E-Logs - the good, the bad & the ugly

huh??

NO regulations?

Still in development? Tell that to Qualcomm.

I don't know where you got that from, they have been well established and in regulation form.

IT IS really simple to understand for the unit, basically the unit has to be tamper proof meaning the driver can't be able to modify data, the unit has to have an indicator for a malfunction, the unit has to be able to print a log on demand or send data to the company to print the log and the manufacturer or developer has to have written instructions for the use of the machine a path for training and provide instructions for the driver when it fails - that is to use paper logs. There are other requirements but these are the most important ones.

The link is not the regulations but an advisory committee report. There is no ECM interface requirements unless it happened in the last three months and there is only a need to print off the log data for a roadside.

But see this is where I don't see the problems you are asking about. I mean until you learn how we work, it is hard to get the idea of what is needed or possible.

 

You're not listening ... there are regulations, there is a simple guidence and that's about it. The FMCSA like the rest of the DOT depends on self-certification and the regulations are really clear and simple.

But to your comments ...

OK first thing is there isn't going to be any legislation, these are regulations not laws hence no legislation needed. Congress doesn't get involved with regulations and as a result we have this mess.

Second is I can't speak for Canada, but US regulations are in 49 CFR 395.14 It is all there and you can easily use that to build on.

Third there are systems that already exist, Qualcomm makes several and are not expensive to get.

Fourth, not understanding the requirements of the driver means you won't produce a product that we can use. Been there and done that in software/hardware development so it isn't like I don't know what you're trying to do. Learn how we work first, get an idea what we go through and learn how to log.

 

Really ? Where have you been ?

http://www.grainnet.com/article.php?ID=125095

 

Been right here, and IF you read the exact legislation for HR 4348, it still has nothing to do with the issue he raised, the entire section is an order from Congress to the secretary of transportation to revise the regulations and to add more definitions into the already existing regulations IT IS NOT THE REGULATIONS. The regulations used for the past few years are already written, the poster is mistaken when he said there is this ambiguity that exists to prevent a unit from being built that is useful or meets the regulations.

 

go to amazon .com and the e-book. pro's and cons of e-logs by a drivers point of view.

 

The Kindle program for your computer (and phone, and tablet...) is free.

 

You are still missing the point. you are assuming something that isn't true.

If these regulations never existed, and there were nothing for people to work from, how come the EOBRs are already in a bunch of trucks?

This little bit of the highway bill doesn't mean a lot, read it carefully, congress is charging the DOT with something they have already done in 49 CFR 395.14, and added a requirement that law enforcement has access to the data to make a judgement call, something that will force the FMCSA to tell the dot enforcement officers they have to accept the data - not mess with the drivers - which is based on the driver harassment complaint by the OOIDA.

If you want to reinvent the wheel, go for it, there is enough information out there to start, Qualcomm has a couple white papers on the subject they can send you.

BUT for the past five years, the regulations existed.