused on these Ford crashes, the board made clear that their concerns apply across the industry.

“These systems function primarily as convenience features rather than safety enhancements,” NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy said.

The 2024 crashes in Texas and Pennsylvania killed three people when Ford Mustang Mach-E SUVs slammed into stopped vehicles. In both cases, the drivers were distracted in ways the system failed to recognize. The Texas driver only briefly glanced at the road while searching for a charging station, and the Pennsylvania driver appeared focused on the cellphone she was holding on top of the steering wheel in front of her.

Homendy said automakers are marketing these systems as safety improvements that allow drivers to take their hands off the wheel and focus elsewhere. To illustrate her point, she showed a Ford commercial that depicted a mother in a driver’s seat pretending to conduct a symphony with her eyes closed while talking to kids in the backseat.

NTSB findings highlight concerns

Philip Koopman, professor emeritus at Carnegie Mellon University and expert on self-driving vehicle safety, said the NTSB findings highlight longstanding concerns about the limitations of these driver assistance systems and the fact that more advancements are needed.

“These concerns continue to be a problem,” Koopman said. “The finding today is that the journey is not over. More work is needed.”

Ford said in a statement that it remains committed to safety and “we will take the NTSB’s recommendations under serious consideration as we continue to evolve our driver-assist technologies and encourage responsible road behavior.”

Drivers lulled into false sense of security

Cathy Chase, president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, said that drivers who are already addicted to their cellphones think it’s OK to check them while using these systems because they trust them.

“Our brains are just wired in that if we think that a system is going to take over and reliably handle a driving task, we get bored and we look for something else to do,” Chase said.

There are currently no clear U.S. government safety standards for the systems, so each automaker’s version of this technology can vary greatly, said Michael Graham, NTSB vice chair.

The NTSB has previously investigated a number crashes involving similar systems, including Tesla’s Autopilot system. Homendy said that it’s not fair to think Tesla’s system is worse because they have reported a large number of crashes. She said Tesla is just much better at reporting crashes. The NTSB recommended that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration should require automakers to track and report crashes more reliably.

Ford’s Blue Cruise system allows drivers to take their hands off the steering wheel while it handles steering, braking and acceleration on highways. The company says the system isn’t fully autonomous and that it monitors drivers to make sure they pay attention to the road. The systems offered by other carmakers are similar and most of the concerns the NTSB raised apply to all of them.

There are no fully autonomous vehicles for sale to the public in the U.S., but robotaxis that operate without a driver are being used in several major cities.

Graham said he’s concerned that some of these systems have a hard time detecting stationary objects or vehicles in the roar, but the only way automakers communicate that with drivers is in the owner’s manual that many people don’t read cover-to-cover. And the caveats in the manual don’t match the way the car companies sell these systems in ads.

Closer look at previous crashes

One of the deadly Ford crashes, which killed one person, occurred in San Antonio, Texas. The other happened in Philadelphia, killing two. The driver in the Philadelphia crash was later charged with DUI homicide. That case is pending, with no trial date set.

The Texas crash occurred on Interstate 10 in San Antonio. The Mach E, going nearly 75 mph, struck the rear of a Honda CR-V that was stopped in the middle of three lanes at night. Investigators said the Ford driver was looking for a nearby charging station, and there was no evidence that either he or the Ford’s automated systems tried to slow the car or swerve.

Another driver who avoided the CR-V told investigators that neither its taillights nor hazards were working at the time. But NTSB investigators said body camera footage shot after the crash showed that some of the CR-V’s lights were on, and that evidence showed that at least one of the taillights was lit up before the crash.

The other crash involving a Mach E killed two people at night on Interstate 95 in Philadelphia. The Pennsylvania State Police said the Ford was in the left lane when it struck a stationary Hyundai Elantra that earlier had collided with a Toyota Prius. The Ford was going 72 mph even though the speed limit in the area had decreased to 45 mph because it was a construction zone.

During the crash, the Prius driver, who was outside of his vehicle, also was struck and thrown into the southbound lanes. A person from the Hyundai also was on the roadway and was hit. Both young men died.

Concerns about impaired drivers

NTSB members expressed concerns Tuesday that drivers who are under the influence of alcohol or drugs seem to believe that using a driver assistance system can help them drive while impaired.

“It’s obvious to anyone paying attention that people are buying this technology with the plan of using it to help them drive home drunk,” Koopman said.

Homendy said that in contrast to the hands-free driving systems, systems that the NTSB has long recommended that can automatically stop a car when they detect an impending collision have proven effective at reducing traffic deaths.