For decades, the trucking industry has dealt with a persistent problem: driver fatigue, distraction, and human error behind the wheel of an 80,000-pound vehicle. Now, a proposed solution is making its way onto American highways, and it raises a different set of concerns entirely. Self-driving and semi-autonomous tractor-trailers are no longer just a concept. Companies like Aurora Innovation have already begun commercial driverless freight operations on select routes, and the industry is moving quickly toward wider deployment.

The promise is straightforward. Autonomous trucks do not get tired. They do not check their phones. They maintain consistent following distances and can process sensor data far faster than a human driver. For an industry facing a significant driver shortage and an ongoing problem with fatigue-related crashes, those are real advantages.

But the technology is not fully proven, federal regulation is still catching up, and the liability questions surrounding crashes involving these systems are genuinely unsettled. For anyone sharing a Virginia highway with a semi-truck running on autopilot, these questions are not abstract.

What Autonomous and Semi-Autonomous Trucks Actually Do

Not all autonomous truck technology works the same way. The Society of Automotive Engineers defines six levels of automation, from Level 0 (fully human-operated) to Level 5 (fully autonomous with no human needed under any condition). Most trucks currently on the road or in testing fall somewhere in the middle.

Level 2 systems, which include features like adaptive cruise control and lane-keeping assist working together, handle speed and steering, but still require a human driver to monitor the road and stay ready to take over at any time. This is the same general category as systems like Tesla’s Autopilot. Many commercial trucks have carried these features for years. Level 4 systems, like those being deployed by Aurora Innovation, are designed to operate without a driver within a defined operational area, typically limited-access highways under certain weather conditions.

The distinction matters because liability follows the level of automation. A Level 2 system still puts a human driver in charge. When that driver stops paying attention because they assume the system is managing things, they remain legally responsible for the outcome. A Level 4 or Level 5 system, by contrast, shifts at least some of that responsibility toward the company that built or operated the technology.

The Research on Complacency and Automated Truck Systems

One concern that recurs in safety research is driver complacency. The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, working with researchers at the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, found that drivers with more experience using adaptive cruise control and lane-keeping assist together were nearly twice as likely to engage in distracted behavior while those systems were active compared to when they were driving manually. The more comfortable a driver got with the technology, the more they tuned out.

For a passenger car, that complacency is dangerous. For a fully loaded 18-wheeler at highway speed, the stakes are considerably higher. A tractor-trailer takes significantly longer to stop than a passenger vehicle, has large blind spots, and can cause catastrophic damage in a collision. The margin for error is thinner.

The progression that researchers described is telling. New users stay alert because they do not fully trust the system yet. Over time, as the system proves reliable in normal conditions, drivers start treating it as a substitute for their own attention rather than as a supplement to it. That shift in attitude is exactly when serious crashes tend to happen.

Where the Technology Falls Short

Autonomous and semi-autonomous trucking systems are generally well-suited for controlled conditions: clear weather, well-marked highways, and predictable traffic. Those same systems tend to struggle with situations that require judgment rather than just reaction.

Some of the most common failure points include:

• Unexpected stops in traffic that occur too quickly for the system to respond safely
• Construction zones with temporary lane markings or missing markers
• Merging vehicles or erratic drivers that require anticipatory responses
• Low-visibility conditions like fog, heavy rain, or glare
• Emergency vehicles that require yielding behavior, the system may not recognize
• Software malfunctions or sudden system disengagement without adequate warning

When a driver is fully disengaged, and the system encounters one of these situations, the result can be a high-speed collision with no evasive action from either the technology or the human who was supposed to be supervising it.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has required manufacturers and operators of autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles to report crashes to a federal database since 2021. That reporting requirement has made the safety record of these systems more visible, but there are currently no federal regulations that specifically govern what autonomous trucks must be able to do before operating commercially on public roads. Most states, including Virginia, have also not enacted specific standards. The public is, in a real sense, part of the ongoing test phase.

Who Is Responsible When an Autonomous Truck Causes a Crash

This is where these cases become genuinely complicated. Traditional truck accident liability focuses on the driver and the trucking company. Did the driver violate hours of service rules? Did the company fail to maintain the vehicle? Did they put an unqualified driver behind the wheel? These questions still apply when a human driver is involved.

When the crash involves a malfunction or failure of an automated system, additional parties may share responsibility. The company that designed the software, the manufacturer of the sensors, and the trucking company that chose to deploy the technology can all potentially be held liable under product liability law if a defect in the system contributed to the crash.

Establishing what happened requires access to data that most people do not know exists. Modern autonomous trucks collect enormous amounts of information before, during, and after a crash, including sensor readings, system status, braking inputs, speed, and whether any alerts were issued to the driver. Quickly obtaining and preserving that data is one of the most important steps in any case involving these vehicles.

If a Level 2 system were active and the human driver failed to pay attention, the liability analysis would more closely resemble a traditional distracted-driving case, though the manufacturer’s design choices may still be relevant. If a Level 4 or fully autonomous system was operating and made a decision that contributed to the crash, the company deploying it faces much greater direct exposure.

What Virginia Truck Accident Victims Should Know

Virginia Beach truck accident claims involving commercial vehicles already carry added layers compared to standard car accidents. Trucking companies carry multiple insurance policies. Federal regulations under the FMCSA govern driver qualifications, hours of service, vehicle maintenance, and cargo loading. Evidence from the truck’s onboard data recorder, also called the black box, can be essential.

Add autonomous technology to the picture, and the investigation becomes even more demanding. System logs, software version records, prior incident reports, and maintenance data for the ADAS components can all be relevant. That evidence does not preserve itself, and it is not automatically turned over just because you ask for it.

Virginia Beach truck accident victims hurt in crashes involving these systems need to act quickly. Virginia has a two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims. Waiting to consult with an attorney means waiting to preserve evidence, and in cases where technology failure may be involved, that evidence can disappear fast.

About Shapiro, Washburn & Sharp

Shapiro, Washburn & Sharp has handled truck accident cases in Virginia since the firm’s founding in 1985. Trucking litigation has been part of the practice from the beginning. Our attorneys are familiar with federal motor carrier regulations, understand how to work with accident reconstruction and trucking industry professionals, and know how to take on both individual drivers and the large companies that employ them.

The firm’s track record in trucking cases reflects that experience. In one case involving a tractor-trailer that rear-ended a family’s car stopped at a red light in Virginia Beach, our attorneys represented four family members who suffered severe physical and brain injuries, including two young daughters with traumatic brain injuries. After extensive investigation, expert evaluations, and mediation, our firm secured a settlement with an annuity payout projected at $21 million for the most seriously injured child.

If you or a family member has been hurt in a crash involving a commercial truck, whether driven by a person or operating on an automated system, the Virginia Beach truck accident attorneys at Shapiro, Washburn & Sharp are ready to review your situation. Call us at 833-997-1774 for a free consultation. Our offices are in Virginia Beach, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Hampton, Norfolk, and Chesapeake, and we are available 24 hours a day.