Euro NCAP
2025 Roadmap

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAPIN PURSUIT OF VISION ZERO1

Executive Summary

The focus of the roadmap is on the use of advanced technology to deliver improved
passenger car safety but also on how it might assist other road users. The continued
use of the overall rating scheme is envisaged, with its separation of assessment
into one of four areas, but a move is proposed to a more scenario-based scheme
in the future and to greater use of simulation to provide a broader and more robust
assessment. An assessment of automated driving is proposed, outside of themain star rating scheme. For primary safety, driver monitoring (start date 2020)is proposed, to mitigate the very significant problems of driver distraction andimpairment through alcohol, fatigue, etc. A reward is foreseen which is related bothto the problems detected by the system and to the action taken — warning in thefirst instance, but also speed limitation etc. Autonomous Emergency Steering (AES,2020) is a technology in its infancy and changes to legislation, expected in 2022, areneeded to allow full exploitation of its potential but driver-initiated, in-lane steering
support could be rewarded early in the roadmap period. Further developments inAutonomous Emergency Braking (AEB, 2020), to address cross-junction, head-on
and reversing accidents are proposed. Finally, V2X communication (2024) offers
great potential but agreement is first needed on the technology employed.
In the field of secondary safety, a review of whiplash testing will
rationalise and simplify the testing effort. For pedestrian protection,
an upper-body-mass leg impactor will yield more realistic test results
while headform testing will be extended to include cyclists.
For the first time, tertiary safety is addressed. From 2022, a reward is given
alert the owner and/or the emergency services, to avoid heatstroke fatalities.
A relatively low-technology approach is proposed for assisting rescue teams
to extricate occupants from a crashed vehicle. Euro NCAP will collaborate
with CTIF to ensure the availability of standardised rescue sheets.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

to Child Presence Detection, which can detect a child left alone in a car and2

Executive Summary

Automated driving can offer great safety potential by helping to eliminate drivererrors. Euro NCAP will promote the rapid, safe deployment of this technology
into the vehicle fleet by means of a categorisation of the type and degree ofassistance/automation offered, outside of the main star rating scheme. At thesame time, Euro NCAP will provide information to consumers to allay fears but also
to maintain realistic expectations of the degree of automation offered and of theneed for vigilance in cars where the level of automation is low or is not universal.
Finally, in the areas of truck city safety, powered two-wheelers andcyber-security, the roadmap outlines projects with which Euro NCAPEURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

may be associated whilst not necessarily taking the lead role.

3

Executive Summary3

Preface5

1/ Introduction

6

2/ The Overall Safety Rating

7

PRIMARY SAFETY

7

Driver Monitoring (2020)
Automatic Emergency Steering (2020, 2022)
Autonomous Emergency Braking (2020, 2022)
V2x (2024)

7
8
8
10

SECONDARY SAFETY

11

TERTIARY SAFETY
Rescue, Extrication and Safety (2020)
Child Presence Detection (2022)

11
11
11
11
11

C A R R Y- O V E R I T E M S

12FUTURE EVOLUTION

12

3/ Automated Driving

13

THE ROLE OF EURO NCAP

13

A U T O M AT E D F U N C T I O N A L I T I E S

13TESTING AND ASSESSMENT

13

G R A D AT I O N

14

4/ Other Initiatives

15

TRUCK LABEL

15

POWERED TWO WHEELERS

15

CYBER SECURITY

16

Timeline

17

References

18

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

Whiplash/Rear-end Crash Protection (2020)
Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (2022)

4

Preface

Before you lies Euro NCAP’s roadmap for the period between 2020 and
2025. The document provides guidance on the future developments andactivities of the European consumer safety program and may serve asa reference for the automotive industry and other stakeholders.
Forward planning for this transient period, where available technology andthe boundary conditions are evolving rapidly, was difficult. Over the lastmonths, Euro NCAP has reached out to key external stakeholders in theindustry to discuss our first thoughts about the future safety rating and
its role in promoting automation. Debating these issues face to face hashelped us to identify the opportunities for vehicle safety improvement andbetter understand the challenges that the automotive industry is facing.
Euro NCAP wishes to express its sincere gratitude to all who
participated in the consultation meetings and who haveprovided the very valuable feedback and suggestions.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

Leuven, 12 September 20175

1/ Introduction

As an advocate for safer cars, Euro NCAP aims to highlight
automated driving technologies and raise awareness of
their benefits. But Euro NCAP will also keep challenging
vehicle manufacturers on what they are actually selling toconsumers on the European market. This means offering
the best possible technology as standard in all segments
and countries, protecting car occupants of all ages, sizes
and shapes and to also look out for the safety of otherroad users in traffic.
With 256 million cars in use, Europe has the world largest passenger car fleet. In 2016, over 14 million new cars
were registered (ACEA, 2017). Traditionally, the smaller
A- and B-segments dominate the passenger car sales
in numbers, while the mid-sized Sport Utility Vehicle
segment is one of the fastest growing. Over 95 percentof new model sales in these segments are covered by arating, so it is probably fair to say that Euro NCAP has
a strong influence on the fitment and performance ofvehicle safety systems in the market.
Despite having one the highest motorisation rates, roads
in Europe remain the safest in the world: in 2016, theEU-28 counted 50 road fatalities per one million inhabitants, against 174 deaths per million globally (European
Commission, 2017). Car occupants account for almost
half of road accident victims. However, all combined,
pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists make up almost
the same share. Looking beyond the fatality number, it
is estimated that 135,000 people are seriously injured on
European roads each year (European Commission, 2017).
Indeed, most of those seriously injured are vulnerable
road users and many are elderly, an age group that is
growing in importance.
The more widespread availability and affordability ofthe technology that enables Advanced Driver Assist
Systems, such as AEB and LDW, has resulted in a significant increase in the uptake of such technology in recent

years. Still, the number of cars in the fleet equipped withstate-of-the-art ADAS remains relatively low and will not
yet have significantly changed common crash types or
the frequency of vehicle crashes. This is particularly true
for ADAS systems designed to address vulnerable roaduser crashes, which are only just emerging on the market.
On the other hand, the widespread availability of better-established or mandatory technologies, such as sidecurtain airbags, SBR and ESC, have had a clear impact
on the frequency of some fatal or injurious crashes suchas single vehicle roll-overs. In developing a longer-term
agenda for vehicle safety, it is important to account forthe changes in real-world priorities and the anticipatedimpact of emerging safety technologies.
Equally important is to understand how the consumer
mindset is changing and what it means for the car market.
Last year, the average car age in Europe rose again, toover 10 years, some two years more than it was a decadeago (ACEA, 2017). This adds pressure on organisations
like Euro NCAP that advocate widespread and timely
adoption of important safety technology across theregion. The average car buyer is getting older as well, as
lifespans extend and young people become less ableor willing to own a new car. Carmakers are expanding
mobility services such as car sharing, in order connect
young consumers to their brand.
To stay influential and relevant in this widening landscape,vehicle safety information will not only have to appeal(and be helpful) to the traditional car buying public, butalso to other user groups or business models. The overall
safety rating, a simple yet powerful tool in communicating
about vehicle safety, will remain one of Euro NCAP’s mostimportant output channels; however, to reach consumers
in their “content cocoons” and to connect with a broad
range of potential other users, Euro NCAP will also needto develop attractive stories around safety-related topics.
In the upcoming years, significant changes to the regulatory landscape and to the content of vehicle safety
type approval are anticipated. The European Commission
has announced a revision of General Safety Regulation
661/2009, potentially including several new measuresthat are part of consumer testing today (European Commission, 2016). Euro NCAP must ensure that its safety
ratings will complement those developments and reward
higher performance in a faster timescale than regulation
requires.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAPIt has been said that the auto industry will change morein the next five to 10 years than it has in the last 50 andthis may very well be true for vehicle safety technology.
Automated driving technologies, now rapidly developing,will transform the driving experience and the auto industry
as a whole. At the same time, Europe’s inevitable shift
towards an era of electric vehicle propulsion is expectedto accelerate, with 30 percent of sales electric by 2025
(UBS, 2017).

6

2/ The Overall Safety Rating

It is the intention that the Overall Rating System andmethodology (van Ratingen, 2008) will remain in place,at least for the time being. It is clear, however, that there
is an increasing amount of overlap between safety
technologies offered on the market and that there ismore than one way in which a particular crash scenario
could be dealt with in terms of injury mitigation and/or
avoidance. Euro NCAP recognises the need to address
more effectively the way in which primary, secondary(and tertiary) safety elements are integrated.
During the coming years, a transition is foreseen froma “technology based” approach (e.g. tests for AEB) toa more “scenario based” assessment that would allow
various types of interventions (e.g. braking and steering).
At the same time, passive safety test methodology will
be updated to allow for pre-crash activation of restraints.
This review of the overall rating methodology will also
address opportunities to exploit virtual testing to add
more robustness to the assessment. This transition
process will phase in from 2022 and is expected to becompleted by the end of the roadmap term in 2025.
Ensuring stability of the rating during this transition willbe essential.
Based on the evolution of safety technology in the
fleet, Euro NCAP plans to introduce several new test
items under the overall safety rating. These items may
be added or partly replace existing tests. The timescalerefers to the expected first introduction date in the rating

scheme. More details can be found in the Roadmap 2025
graphical timeline (see p.17).
As a final introductory remark, it should be noted thatEuro NCAP will continue to closely monitor the frequency
and nature of real-world crashes and advancements intechnology during the roadmap implementation years.
Where appropriate, it will pursue available possibilities
to test and rate important new features beyond thosethat already have been identified here. This would allow
us to rapidly give credit for important safety innovations.

PRIMARY SAFETY
Driver Monitoring (2020)
More than ninety percent of road accidents are causedby “human mistakes”. In general, two kinds of mistakes
can be observed: violations, of which speeding anddriving under the influence of alcohol or drugs are mostcommon; and human “errors”, in which the driver state- inattentiveness, fatigue, distraction - and inexperienceplay an important role. In an aging society, sudden medical
incapacitation is also a growing cause of road crashes.
Already, driver advisory systems such as Speed Assistance
Systems (SAS) and Attention Assist target the human element in crashes by alerting the driver in critical situations
and, ultimately, by supporting the driver to improve his
behaviour. In addition, adapting intervention criteria to
individual drivers and the driver’s state may provide asignificant potential for earlier interventions in the future
without compromising false-positive levels.
Euro NCAP envisages an incentive for driver monitoring
systems1 that effectively detect impaired and distracted
driving and give appropriate warning and take effective
action e.g. initiating a safe evasive manoeuvre, limp homemode, increased increasing sensitivity of Electronic Stability Control, lane support, speed, etc. Implementationin the overall rating is planned in phases, starting withsystems that have already entered the market. The assessment will evolve around how reliably and accurately
the status of the driver is detected and what action thevehicle takes based on the information. Other aspects,
such as driver position monitoring, could be added infuture iterations of the protocol.

Effective driver monitoring will also be a prerequisite for automated driving, to make sure that, where needed, control can be handed back to a driver who is
fit and able to drive the vehicle. This item will be taken on board under the HMI requirements for Automated Driving.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAPEuro NCAP has already introduced some important
updates to the crash test program in recent years andrevisions to the front and side impact tests are plannedfor 2020 (Euro NCAP, 2015). This shows that secondary
safety is and will remain at the heart of Euro NCAP’s
consumer ratings for some time. But Euro NCAP has
clearly recognised that primary safety has an increasingly
important role to play. As the rate of development in thisarea accelerates, the safety rating is expected to include
more and more ADAS and crash avoidance technologies,
introduced by vehicle manufacturers. In the upcoming
period, Euro NCAP will also pay more attention to tertiarysafety in the rating using the Haddon matrix (Haddon,1972) as guidance. Hence, the strategy going forwards
will emphasise primary, secondary and tertiary vehicle
safety as important enablers on the road to vision zero.

1

7

•

•

•

About 20 percent of Killed and Seriously Injured(KSI) originate from loss of control or lane or roaddeparture (STATS 19, 2015)2.
Frontal collisions with a small overlap account foraround 15 percent of all car accidents and 25 percent of all car accidents involving a frontal collision(German Insurance Association, 2013). This amounts
to approximately 10 percent of KSI in small overlap
crashes.
Vulnerable road user KSI account for 36 percent(STATS 19, 2015).

The hardware needed for automated steering (e.g. automated parking, steer by wire) is available and on sale,as is the vehicle support for driver initiated emergency
steering. However, very few automatic steering intervention systems are currently offered. Despite challenges inmarket introduction and cost effective manufacturing,
AES technology is expected to land into the market in
the coming years. Regulation 79 is expected to permit
Emergency Steering Functions (ESF) by sometime aroundthe year 2020 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/82, 2016)
and this will facilitate the development and fitment of
AES. Euro NCAP sees possibilities to stimulate the uptake of AES technologies and verify their performance by
including them in the rating scheme, based on dangerous
situations with a range of road users and interactions.
As a first step, Euro NCAP plans to include driver-initiated, within-lane steering support technology in theoverall rating in 2020. Information on the acceptance,robustness and performance of such systems will begathered before taking the next step towards testing
systems that may carry out more radical “avoidance bysteering and braking” interventions. The timeframe forthis second step will also be determined by what will be
legally allowed in the future, but implementation is notexpected before 2022.

Autonomous Emergency Braking (2020, 2022)
The primary goal of AEB technology is to prevent crashes
by detecting a potential conflict and alerting the driver,and, in many systems, aiding in brake application or
automatically applying the brakes. The technology was
successfully introduced in the safety rating in 2014, andwas tested first in rear-end car-to-car collisions (Schram,
Williams, & van Ratingen, 2013) and subsequently inpedestrian crossing accidents (Schram, Williams, & van
Ratingen, 2015). The performance of an AEB system isdependent on the type and complexity of the sensors
used. More and more manufacturers are adding additional
sensors and combining multiple sensor types together in“fusion” to offer the potential to address new and more
complex crash scenarios.
Euro NCAP expects AEB technology to continue to evolvein the years ahead and has identified three priority areas
where the rating scheme will be updated to reflect the
progress in industry:•Back-over or reversing crashes usually happen at low
speeds at driveways and parking lots. Recent accident
research by the German insurers suggests that up
to 17 percent of collisions between pedestrians andvehicles with personal injury occur at the rear side of
the car. The majority of accident victims (63 percent)were elderly, while children under 12 years of age
accounted for 6 percent (German Insurers Accident
Research, 2017). It is estimated that, Europe-wide, thenumber of seriously injured pedestrians in reveringcrashes could amount to 1,400 per year. A driverassistance system which detects the presence of
persons behind the car and automatically initiates
braking or prevent acceleration could have significant
potential to prevent accidents involving cars andpedestrians (German Insurers Accident Research,
2010). Taking the work done by the insurance industry
as a starting point (RCAR, 2017), Euro NCAP plans to
adopt the reversing pedestrian scenario to the AEB
Vulnerable Road User - Pedestrian test suite in 2020.

•

Crossing and turning manoeuvres that occur atjunctions create opportunities for vehicle-vehicle,
vehicle-pedestrian, and vehicle-(motor)cycle conflicts,
which often result in traffic crashes. Typically, crossing

2
STATS 19 does not codify lane departure accidents so lane departure accident were constructed by considering the following variables: Number of casualties
where at least one vehicle involved was a car that performing changing lane, overtaking, going ahead in bend manoeuvres, and vehicle left the carriageway.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

Automatic Emergency Steering (2020, 2022)
Current AEB systems show potential to avoid or mitigate
many crashes but Automatic Emergency Steering, or
AES, although technically more demanding, may delivera further significant reduction in crashes and casualties,
in particular for single vehicle and small overlap crashes
and accidents involving vulnerable road users.

8

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP© 2017 Thatcham Research© 2017 Thatcham Research9•Head-on scenarios. A combined assessment ofsteering and braking interventions within the lane toprevent narrow overlap head-on crashes with otherroad users (cars, PTW, pedestrians) is foreseen from2022 (see also EAS).

V2x (2024)
V2x communication, which involves vehicles exchanging data with each other and the infrastructure, has thepotential to improve traffic safety and increase the efficiency of transport. Examples of safety-related functions
include the ability to transmit and receive messages
like “Emergency electronic brake lights”, “Motorcycle isapproaching” or “Roadwork ahead”. In order to provide
a benefit over and beyond regular onboard sensors,
V2x must identify a potential risk earlier than any of thesurrounding sensors can “see” the danger. This means

low latency, secure, beyond line of sight communicationand localised data transfer.
In general, there are two different communications approaches being discussed to address this need: 802.11p,
a standard available today and favoured by the US, andthe new cellular-V2X (5G). Leading car makers, chipmakers and cellular operators have established the 5G
Automotive Association (5G Automotive Association,2016) to develop, test, and promote 5G systems forautomated vehicles. The European Union expects 5G
services to be rolled out by 2020, though in reality it may
take several more years to fully deploy the infrastructure
required (European Parliament, 2017).
As long as there is uncertainty about the V2X standard
and the timing, carmakers do not seem to prioritise V2X
safety functions for the European market. It is expected,
however, that by 2024 much of the technological uncertainty will have been resolved, leaving only the demand
uncertainty. Euro NCAP recognises the safety potentialof V2V and V2X technologies, for car occupants, vulnerable road users and powered two wheelers. To support
the availability of technology on the vehicle side, newincentives will be introduced in the rating scheme forV2X technology that support and enhance importantsafety functions.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

accidents are the result of running a red light, lack ofvisibility, driver inattentiveness or speeding. Turning
crashes are often caused by misjudging or failing toobserve oncoming traffic when turning left or right. In
crossing scenarios, where the speed of the ego vehicle
is relatively low, and in turning scenarios, an AEB
intervention could effectively prevent a crash. Testing
could include car, pedestrian, cyclist and Poweredtwo-wheeler (PTW) targets and commence in 2020.

© 2017 CERAM-UTAC

10

SECONDARY SAFETYTERTIARY SAFETY

Whiplash/Rear-end Crash Protection (2020)
It is nearly ten years since Euro NCAP first introduced anassessment of the protection provided against whiplash
injuries in a rear-end collision (Avery, 2008). A review has
been carried out of the correlation between those ratings
and real-world performance which suggests that the
numbers of criteria and pulses could be reduced without
significantly reducing the real-world effectiveness. Heldback by the limited of progress of the Informal Group on
UN Global Technical Regulation 7 (Phase II), the planned
re-evaluation of the tests for 2018 is postponed to 2020.
This review will also determine whether there is any justification for a higher energy test to be included in Euro NCAP.

Rescue, Extrication and Safety (2020)
Rescue services require detailed but readily-understoodinformation regarding the construction of individualvehicles to extricate trapped occupants as quickly andsafely as possible. This is becoming more pressing
as vehicles become stronger (e.g. use of high strength
steels or composite materials), use different sources ofpower (e.g. electric/hybrid, hydrogen) and are equippedwith increasing numbers of safety devices (e.g. airbags,
pre-tensioners). Car makers in recent years have invested
in “Rescue sheets” but their availability and dissemination
across Europe is not always guaranteed. Euro NCAP,
in collaboration with the International Service of Fire &Rescue Services (CTIF), will support the timely availabilityof ISO 17840 compliant rescue sheets (ISO 17840-1:2015,2015), consider the best options to centralise and maintain a database and have information available on thevehicle (for instance, a standardised ID tag with a linkto the database).

Euro NCAP is also aiming to modify pedestrian head
impactor testing to include ambient conditions relevant for cyclists as the second big group of vulnerable
road users. Based on the findings of recent European
research as well as the existing pedestrian protection
requirements, common head test boundary conditions
for pedestrians and cyclists could be derived, whereby
the existing requirements are modified and two parallel
test procedures are avoided. Such rearrangement ofpedestrian/cyclist head form test conditions must takeaccount of the likely benefits of avoidance technology as
well as the implications for deployable bonnets.

Euro NCAP’s tests and inspections already include
some assessments of areas relevant to entrapment
e.g. door-opening forces. The inspection procedure will
be broadened to include other relevant areas such as
preventing automotive entrapment and the safety ofbatteries or hydrogen fuel-cells and tanks.
Child Presence Detection (2022)
Leaving an unattended child in a parked car, even for a few
minutes, can cause heat-stroke and death. Child deaths
from vehicle-related heat-stroke happen less frequently
than those resulting from crashes, but the nature of theseentirely avoidable deaths deserves special attention.
A child’s inability to exit the vehicle on his/her, own
combined with a low tolerance for high temperatures,
requires that children never be left unattended in a car.
Technological solutions are available that can monitor
a child’s presence in the vehicle and alert the car owneror emergency services should the situation become
dangerous. Euro NCAP will reward manufacturers thatoffer such solutions as standard.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (2022)
Current pedestrian impact tests make use of the child andadult headform impactors, the upper legform impactor
and the pedestrian legform impactor, FlexPLI. With
the FlexPLI, injuries to the pedestrian’s knee ligaments(ACL/PCL and MCL) as well as injuries to the tibia canbe assessed. However, without an upper body massrepresenting the pedestrian’s torso, the impactor does
not provide any information about injuries to the femur
portion of the lower extremities. Moreover, the current,
linearly-guided upper legform impactor test is not truly
representative of the loading that normally occurs. Two
independent research studies (FlexPLI with Upper Body
Mass; EC Seniors Project, Horizon2020, 2017); (aPLI;
Isshiki, 2016) have shown the feasibility of replacing thecurrent upper and lower legform tests with a revised test,
using a leg impactor that represents the human leg withan upper body mass. Euro NCAP plans to adopt the mostfeasible procedure once it is available and proven robust,ahead of potential adoption in European Regulation.

11

© 2017 Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil-Club

The beginning of the roadmap 2025 is also the final year of
the current strategic plan (Euro NCAP, 2015). Accordingly,
a number of major rating updates have previously beenannounced to which Euro NCAP clearly stays committed.
In 2020, the off-set deformable barrier test will be replaced by the mobile progressive barrier test, introducing
the THOR-50M Anthropomorphic Test Device. At thesame time, the side impact (AE-MDB) barrier mass andtest speed will be revised and far-side protection will be
added to the Adult Occupant Protection score.
Child Occupant Protection test & assessment will be
brought into full alignment with Regulation 129, phasingout references to the defunct Regulation 44. Wheneveravailable, Euro NCAP intends to adopt an improved Q10child dummy specification to address ongoing concerns
about the dummy’s adult belt interaction, modifying thecriteria and limits in accordance.
It is also proposed to incrementally update the assessment
protocols of both Speed Assistance and Lane Support
System to reflect advancements in the capabilities ofsystems entering the market. In the case of speed assis-

tance systems, this includes adding incentives for system
recognition of traffic signs, such as “One-way”, “No entry”,“Stop” or “Yield” road signs. A more stringent assessmentof Lane Support Systems has already been announced,
putting more emphasis on Emergency Lane Keep performance over basic Lane Keep Assist. Further revisions
may include adding a Power Two-Wheeler target in theovertake scenario or testing at curved road segments.

FUTURE EVOLUTION
Technological advancements in safety will continue toaccelerate and find their way into the vehicle fleet andtransport system. With these innovations, new questions
will arise regarding methodology and principle: E.g. how
can radically different seating and restraint concepts forhighly automated driving solutions be effectively evaluated
and what will it mean for the long-established practices
in crash testing? How can the validity and value of star
ratings be guaranteed when over-the-cloud software updates become common-place for critical safety systems
in cars? For this and other reasons, Euro NCAP expects
to begin to review its strategic direction again in the not
too distant future, probably by 2020.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAPCARRY-OVER ITEMS

12

3/ Automated Driving

THE ROLE OF EURO NCAP
Public expectations of automated driving are high, although understanding may be low, and car manufacturers
will naturally seek to promote the technologies they offer.
In such an environment, it would be easy for consumers tobase their purchasing decisions on information provided
by the manufacturer. In this situation, Euro NCAP can:
•
•
•

•

•
•

Clarify availability and inform consumers on what
is and what is not automated driving.
Clearly identify functionality and encourage commercial unambiguous labelling.
Develop protocols to assess safe automation interms of technical performance and driver vehicle
interaction.
Ensure that safety remains a factor in consumers’purchasing decisions when it comes to automateddriving technologies.
While at the same time;
Promote automated driving technologies and raiseawareness of their safety benefits and performance
limitations.

AUTOMATED FUNCTIONALITIESThe development of passenger car automation is likely
to be rapid but evolutionary. No car yet offers complete
automation in all situations and driving environments.
However, early examples of Level 3 automation, allowing

the driver to disengage from the driving task in defined
situations, are entering the market.
The main characteristic of current functions is the simultaneous automation of longitudinal and lateral control butthese still require the driver to oversee their safe operation.
Given the step-wise development of technologies, it
makes sense to assess automated driving on a function
by function basis i.e. the scenarios in which automateddriving is provided is to be assessed separately. This would
allow consumers to compare the results of one vehicle
with those of another in the same driving situation andensure correct system use. The following is a list of use
cases for which some degree of assistance or automation
function is offered, or expected to be offered soon, andin which Euro NCAP may have an interest:
•
•
•
•
•

Parking
City driving
Inter-Urban driving
Traffic Jam
Highway driving

In some use-cases, automation can offer greater safety
benefits than in others. In the future, there may be goodreason to combine the assessments of individual functionalities into a combined ‘Automated Driving’ rating.
This would weigh the results of individual functionalities
by the relative safety relevance.

TESTING AND ASSESSMENT
Euro NCAP is, and will remain, dedicated to the promotion of safer vehicles by providing relevant consumer
information. To this end, Euro NCAP aims to test theperformance of a system and, to some extent, assessthe driver-vehicle interaction.
Consumer information about Automated Driving systems
must be based on transparent, objective and non-discriminatory criteria and the independent testing of thetechnology. Therefore, specific test and assessment procedures for safe Automated Driving in terms of technicalperformance as well as Human Machine Interaction (HMI)
have to be developed.
Given that the first systems will already enter the market
before test procedures can be completed, Euro NCAPEURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAPFor several years, Euro NCAP has recognised that active
safety technologies can bring safety benefits, either byaiding safe driving (SAS, LSS) or by intervening to help
avoid a crash if one is imminent (ESC, AEB). Technology is
evolving quickly and more and more of the driving function
is being handed to the vehicle. Given that around 90
percent of road accidents are attributable to driver error,
the potential safety benefits of increased automation
are clear assuming that the automation is at least ascompetent as the driver in complex traffic situations. It
is therefore in Euro NCAP’s interests to raise awarenessof the technologies that exist among consumers and topromote their introduction in such a way that the safety
benefits are realised. At the same time, we need to checkthat these technologies do not introduce new risks witha potential negative impact on safety.

13

will focus firstly on informing consumers on the functionality, technical limitations and HMI of these systems.
This means it aims to provide explanatory information
covering some of the following items: Definition (e.g.
manual, branding), System Enable, System Activation(e.g. with ACC), Operation (functional testing of principle
system functionality such as AEB, SAS, etc.), Driver deactivation (e.g. considered manoeuvre, like switch, brakeor steer), Drop out (automatic deactivation e.g. at end ofroad markings), Override (instantaneous driver takeover,e.g. emergency cases).
In addition, regarding successful HMI, Euro NCAP will
examine drivers’ expectations and comprehension basedon manufacturer’s information as well as the behaviourof the system itself, to ensure a safe and intended use.
For the first time, a dual way of interaction-assessment
will be carried out pragmatically, integrating not only
experts’ technical testing but also information from user
studies in the assessment process. For this purpose,standardized protocols and procedures for expert anduser assessments will be developed soon.

GRADATIONEURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAPFor the time being, the assessment of automated driving
will be kept separate from Euro NCAP’s mainstream star
rating scheme. A separate gradation scheme is proposed,with simple, descriptive levels of the degree and safety ofthe system. Euro NCAP plans for a phased-in approachthat will focus first on Continued Assistance systems,
particularly the Highway and Traffic Jam Assistants.
This will probably start ahead of the roadmap term, or
as early as 2018/2019.

14

4/ Other Initiatives

TRUCK LABEL

Trucks represent around five percent of registered vehicles
and are involved in around four percent of all injury accidents but around 15 percent of fatal road accidents. Thisshows that they are no more likely to become involvedin a collision than other vehicle types but when they do,
the collision is far more likely to cause a fatality. Therefore, trucks have a disproportionately negative effect onroad safety. This excessive impact is linked to their size,
weight and the way they are designed. Because of a highseating position and their vehicles’ brick-shaped cabs,
truck drivers have a very poor field of view. In particular,
in built-up areas, this leads to blind spot accidents andwhen crashes occur, vulnerable road users are often run
over by the wheels.
Opportunities are being discussed to use traditional andemerging technologies to promote the safety of vehicles
other than passenger cars. A recent ACEA report (Wismans,
2016) has identified the following as effective countermeasures that would provide cost-benefit: emergency
braking systems that can detect cars and VRUs; extended
flexible front under-run protection; lane-keeping supportand visibility support (aimed at reducing blind spots);and speed assistance systems. The question is why
these technologies have remained relatively uncommon
across the HGV fleet in Europe and how that situation
could be changed.
A dedicated truck label would be a stand-alone instrument targeting a new category of vehicles not coveredby a safety rating. The label would:•

Accelerate the market penetration and reduce thecost of safer vehicles and technologies by creating
scale required for mass-market penetration. With thisapproach the demand across Europe will be extended

•

•

•

Euro NCAP will support, but not necessarily lead, thetechnical development of such a label for cities as wellas highways, based on the experience it has gained withtesting and rating of different safety technologies.

POWERED TWO WHEELERS
Over the last decades, motorcycles and mopeds havegained significant popularity in European cities. Riding
a powered-two-wheeler offers an attractive alternative
to private car ownership because it is generally is lessexpensive and has advantages in terms of parking andmobility in dense traffic. Compared to cars, however,powered-two-wheelers are more vulnerable and they
are involved in a disproportionately high percentage offatal and serious crashes. Moreover, the safety of powered-two-wheelers has not improved nearly as much asthat of passenger cars.
Technologies such as anti-lock braking, electronic stability control, traction control and other safety related
equipment that would help to improve the situation for
powered-two-wheelers have been available for years,
but are often limited to high-end, expensive motorcycles. Powered-two-wheeler safety is an urgent problem
that requires closer collaboration between the car andmotorcycle industries and more awareness amongst
riders about the potential benefits of the latest safety
innovations.
Euro NCAP’s first and foremost role is to help address thepowered-two-wheeler situation by promoting passenger
car solutions. Last year, new initiatives were started to
study the type of crashes that the motorcyclists are in-EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAPIn 2011, in the EU-27, there were 4,252 fatalities fromcollisions involving Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) witha weight over 3.5 tonnes. This represents 18 percent of
the 27,000 people killed in road accidents in Europethat year (Wismans, 2016). The largest proportion of
HGV-related casualties was car occupants impacting atruck, crashes that occur mostly in rural areas. This wasfollowed by accidents with vulnerable road users, 60
percent of which occur in urban areas. Truck occupants
represent the lowest proportion of fatalities.

so that it will be commercially attractive to vehicle
manufacturers to implement safety systems. It will
also improve competitiveness between producers
and encourage them to build trucks that are safer
than their competitors;
Enable more authorities and operators to makeuse of and scale up urban truck safety schemes byreducing administrative barriers;
Reduce the administrative burden for companies
operating in and between different European cities(that currently may have different requirements);
Complement and reinforce regulatory efforts such as
the General Safety Regulation or UNECE processes.

15

volved in, to evaluate the most suitable ADAS systems
to avoid these kinds of crashes and to develop the test
equipment and procedures to assess the system performance. The outcome of this research will be used tofacilitate the rating scheme updates (AEB, see page 8).
Motorcycle manufacturers themselves see considerable
potential in Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) , which
are specifically designed for powered-two-wheeler riders
and in those that seek to protect riders, by giving thema digital presence with surrounding vehicles, and which
can inform and warn the other vehicle drivers by meansof an appropriate HMI of the oncoming motorcycle. The
Connected Motorcycle Consortium (Connected Motorcycle Consortium, 2014) was set up to create a common
approach for ITS on powered-two-wheelers and achieve
successful implementation and deployment of ITS
functions. Also on this subject, Euro NCAP intends tosupport technology adoption on the side of the vehicle(V2X, see page 7).

UN Task Force on Cyber Security and OTA issues, under
Umbrella of WP29/ITS-AD group (Informal Working
Group on Intelligent Transport Systems-AutomatedDriving (ITS/AD), 2017).
Euro NCAP will continue to monitor how these standards
and regulations develop and how the industry is responding. Through compliance with these existing standards,
Euro NCAP may require a minimum level of Cyber-Security
be demonstrated by the vehicle manufacturer.

CYBER SECURITY
As cars become increasingly connected and depend
more and more on the exchange of data over the internet, so they become more vulnerable to hacking andcyber-attack. Cases have already been reported of somevehicle controls being remotely manipulated and there isincreasing concern that this weakness could be exploited
maliciously to jeopardise safety. In other words: a systemthat is not secure is not safe.

Work is ongoing to develop a revision of ISO 26262 (Automotive Functional Safety) and a joint working groupbetween ISO (21434) and SAE (J3061) has started thedevelopment of an Automotive Cyber-Security Standard.
This will provide a Cyber-Security process framework andhelp companies design security into cyber-physical vehicle
systems throughout the entire development lifecycle
process. At the same time, the topic is discussed by theEURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

Cyber-Security is not, per se, of direct relevance to Euro
NCAP. However, technologies may emerge that offer asafety benefit and Euro NCAP may reward these, thereby
advising consumers that vehicles will be safer for havingsuch systems. If it transpires that these systems areeasily attacked in a way that undermines their safety,
trust in Euro NCAP’s rating could also be undermined.

16

StartProtocol Release

ROADMAP 2020
AEB VRU cyclist
Far-side protection

Implementation

Mobile progressive deformable barrier

ROADMAP 2025 — SAFETY RATING
Driver monitoring
AEB VRU pedestrian - Back-over
AEB - Junction & Crossing
AEB - Head-on
Automatic Emergency Steering
V2X
Whiplash/Rear-end Crash Protection
Revised subsystem for pedestrian & cyclist
Rescue, extrication and safety
Child presence detection

ROADMAP 2025 — AD
Grading of AD functions

2018

Communication only
based on first ideas

2019

2020

2021

2022

Proposal to release updates outof phase with overall rating

2023

2024

2025

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

Implementation
Protocol Release
Start

Timeline

17References

5 G AU TO M O T I V E AS S O C I AT I O N . ( 2 0 1 6 ) . Retrieved 2017, from 5G Automotive Association: http://5gaa.org/

AC E A . ( 2 0 1 7 ) . ACEA Pocket Guide 2017 - 2018.

AV E RY, M . ( 2 0 0 8 ) . Euro NCAP Whiplash Test Procedure – A new Consumer Seat Rating Programme .

C O N N E C T E D M O TO R C YC L E C O N S O RT I U M . ( 2 0 1 4 ) . Retrieved from Connected Motorcycle Consortium: http://www.cmc-info.net/

C T I F. ( N . D. ) . Retrieved from CTIF - International Technical Committee for the Prevention and Extinction of Fire: http://www.ctif.

org/ctif/about-ctif
E C S E N I O R S P R O J E C T, H O R I ZO N 2 0 2 0 . ( 2 0 1 7 ) . Retrieved from grant agreement n° 636136: http://www.seniors-project.eu/( 2 0 1 6 ) . ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/82.

E U R O N C A P. ( 2 0 1 5 ) . Euro NCAP 2020 Roadmap (Revision 1). Brussels.

E U R O P E A N C O M M I S S I O N . ( 2 0 1 7 ) . 2016 road safety statistics: What is behind the figures? La Valette.

E U R O P E A N C O M M I S S I O N . ( 2 0 1 7 ) . Road Safety: Encouraging results in 2016 call for continued efforts to save lives on EU roads. La

Valette.
E U R O P E A N C O M M I S S I O N . ( 2 0 1 6 ) . Saving Lives: Boosting Car Safety in the EU; Reporting on the monitoring and assessment ofadvanced vehicle safety features, their. Brussels.
E U R O P E A N PA R L I A M E N T. ( 2 0 1 7 ) . Briefing: Towards a European gigabit society - Connectivity targets and 5G. Retrieved from http://

www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/603979/EPRS_BRI(2017)603979_EN.pdf
G E R M A N I N S U R A N C E AS S O C I AT I O N . ( 2 0 1 3 ) . Compact accident research 38: Small-overlap frontal impacts involving passenger carsin Germany. Berlin: UDV.
G E R M A N I N S U R E R S AC C I D E N T R E S E A R C H . ( 2 0 1 7 ) . Compact Accident Research 71: Research report FS 03 Car rear and side collisions

with pedestrians and cyclists. Berlin: UDV.
G E R M A N I N S U R E R S AC C I D E N T R E S E A R C H . ( 2 0 1 0 ) . Research report FS 03: Advanced driver assistance systems - An investigation of

their potential safety benefits based on an analysis of in-surance claims in Germany. Berlin: UDV.

INFORMAL WORKING GROUP ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS-AUTOMATED DRIVING (ITS/AD). (2017). TFCS-0-02e Terms of Reference

and the Rules of Procedure of the UN Task Force on Cyber Security and OTA issues. Geneva.
I S O 1 7 8 4 0 - 1 : 2 0 1 5 . ( 2 0 1 5 ) . Retrieved from Road vehicles — Information for first and second responders — Part 1: Rescue sheet

for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:17840:-1:ed-1:v1:en
I S S H I K I , T. ( 2 0 1 6 ) . Development and Evaluation of the Advanced Pedestrian Legform Impactor Prototype which can be Applicable

to All Types of Vehicles Regardless of Bumper Height . IRCOBI. Malaga.

EURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAPH A D D O N , W. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . A logical framework for categorizing highway safety phenomena and activity,. J Trauma , 12:193--207.

18

References

R C A R . ( 2 0 1 7 ) . http://www.rcar.org/Papers/MemberPapers/Reverse%20AutoBrake%20Test%20Procedure.pdf. Retrieved 2017,from Procedure for assessing the performance of Reverse Autonomous Emergency Braking (R-AEB) systems in rear collisions.
EURO NCAP’S FIRST STEP TO ASSESS AUTONOMOUS EMERGENCY BRAKING (AEB) FOR VRU. ESV, (pp. Paper Number: 15-0277). Gothenburg.

S C H R A M , R . , W I L L I A M S , A . , & VA N R AT I N G E N , M . ( 2 0 1 3 ) . Implementation of Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB), The Next Step In

Euro NCAP’s Safety Assessment. ESV, (pp. Paper Number: 13-0269). Seoul.
STAT S 1 9 . ( 2 0 1 5 ) . UK Road Accidents Safety Data. Retrieved from Road Safety Data - Datasets - Data.gov.uk: https://data.gov.

uk/dataset/road-accidents-safety-data
UBS. (2017, MAY 18). UBS Evidence Lab Electric Car Teardown – Disruption Ahead? Retrieved August 2017, from Advantage Lithium:

http://www.advantagelithium.com/_resources/pdf/UBS-Article.pdf
VA N R AT I N G E N , M . ( 2 0 0 8 ) . The Changing Outlook of Euro NCAP. 9th International Symposium & Exhibition on Sophisticated Car

Occupant Safety Systems. Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer ICT.
W I S M A N S , J . ( 2 0 1 6 ) . What are the most significant safety improvements that can be made to trucks used in urban and uralEURO NCAP 20/25 ROADMAP

areas? Brussels: ACEA

19