Auto Rental News
MenuMENU
SearchSEARCH

'Inadequate Safety Culture' to Blame for Uber's Automated Vehicle Crash

During a board meeting held to determine the probable cause of the March 2018 crash in Tempe, Ariz., the NTSB said an Uber Technologies Inc. division’s “inadequate safety culture” contributed to the fatal collision between an Uber automated test vehicle and a pedestrian.

by Staff
November 24, 2019
'Inadequate Safety Culture' to Blame for Uber's Automated Vehicle Crash

The pedestrian’s impairment at the time of the crash, coupled with crossing outside a crosswalk, contributed to the crash, as did the Arizona Department of Transportation’s insufficient oversight of automated vehicle testing, the NTSB found.

Photo via NTSB/Wikimedia.

3 min to read


The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) called upon federal regulators to create a review process before allowing automated test vehicles to operate on public roads, based upon the agency’s investigation of a fatal collision between an Uber automated test vehicle and a pedestrian.

During a board meeting held to determine the probable cause of the March 2018 crash in Tempe, Ariz., the NTSB said an Uber Technologies Inc. division’s “inadequate safety culture” contributed to the fatal collision between an Uber automated test vehicle and a pedestrian. The vehicle operator was uninjured in the crash, the pedestrian died.

Ad Loading...

Uber’s Advanced Technologies Group had modified the striking vehicle, a 2017 Volvo XC90, with a proprietary developmental automated driving system. The vehicle’s factory-installed forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking systems were deactivated during the operation of the automated system. An Uber ATG operator was in the driver’s seat, but the automated system was controlling the vehicle when it struck the pedestrian at 39 mph.

The NTSB determined the immediate cause of the collision was the failure of the Uber ATG operator to closely monitor the road and the operation of the automated driving system because the operator was visually distracted throughout the trip by a personal cell phone. Contributing to the crash was Uber ATG’s inadequate safety risk assessment procedures, ineffective oversight of the vehicle operators, and a lack of adequate mechanisms for addressing operators’ automation complacency — all consequences of the division’s inadequate safety culture.

The pedestrian’s impairment at the time of the crash, coupled with crossing outside a crosswalk, contributed to the crash, as did the Arizona Department of Transportation’s insufficient oversight of automated vehicle testing, the NTSB found.

Among the investigation’s findings:

The Uber ATG automated driving system detected the pedestrian 5.6 seconds before impact. Although the system continued to track the pedestrian until the crash, it never accurately identified the object crossing the road as a pedestrian — or predicted its path.

Ad Loading...

Had the vehicle operator been attentive, the operator would likely have had enough time to detect and react to the crossing pedestrian to avoid the crash or mitigate the impact.

While Uber ATG managers had the ability to retroactively monitor the behavior of vehicle operators, they rarely did so. The company’s ineffective oversight was exacerbated by its decision to remove a second operator from the vehicle during testing of the automated driving system.

Uber ATG made several changes to address the deficiencies identified, including implementation of a safety management system.

The NTSB issued a total of six recommendations to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the state of Arizona, the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, and Uber ATG.

The NTSB recommended that NHTSA require entities wishing to test a developmental automated driving system on public roads to submit safety self-assessment plans before being allowed to begin or continue testing and that NHTSA should review the plans to ensure they include appropriate safeguards.

Ad Loading...

This article was originally posted on Metro Magazine.

Originally posted on Automotive Fleet

More Rental Operations

plane, palm trees, car rental sign
Rental Operationsby Chris BrownSeptember 15, 2026

Palm Beach Airport Code Change Creates Car Rental Distribution Gap

A test of rental searches under the old PBI and new DJT airport codes returned largely different sets of brands and vehicles, highlighting a potential distribution problem for rental operators.

Read More →
Team members of U-Save's new franchise
Rental Operationsby StaffSeptember 15, 2026

U-Save Continues Dominican Republic Expansion with Launch in Punta Cana

The new franchise location builds on U-Save’s existing Santo Domingo operation and will begin taking reservations for October 2026.

Read More →
A traveler searches for rental cars with an AI bot
Rental OperationsSeptember 14, 2026

When AI Books the Rental Car, Who Controls the Sale?

As AI moves from comparing rental rates to completing transactions, operators need to understand how travelers find, interpret, rank, and ultimately see their offers. (Part 2 of 2.)

Read More →
Ad Loading...
map of europe and summer car rental rates
Rental OperationsSeptember 11, 2026

European Booked Car Rental Rates Fell 5%, Results Varied by Country

Ireland, Cyprus, and the United Kingdom saw steep declines, while booked rates rose in Poland and Hungary.

Read More →
thumbnail of Chris Brown and Mike DeLorenzo with title Time to Rethink Rental Categories?
Rental Operationsby Chris BrownSeptember 8, 2026

Is It Time to Rethink Rental Categories?

As traditional economy and compact cars disappear from the market, longtime rental operator Mike DeLorenzo asks whether the industry’s familiar vehicle categories still make sense — and what operators need to rethink along with them.

Read More →
Woman receiving car rental rates on computer from AI agent
Rental OperationsSeptember 1, 2026

Who Owns the Rate? AI Is Creating a New Distribution Problem for Car Rental

Generative Engine Optimization asks whether AI can find a rental company, but operators also need to know whether the agent inspected enough of the market, compared equivalent offers, and presented a rate the traveler can actually book. (Part 1 of 2)

Read More →
Ad Loading...
map of globe with regional corporate car rental rates
Rental Operationsby StaffAugust 25, 2026

U.S. Business Travel Car Rental Rates Forecast to Rise Up to 2%

Improved fleet supply should limit pricing gains in 2026-27, while insurance, repair costs, and softer residual values continue to pressure rental operations, according to Amex GBT.

Read More →
Sixt H1 financial results
Rental Operationsby StaffAugust 14, 2026

Sixt Revenue Tops $2.4 Billion in First Half of 2026

Sixt’s first-half revenue surpassed $2.4 billion for the first time as demand outpaced fleet growth, lifting utilization and earnings despite weaker consumer sentiment in North America.

Read More →
Bobby Klyce in memoriam image
Rental Operationsby Chris BrownAugust 13, 2026

In Memoriam: Bobby Klyce, Avis Licensee Legend

The longtime Birmingham Avis operator and 2018 Auto Rental News Impact Award recipient was remembered as an advocate for independent licensees and the broader car rental industry.

Read More →
Ad Loading...
Vibe coding webinar promo image
Rental Operationsby StaffAugust 12, 2026

How to Build Custom Fleet Tools With AI and Vibe Coding [Webinar]

A new Automotive Fleet webinar explores how fleet managers are using AI and vibe coding to automate routine work and create simple operational tools without traditional programming skills.

Read More →
Ad Loading...