ESafety Working Group 8 July 2002 1 e Safety Working Group 2nd Meeting, Brussels 8 July 2002 Overview of progress J. Jaaskelainen European Commission,

eSafety Working Group 8 July 2002 1

eeSafety Working GroupSafety Working Group

2nd Meeting, Brussels 8 July 2nd Meeting, Brussels 8 July 20022002

““Overview of progress”Overview of progress”

J. Jaaskelainen J. Jaaskelainen

European Commission, DG Information European Commission, DG Information SocietySociety


TopicsTopics

• 1st Meeting Results1st Meeting Results

• eSafety WG: Focus RevisitedeSafety WG: Focus Revisited

• 2nd Meeting Agenda2nd Meeting Agenda

• eSafety Work in Progress: Sub-groupseSafety Work in Progress: Sub-groups

• Next StepsNext Steps

• Action Plan: What is it about?Action Plan: What is it about?


1st Meeting results1st Meeting results

• Participants confirmed their commitment to eSafetyParticipants confirmed their commitment to eSafety

• Goals, ToR, List of actions, WG calendar and Goals, ToR, List of actions, WG calendar and milestones agreedmilestones agreed

• The four sub-groups were established, members The four sub-groups were established, members nominatednominated

• Concept/vision for Intelligent Integrated Safety Concept/vision for Intelligent Integrated Safety emerging, emerging, butbut

• Discussion on Discussion on eeSafety impact insufficientSafety impact insufficient

• Business model too much concentrating on e-CallBusiness model too much concentrating on e-Call

• Potential overlapping of the sub-groupsPotential overlapping of the sub-groups


eSafety WebsiteeSafety Website

www.europa.eu.int/information_society/programmes/esafety/index_en.htmwww.europa.eu.int/information_society/programmes/esafety/index_en.htm

• Work in progress Work in progress

• All documents and presentations of the 1st meeting availableAll documents and presentations of the 1st meeting available


eSafety Working Group:eSafety Working Group:organisation and tasksorganisation and tasks

High-Level Group

Support of the Support of the preparation of preparation of

eSafety Action PlaneSafety Action Plan

Reporting to the HL Group

Working GroupWorking Group

Monitoring of the implementation


Preparations of the Preparations of the eSafety Action Plan - Phase 2eSafety Action Plan - Phase 2

This phase aims at agreeing on the priorities and This phase aims at agreeing on the priorities and the viable approach for eSafety, and preparation the viable approach for eSafety, and preparation of the eSafety Action Plan:of the eSafety Action Plan:

• Elaboration of the detailed eSafety Action PlanElaboration of the detailed eSafety Action Plan

• Preparation of the e-Safety Congress in LyonPreparation of the e-Safety Congress in Lyon

• Commission Communication to the Council and the Commission Communication to the Council and the European Parliament European Parliament

• Elaboration of the Road Map (part of the Action Plan)Elaboration of the Road Map (part of the Action Plan)

• Preparing for further RTD under FP6Preparing for further RTD under FP6

• Other actions: Dissemination actions, International Other actions: Dissemination actions, International contacts, Forum for the Automobile and Societycontacts, Forum for the Automobile and Society


eSafety Working Group:eSafety Working Group:Focus revisitedFocus revisited

The four Sub-Groups have to produce reports The four Sub-Groups have to produce reports with recommended actions:with recommended actions:

• Each sub-group will produce a report Each sub-group will produce a report • working independentlyworking independently

• co-ordination by the Working Groupco-ordination by the Working Group

• Certain amount of overlapping can be allowed at this Certain amount of overlapping can be allowed at this stagestage

• List of realistic, detailed actions should be identified List of realistic, detailed actions should be identified immediately and completed during the processimmediately and completed during the process

• The Commission Communication MAY HAVE a The Commission Communication MAY HAVE a different structuredifferent structure


eSafety Working GroupeSafety Working Group2nd Meeting, 8 July 20022nd Meeting, 8 July 2002

10.0010.00 Welcome by the chairWelcome by the chair A. Vits, ECA. Vits, EC

10.1510.15 Overview of progress and the next stepsOverview of progress and the next steps J. Jaaskelainen, J. Jaaskelainen, ECEC

10.3010.30 Subgroup 1 Report and DiscussionSubgroup 1 Report and Discussion

Autonomous in-vehicle technologiesAutonomous in-vehicle technologies F. Minarini, ECF. Minarini, EC

D. Augello, RenaultD. Augello, Renault


Interactive and co-operative technologiesInteractive and co-operative technologies D. Callahan, ECD. Callahan, EC

G. Freij, ERTICOG. Freij, ERTICO

12.3012.30 LunchLunch


eSafety Working GroupeSafety Working Group2nd Meeting, 8 July 20022nd Meeting, 8 July 2002


Regulatory and standardisation issuesRegulatory and standardisation issues N. Bowerman, ECN. Bowerman, EC

M. Rowell, NavTechM. Rowell, NavTech


Societal and business issuesSocietal and business issues T. Barbas, ECT. Barbas, EC

J. Mateu, RACC J. Mateu, RACC

16.0016.00 Conclusions of the 2Conclusions of the 2ndnd Meeting and the Next Steps Meeting and the Next Steps

16.3016.30 Information pointsInformation points

Update on the HL meeting 14 NovemberUpdate on the HL meeting 14 November O. Mossé, ERTICOO. Mossé, ERTICO

National programmes and eSafetyNational programmes and eSafety V. Moutal, ECV. Moutal, EC

E-112 and E-112 and eeSafetySafety J. Jaaskelainen, ECJ. Jaaskelainen, EC

17.0017.00 A.O.B. and the Next meetingA.O.B. and the Next meeting


The Sub-groupsThe Sub-groups

SG1: Autonomous in-vehicle technologiesSG1: Autonomous in-vehicle technologies

SG2: Interactive and co-operative technologiesSG2: Interactive and co-operative technologies

SG3: Regulatory and standardisation issuesSG3: Regulatory and standardisation issues

SG4: Societal and business issuesSG4: Societal and business issues


Sub-group 1: Autonomous Sub-group 1: Autonomous in-vehicle technologiesin-vehicle technologies

• Main inputs: Becker (Ford - Response 1,2), Main inputs: Becker (Ford - Response 1,2), Rault (ACEA), Augello (Renault), Ulmer (DC - Rault (ACEA), Augello (Renault), Ulmer (DC - ADASE II)ADASE II)

• Status: A draft consolidated paperStatus: A draft consolidated paper

• Recommendations: IncompleteRecommendations: Incomplete

• Comments: Addressing second-generation Comments: Addressing second-generation ADAS ADAS per safety functionper safety function


Sub-group 2: Interactive andSub-group 2: Interactive andco-operative technologiesco-operative technologies

• Main inputs: Alberti (RACC), Cousyn (PSA Main inputs: Alberti (RACC), Cousyn (PSA Citroën), Schulenberg (VW), Freij (Ertico), Citroën), Schulenberg (VW), Freij (Ertico), Dechangy (Cofiroute)Dechangy (Cofiroute)

• Status: A draft of consolidated reportStatus: A draft of consolidated report

• Recommendations: Some very generic ones Recommendations: Some very generic ones identifiedidentified

• Comments: Some overlapping with SG 1 Comments: Some overlapping with SG 1 identifiedidentified


Sub-group 3: Regulatory andSub-group 3: Regulatory andStandardisation IssuesStandardisation Issues

• Main inputs: M. Rowell (NavTech)Main inputs: M. Rowell (NavTech)

• Status: A draft report, with a table of Status: A draft report, with a table of standardisation work/recommendations.standardisation work/recommendations.

• Recommendations: Actions are identified Recommendations: Actions are identified

• Comments: The table covers also other than Comments: The table covers also other than eSafety technologies eSafety technologies


Sub-group 4: Societal and Sub-group 4: Societal and business issuesbusiness issues

• Main input P. Sauret (RACC), comments by Main input P. Sauret (RACC), comments by Schuessler (DC) M. Hollingsworth (ACEA)Schuessler (DC) M. Hollingsworth (ACEA)

• Status: A draft reportStatus: A draft report

• Recommendations: Some very generic ones Recommendations: Some very generic ones identifiedidentified

• Comments: Should move towards a safety-Comments: Should move towards a safety-function based assessment?function based assessment?


Next StepsNext Steps


Calendar and major milestonesCalendar and major milestones

WG 1WG 1 10 June10 June Setting the scene, Setting the scene, eeSafety challenge, Safety challenge, integrated safety, setting up subgroupsintegrated safety, setting up subgroups

WG 2WG 2 8 July8 July First subgroup reports, discussionsFirst subgroup reports, discussions

WG 3WG 3 9 Sept9 Sept Updated subgroup reports, Comm.Updated subgroup reports, Comm.Comm. and Action Plan 1st draftsComm. and Action Plan 1st drafts

Lyon e-SafetyLyon e-Safety 16-18 Sept16-18 Sept Presentation of state of play and draftPresentation of state of play and draftConference Conference Comm. Comm. and Action PlanComm. Comm. and Action Plan

WG 4WG 4 OctoberOctober Full draft Comm. CommunicationFull draft Comm. CommunicationRoad map and actionsRoad map and actions

PreparatoryPreparatory 13 Nov13 Nov Meeting to prepare for the HL meetingMeeting to prepare for the HL meetingMeetingMeeting

2nd High2nd High 14 Nov14 Nov Presentation of Comm. CommunicationPresentation of Comm. CommunicationLevel MeetingLevel Meeting Speakers from industrySpeakers from industry

Announcements & PressAnnouncements & Press


Towards the 3rd meeting Towards the 3rd meeting of the WGof the WG

• We have to converge towards consolidated Sub-We have to converge towards consolidated Sub-Group reports with Actions identified (Lyon!)Group reports with Actions identified (Lyon!)

• The Commission will produce a draft list of actions The Commission will produce a draft list of actions on the basis of this meeting by mid-August, for on the basis of this meeting by mid-August, for discussion at the WG3 meetingdiscussion at the WG3 meeting

• To be discussed and decided today:To be discussed and decided today:•How can we build on and use the existing How can we build on and use the existing

research results of the partners?research results of the partners?•Safety function based approach to be used in all Safety function based approach to be used in all

Sub-Group reports?Sub-Group reports?•Should we have sub-group meetings before the Should we have sub-group meetings before the

holidays?holidays?


Autonomous Safety FunctionsAutonomous Safety FunctionsDraft - to be developedDraft - to be developed

• Lane supportLane support

• Safe speedSafe speed

• Safe followingSafe following

• Pedestrian protectionPedestrian protection

• Improved visionImproved vision

• Driver monitoring Driver monitoring

• Intersection safetyIntersection safety

• Vehicle diagnostics and dynamicsVehicle diagnostics and dynamics


Co-operative Safety FunctionsCo-operative Safety FunctionsDraft - to be developedDraft - to be developed

• e-call e-call vehicle - infrastructurevehicle - infrastructure

• safe speedsafe speed vehicle - infrastructurevehicle - infrastructure

• hazard warning hazard warning vehicle - infrastructure orvehicle - infrastructure or vehicle - vehicle vehicle - vehicle

• incident/congestion warningincident/congestion warning vehicle - infrastructure or vehicle - infrastructure or vehicle - vehiclevehicle - vehicle

• traffic sign recognition traffic sign recognition vehicle - infrastructurevehicle - infrastructure

• obstacle detectionobstacle detection autonomous or vehicle -autonomous or vehicle - vehiclevehicle

• road conditionroad condition vehicle - infrastructure or vehicle - infrastructure or vehicle - vehiclevehicle - vehicle

• weather data weather data vehicle - infrastructure or vehicle - infrastructure or vehicle - vehiclevehicle - vehicle

• intersection safety intersection safety vehicle -infrastructurevehicle -infrastructure


Action Plan: What is it about?Action Plan: What is it about?


eSafety Actions (1)eSafety Actions (1)

What the eSafety Actions ARE:What the eSafety Actions ARE:

• Action clearly specifiedAction clearly specified

• All involved main actors (EC, MS, All involved main actors (EC, MS, industry and others) clearly industry and others) clearly identifiedidentified

• Realistic - doableRealistic - doable

• Deadline mentioned if relevantDeadline mentioned if relevant

What the eSafety Actions are NOT:What the eSafety Actions are NOT:

• Generic statementsGeneric statements


eSafety Actions (2)eSafety Actions (2)

This COULD BE an eSafety This COULD BE an eSafety Action:Action:

• The European Commission and the The European Commission and the Automotive industry represented by ACEA Automotive industry represented by ACEA will establish by 2004 a European Code of will establish by 2004 a European Code of Practise for the design, testing and use of Practise for the design, testing and use of Active Safety Systems including ADAS in Active Safety Systems including ADAS in motor vehicles.motor vehicles.

This is NOT an eSafety Action:This is NOT an eSafety Action:• Specific actions need to be taken for Specific actions need to be taken for

overcoming the main societal and business overcoming the main societal and business obstacles.obstacles.


E-112 and eSafetyE-112 and eSafety


E-112 and eSafety (1)E-112 and eSafety (1)

• E-112E-112 E-Call E-Call E-MERGE E-MERGE eSafety eSafety• Europe has already adopted a regulatory approach Europe has already adopted a regulatory approach

towards location enhanced emergency callstowards location enhanced emergency calls

• Obligation for 112 applies to all operators as from July Obligation for 112 applies to all operators as from July 20032003

• A Commission Communication on the implementation A Commission Communication on the implementation aspects will be prepared by the end of the year 2002aspects will be prepared by the end of the year 2002

• Best effort approach: Operators pass the best location Best effort approach: Operators pass the best location information available, significant efforts made to information available, significant efforts made to develop common solutionsdevelop common solutions

• Progress of implementation will be monitoredProgress of implementation will be monitored


• ““A project that develops the Pan-European A project that develops the Pan-European Harmonised Vehicle Emergency Call Service”Harmonised Vehicle Emergency Call Service”• Aims to create technical, operational and business solution for Aims to create technical, operational and business solution for

e-call services available for travelers anywhere across Europee-call services available for travelers anywhere across Europe

• E-MERGE harmonises existing proprietary solutionsE-MERGE harmonises existing proprietary solutions

• Important issues regarding E-112Important issues regarding E-112• E-MERGE is not E-112 but complements it with additional E-MERGE is not E-112 but complements it with additional

informationinformation

• E-MERGE Workshop on User Needs (25 June): Confirmation E-MERGE Workshop on User Needs (25 June): Confirmation of the need for additional information in case of accidents of the need for additional information in case of accidents involving vehiclesinvolving vehicles

• Cross-fertilization of E-112 and E-MERGE: June meetingsCross-fertilization of E-112 and E-MERGE: June meetings

• E-112/E-Call co-existence has not been solved!E-112/E-Call co-existence has not been solved!


E-112 and eSafety (2)E-112 and eSafety (2)

Common ground for E-Call and E-112:Common ground for E-Call and E-112:• Investments to PSAPs and EAs to allow use of location Investments to PSAPs and EAs to allow use of location

information (civil protection authorities) information (civil protection authorities) • Further development and deployment of location and Further development and deployment of location and

communications technologies (GNSS, E-OTD, TA, Bluetooth, communications technologies (GNSS, E-OTD, TA, Bluetooth, WLAN, DSRC, 2.5G, 3G and beyond)WLAN, DSRC, 2.5G, 3G and beyond)

• Common platforms, standardised technologiesCommon platforms, standardised technologies• Solving privacy and liability issuesSolving privacy and liability issuesNext Steps:Next Steps:• See Helios Technology Study, 30 April 2002See Helios Technology Study, 30 April 2002• Proposal for establishing a European Emergency Proposal for establishing a European Emergency

Communication Forum (EECF, new CGALIES)Communication Forum (EECF, new CGALIES)• Commission CommunicationCommission Communication• Standardisation in ETSIStandardisation in ETSI

ESafety Working Group 8 July 2002 1 e Safety Working Group 2nd Meeting, Brussels 8 July 2002 Overview of progress J. Jaaskelainen European Commission,

Documents

esafety goals

esafety participants

esafety website

working group coordination

working group certain

subgroups esafety work

e safety working group

esafety action plan