- Waymo recalled about 4,000 robotaxis due to software problems.
- Vehicles may accidentally drive into a closed highway construction zone.
- Waymo vehicles will avoid highways until a solution is found.
Google’s parent company Alphabet has recalled 3,871 units of its Waymo autonomous robotaxi in the United States because the vehicles may drive over closed highway construction zones. The problem is software-related, prompting the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue a recall.
Waymo says a solution is currently under development, and vehicles will be banned from freeway driving during the interim. When a solution is found, the company will update the 5th generation automated driving systems (ADS) in cars to detect when the vehicle is inside and avoid entering construction areas.
according to NHTSA RecallThere have been at least 13 incidents involving Waymo robotaxis operating on the closed highway. Six incidents occurred in Phoenix, Arizona, and seven incidents occurred in San Francisco, California.
Waymo issued a similar recall in May, after a software issue caused autonomous vehicles to drive onto flooded roads in Texas and get stuck in the process. The car entered a flooded roadway at low speed with a speed limit of 40 mph. No riders were harmed due to the Waymo evacuation, but it pointed to a serious problem with the cars in severe weather.
The company says flooding in San Antonio prompted it to update vehicle maps to account for increased weather-related obstacles.
This is far from the biggest controversy involving a Waymo vehicle in 2026. In January, a Waymo taxi struck a child who was running across the street from behind a double-parked SUV. According to a statement from Waymo, the car’s speed dropped from 17 mph to less than six mph before contact, allowing the child to be located immediately.
The situation is currently under investigation, but Waymo says its vehicle experienced a “significant reduction in the speed and severity of the impact” compared to an attentive human driver in the same situation.
Motor1’s Opinion: Whether or not the data shows that an AV is safer than the average human driver, there is an ethical dilemma about who is to blame when the system is at fault for the loss of life. AVs are not considered legal persons, so they cannot be taken to court for criminal negligence if they, for example, decide to endanger themselves to avoid hurting two other people instead of one occupant.
