Will "Smart Vehicles" and their marketing cause more crashes

[rhagfo]

I will start this post with quotes from the 2017 F150 post.

spoon059 wrote:

rhagfo wrote:
We have already seen deaths due to people not turning off their engines when parking in the garage!

I think that has more to due with driver error/stupidity than an auto feature.

Its kinda like the "Runaway Toyota's" from a couple years back. Turns out that it was DRIVER ERROR. Drivers weren't properly securing floormats, which got underneath the accelerator and caused the accelerator to get stuck. Rather than put cars in neutral, they continued trying (unsuccessfully) to mash on the brakes. Didn't work.

mich800 wrote:

rhagfo wrote:



Yes, I do understand the concept and reason, I see a wrongful lawsuit in some car makers future because of this feature.
We have already seen deaths due to people not turning off their engines when parking in the garage!

Death from stop/start. Are you sure you are not confusing push button start. I have not heard of one death blamed on the stop/start function.

First of all let me say I am not anti technology, just one that asks "What If"!
I installed the Factory Curse Control on my 1968 Mustang GTCS in 1969 to control the lead in my right foot. Great option saved me far more than the $75 for the factory kit.
That said much of the marketing around much of the new technology seems to encourage bad driving habits! While not all marketing demonstrates these devices poorly, many do with drivers doing everything BUT driving while behind the wheel!

Used correctly most if not all will add to road safety, BUT for those that think these will allow them to focus their attention on things other than driving just scares me to death.
I travel a lot for my work, and rent many new cars with these features, some great some not so great.
One that I liked but was also annoying was a parking assistance that started beeping as you got closer to objects, well at the house we stay at here in Ireland while visiting the Granddaughter there is a tight gate and arch to the parking area. So every time through the beeper would go off, glad the car this time didn't have it!!

[toedtoes]

fj12ryder wrote:
^^^^^^^^From the Tesla website:

"All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver."

The hardware, yes. The software, no.

[2oldman]

Hawking.

[4x4ord]

mkirsch wrote:

4x4ord wrote:
When jumbo jets are safely landed by computers I think it's pretty obvious that the necessary technology exists to drive a car down the road.

Not necessarily.

Jumbo jets have a fairly limited set of conditions and parameters to deal with. Another plane is not going to suddenly decide to change lanes without looking, or stop short in front of you, for example.

While technically those situations do arise, rarely, they are almost always FATAL even if the aircraft is being flown manually. By and large commercial aircraft control keeps a safe distance between planes and gives each plane exclusive rights to the runway as it is taking off and landing.

In a car you have a near-infinite set of variables to deal with. Kid pops out from between two parked cars chasing a ball. Some idiot tries to change lanes and occupy the same physical space as you. Guy ahead of you has a blowout, skids into the barrier, and starts flipping end-over-end... Just a few examples.

The situations you mention present some of the challenges the autonomous vehicles are faced with. The autonomous car will not be programmed to just follow rules....see this ..do that. Instead the computers are being developed to have a form of artificial intelligence. The fully autonomous cars will not be controlled by a smart phone.

[fj12ryder]

That's a pretty large leap from self-driving cars to actual AI.

[BenK]

Some of the world's leading technologist do NOT believe we should be going in this direction...Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Stephen Hawkins just to name a few...me too, but not of their class....just one career in robotics and automation... :B

There is a project in Russia that has three AI & automomus robots...they are going to destroy the one that has been running away...three times and caught each time out and about 'cuz the battery ran out of juice...tried to get them to NOT destroy it, but to study 'why' ....think it can 'think'...therefore might have feelings (sentient)...

Or the one in Texas that is NOT autonomous...manually maneuvered in close enough to a gunman...then blew them both up...try telling someone (a person) to do just that..."here....take this bomb in close enough to the gunman and then we will blow you both up..."

AI, autonomous and the key is "sentient" is a 'being' and slavery is the word best to describe that AI robot...

Am a technologist all my life and can see AI robots in our lives (all mankind) is to have slaves doing our bidding...nope...not for me...

[fj12ryder]

^^^^^^^^From the Tesla website:

"All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver."

[time2roll]

Halmfamily wrote:
On the other note just ask the guy whose Tesla drove itself into the side of 18 wheeler because it could not decipher the white side of the trailer from the sky, oh nevermind he died.

Tesla is not a self driving vehicle. This person was tempting fate and lost.

[2oldman]

rhagfo wrote:
Take the case off the Air France plane that crashed in the Atlantic, the plane was loosening (?) altitude, so the copilot pulled back on the stick, resulting in putting the plane in a stall! The plane fell 30,000 feet and bellyflopped on the ocean!

I think I saw that on an episode of Air Disasters.

The pilot wasn't aware he was stalling, and made it worse.

[mkirsch]

4x4ord wrote:
When jumbo jets are safely landed by computers I think it's pretty obvious that the necessary technology exists to drive a car down the road.

Not necessarily.

Jumbo jets have a fairly limited set of conditions and parameters to deal with. Another plane is not going to suddenly decide to change lanes without looking, or stop short in front of you, for example.

While technically those situations do arise, rarely, they are almost always FATAL even if the aircraft is being flown manually. By and large commercial aircraft control keeps a safe distance between planes and gives each plane exclusive rights to the runway as it is taking off and landing.

In a car you have a near-infinite set of variables to deal with. Kid pops out from between two parked cars chasing a ball. Some idiot tries to change lanes and occupy the same physical space as you. Guy ahead of you has a blowout, skids into the barrier, and starts flipping end-over-end... Just a few examples.

[TugCE]

I was working on Sea Going Vessels that ran the Delaware River on a regular schedule back in the 90's. They were just starting to use Chart Readers with DGPS (Differential Global Positioning System) which was supposed to be very accurate. The idea was to have Chart over lay used injunction with the DGPS. Some Captains thought this was a great idea and would allow them to transit in very low visibility.

On one trip I just happened to be in the Wheel House (I was normally always down below as I was Chief Engineer) while we were northbound and looked at the Chart System. I was a little more than surprised to see it showing us Northbound on 495 (might have been I-95), which was about a mile or so to the left of where we actually were. Needless to say the Company had to come out and tell them NOT to use it for Navigation.

Fast forward to 2005 (when I retired) we were running Tampa Bay on vessels loaded to max draft (max depth of water in the channel) and using a system designed just for use in Tampa Bay. According to my Captain (who was a Licensed Pilot for Tampa Bay) this system was so accurate that it would show it you were not in the center of the Channel by as much as a couple of feet.

Even with him knowing how accurate this system was, he would never sail knowing that he would have to trust it. There were times when Fog set in causing visibility to drop to next to nothing and this system allowed him to safely to transit the channel.

I am sure that sooner or later they will have a system that will work but until ALL vehicles are equipped with the same type of system (and the can talk to each other) I do not see this being used nation wide. There are just way to many variables (distracted drivers, road debris, large trucks / RVs) for any system to read in milliseconds for it to work.

[rhagfo]

4x4ord wrote:

ScottG wrote:
Self driving technology isn't all encompassing. These cars still have steering wheels and a driver is responsible for its operation. If road conditions are bad and it cant find its way, it wont continue to operate aimlessly.
It's not intended to let the driver curl up in the back seat and take a nap while going down the road.

Not yet. But it won't be long and a computer operated car will likely be a whole lot safer in a snowstorm than one operated by a human who can't see anything. When jumbo jets are safely landed by computers I think it's pretty obvious that the necessary technology exists to drive a car down the road.

This may be true, but over reliance on computers results in lack of skills!
Take the case off the Air France plane that crashed in the Atlantic, the plane was loosening altitude, so the copilot pulled back on the stick, resulting in putting the plane in a stall! The plane fell 30,000 feet and bellyflopped on the ocean!

[4x4ord]

Fully autonomous car by 2021.


Or here.

[4x4ord]

ScottG wrote:
Self driving technology isn't all encompassing. These cars still have steering wheels and a driver is responsible for its operation. If road conditions are bad and it cant find its way, it wont continue to operate aimlessly.
It's not intended to let the driver curl up in the back seat and take a nap while going down the road.

Not yet. But it won't be long and a computer operated car will likely be a whole lot safer in a snowstorm than one operated by a human who can't see anything. When jumbo jets are safely landed by computers I think it's pretty obvious that the necessary technology exists to drive a car down the road.

[2oldman]

I'm always on the side of technology. How many people are killed in traffic 'accidents' every year.. 30,000? How many injured, sometimes for life? And why? I'm thinking almost 100% human error.

But just wait until a computer kills even one person. Look out.

[AlmostAnOldGuy]

The level of automation varies. Tesla was running level 3 where the vehicle is automated, however the driver is expected to maintain awareness of the situation and take over. Some consider this an issue as the system works most of the time lulling the driver into a false sense of security. In the well publicized accident in the Tesla the operator did not take control of the vehicle when the system failed to recognize a white travel trailer was not just sky.

Ford is planning on launching their automated cars in 2021 at level 4. Per Ford's press release Plans are to design it to operate without a steering wheel, gas or brake pedal, for use in commercial mobility services such as ride sharing and ride hailing within geo-fenced areas and be available in high volumes. .

https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2016/08/16/ford-targets-fully-autonomous-veh...

http://safety.trw.com/autonomous-cars-must-progress-through-these-6-levels-of-automation/0104/

Do I really want an automated system with no override? Do I even want automated braking? What if I am going 60 mph down a highway with a twin tanker truck behind me. I recognize the tanker represents a material condition and this affects my behavior. I doubt the auto-braking feature of many of these new cars would take this into account. If a deer steps in the middle of the road I will not slam on my brakes, I will adjust and evade and perhaps still hit the deer. I do not want an auto-braking system to bring me to a rapid stop because I do not want that tanker to plow into me. I may wish to apply some brake, but that will be in relation to how much room I have to steer left or right when I evade. Bottom line is I want to manage the system.

I like my truck. ABS and torque management are as much automation as I am comfortable with at this point.

We will see how this all unfolds over the next decade.

This is certainly not my area of expertise and would be interested in what others may have to say.

Good luck,
Stu