Tower alluded to this but I think this was simply a system breakdown. This was a breakdown with OnStar as well as the locals. Allow me to read between the lines and I'll explain:
One big key that Onstar has said since this incident is that it was not an airbag notification but someone pushed the button. This obviously lowered the priority of the call for Onstar. The other excuse Onstar gave was that the message was garbled or whatever and that it appeared the female was outside of the vehicle. So Onstar made the obligatory call and gave coordinates but I don't think they care much after that.
Many local emergency responders and 911 operators are not familiar at all with Onstar and/or it's capabilities and I imagine the Onstar operator gave a nonchalant attitude to the 911 operator on the call. I don't know how many false calls Onstar receives but I am thinking this was where the breakdown occured, that no priority was really given the emergency.
Where I do differ from Tower is the continued response and this is where my biggest issue lies with this whole ordeal. Onstar has the ability to track your vehicle for emergency purposes through GPS just like it did with the inital call here. But, if the Rangers went to the general location and didn't find anything, Onstar should have been contacted again to verify the vehicles current location. If it remained the same then they know something is up. If it is at an address in the city, a patrolman could be sent to verify, if there was no signal at all, then you go out in force to find them. There was obviously battery power immediately after the accident because Onstar was contacted. Onstar was able to get some general GPS coordinates from the vehicle. After the first sweep of the area, Onstar should have been contacted again to verify the vehicle's location. It doesn't appear that the full capability of Onstar was utilized at all in this situation.
|
03-20-2005, 02:18 PM
Posting Rules
Hybrid Mode