Ford Motor Company has filed a patent for a remote keyless entry method that uses NFC key cards, Ford Authority has learned.
The patent was filed on August 12th, 2021, published on February 16th, 2023, and assigned serial number 0050828.
The Ford Authority Take
Ford has filed its fair share of accessibility-related patents in recent months, including one for a session unique access token for vehicles, key fobs with remote park-assist functionality, a window based keyless entry system, and a folding backup key, to name just a few. Now, this new Ford patent keeps that trend going by introducing an idea for a way to gain remote access to a vehicle using a near-field communication (NFC) key card.
Tesla already does something similar by giving owners a credit card-like “key” that’s capable of unlocking a vehicle and starting it, but this Ford patent expands on that idea somewhat. In this case, the Ford NFC key card would feature different zones that complete different functions, including locking, unlocking, and starting a vehicle.
A key card is obviously much easier and less bulky to carry around than a traditional key fob, and doesn’t require us to press buttons to do those sorts of things. Phone-as-a-key functionality has also become increasingly popular, but having a backup key card is typically a good idea in the event that a phone dies, malfunctions, or just stops working.
And that’s precisely where this Ford patent comes into play – its key card would utilize sensors and a transceiver configured to send RKE commands upon request, which would complete simple tasks like locking, unlocking, and starting vehicles. It’s a good idea that’s already in use by some automakers, and one that could very likely make its way to Blue Oval models in the near future as well.
We’ll have more on this and all Ford patents soon, so be sure and subscribe to Ford Authority for the latest Ford patent news, Ford business news, and non-stop Ford news coverage.
Comments
I really despise taking simple things and making them inordinately complex. A physical key is so simple. Why replace it with these incredibly complex systems? How may parts and systems need to work correctly for you to now open your door? Engineering 101–the more movement, the more problems. It is hard to listen to Farley say Ford has gotten too complex and then read about something as simple as opening a door with a proposed “solution” 1000x more complex than it needs to be. Ford is clearly not alone here. Vehicles could be much, much simpler and cheaper.
He’s talking about organizational and build sheet complexity. I think you know that.
But many customers will be happy to leave a physical key behind.
I’m looking forward to Apple Car Key, be happy to ditch my key and use my Apple Watch to gain entry. (I imagine, such a system will also allow customers to possibly delete the touchpad.)
If I would have to use some kind of Ford proprietary RF chip or Bluetooth antenna then I wouldn’t see that as an improvement (for me) because it would just be exchanging one physical object for another.)
If Quality is Problem #1, and your organization is overly-complex on top of that, it would be wise to simplify your vehicles. You could eliminate problems across the board. Adding complex solutions to the current environment will only exacerbate Ford’s existing problems. Simplicity is grossly under-rated.
To give you an example of why this would benefit me, I was at a convention center and was checking into my hotel. The hotel only offered valet parking, which would not have been problematic under normal circumstances. However, because I had grown accustomed to using my PAAK with my Mach-E, I had overlooked the need to bring the physical key fob with me. Fortunately, the hotel staff made accommodations due to my hotel status. That said, if I had a credit card-sized key in my wallet, situations like this would no longer pose a problem for anyone.
You are a bit too judgmental and quick to discard that which you dislike. Much of ‘new tech’ is not really new…its just a different way of doing the same things. Sometimes less is more, meaning some tech is just not necessary.
I would suggest you at least consider moral, ethical, environmental issues in addition to engineering, and business circumstances.
It would appear that much of the criticism you face in this blog illustrates my suggestions for you.
To key or not to key.
I’ll take a metal key before all the overly engineered “solutions”
DITTO ON 95% OF THE ABOVE ! WHY RE-ENGINEER SOMETHING THAT ISN’T BROKEN ?