I have to disagree with the OP. A good driver will want to have all the information available to him. And even the best driver will be slightly distracted from time to time, misjudge a stopping distance, or be a little more tired than he thought. These are the sort of people that it’s intended to help, and they’re also the sort of people that are likely to be attracted to those sorts of features.
I don’t expect bad drivers will be able to excessively rely on it. It’s not like they can just sit back and gas it and expect it to keep them in the lane and keep them from rearending whoever is in front of them. That is, I expect it can correct small mistakes, but is unlikely to be able to correct large ones with any sort of regularity.
So, I see that it will likely make the safe drivers a little bit safer and, at worst, have no effect on bad drivers.
There’s very distinct differences between intensional lane changing and accidental drifting, and there’s going to be a series of checks that can help determine that. For instance, as someone mentioned, if you signal, it’s almost certainly intentional. Similarly, most lange changes, you probably complete it within a few seconds and with a particular steering pattern (turn a bit, straighten up, turn a bit back, straighten up). If you’re drifting, there’s likely to be pretty much no pattern, where, you either turn too hard or you’re continuing straight while the lane is turning. And, of course, crossing a double yellow line is virtually always bad.
I suspect they have sone intelligent checks for that and probably favor false positives a bit because the cost of a false negative would be worse; that is, I’d rather it stop a little short every once in a while than not kick in when I’d actually want it to. I’d actually be quite interested in getting to look at their implementation of these sorts of features.
I don’t say that they endanger me. But I want direct control of my car in an emergency, and they take some of that away. I think I can do better without them. So far, 30+ years with only one accident is proving me right. And the one accident was someone hitting me from the side.
There are situations where ABS can result in longer stopping distances, mainly in deep snow of loose gravel where a wedge of snow/gravel will build up in front of a locked tire. But ABS systems have gotten smarter over time and I believe those situations are becoming rarer. In a perfect world I would like to have a switch to turn off ABS for those rare occasions, but having had my ass saved by ABS (coming over a rise on the interstate to find a 60-car pile up waiting for me) I would never buy a car without it.
People have made this same argument about ABS, traction control, crumple zones, and yes, seatbelts and airbags. And I believe it to be generally true – if you feel safer in your car, for whatever reason, you’ll drive less attentively. Hell, there’s an entire school of thought, backed up by science, that says if you take away road signs and traffic signals, people drive slower and safer because they’re forced to pay attention.
However, taken as a whole, ABS, traction control, crumple zones, seatbelts, and airbags are all very likely factors in the steady reduction in deaths/mile in the US over the last 100 years, and these new safety nannies are like to continue the trend. So yes, drivers will get worse, and yes, people will die less. The net effect is good.
No offense, but this is stupid. It’s essentially impossible for you to be a good enough driver to stop quicker without ABS. The idea that there is a time where the ABS would have engaged, but you would have been without them is ludicrous.
This is what makes my wife and I crazy about my MIL’s car. It’s too big for her to drive. She relies on all sorts of cameras and computer assisted stuff to park her car. The system isn’t infallible. For example, if you are looking around you can see the daredevil kid zipping down the hill on his bike. She backs up looking at a screen that only shows her what’s immediately behind her car. She’d hit the kid as he swooped in behind her.
If you can’t safely operate your vehicle yourself, or keep your attention span engaged in driving when you’re the driver, I’m not so sure you should be behind the wheel.
I want control of my car in an emergency. I would like to be able to make the decisions, thanks. I don’t want to have to override a computer that doesn’t have the big-picture of the situation that I do.
Volvo’s “false negatives” were the bigger problem. In a demonstration for the press, the car rear-ended a truck. The “pedestrian avoidance” feature mowed down the dummy in 25% of the demonstrations.
They have those in Europe. My friend’s wife is from Spain where the concept of “shoulder check” never really caught on. Whenever a car is passing them there is a beeping sound. So if you want to make a lane change, you just signal and start moving over, if you hear beeping you pull back into your own lane. The problem is that they have it on all. the. time. So the car is going beep-beep-beep for the entire time they are on any kind of road there there is traffic that can pass them. It sound like they drive a car from the Jetsons.
But the fact is, people who are not always good drivers are going to drive. Our society is set up so they have to. If getting to places that people need to go depends on driving, you’re going to have people who probably shouldn’t be driving doing so. The only way around that is more walkable neighborhoods and more public transit, so that people don’t have to drive as much. In the absence of those things, telling people not to drive isn’t a solution to bad drivers. Bad drivers need to get groceries, and they need to get to work. If they live alone or don’t have anybody who can drive them where they need to go when they need to get there, the only way that’s going to happen is if they drive.
I don’t think raising the standards for driver licensing without creating walkable neighborhoods and mass transit will help, either. If people need to drive, they do, whether they’re in good shape to drive or not, whether they can drive legally or not.
If you want to get fewer bad drivers driving, make it so that people can get from their homes to stores and workplaces without driving. If “don’t drive” means “you can’t do X, Y, and Z when you want to”, we shouldn’t be too surprised if some people don’t listen when we tell them “don’t drive”.
Non-computerized methods of determining whether someone is behind your car aren’t infallible, either. If they were, there would be no market for the computerized gizmos. There also wouldn’t be 40,000 Americans dying in car accidents every year if there were an easy and infallible system for avoiding collisions.
Ok, let me see if I have this straight. Using Volvo’s system, 3 out of 12 of the dummies were hit. Not using it would result in 12 out of 12 being hit.
How is this not one hell of an improvement?
You know, if this keeps up, eventually we’re going to have cars that can accept an address as input and automatically transport us there safely without us once touching the wheel.
And that’s just going to enable bad drivers even more.
Would you rather jump out of a plane with a parachute that is 99% effective or 0% effective?
Would you rather have a one night stand with no condom (0% effective at preventing STDs, or with a condom (99%)
Want me to go on?
In the real world, (assuming the 25% rate holds, which I think it pessimistic) 9 out of 12 pedestrians are better off than they would have been without the collision avoidance system. the other 3 are no worse off.
I was trying to not sound snarky when I asked, but this I don’t buy. How does the car pumping your breaks for you in any way remove control of the vehicle from you? It only engages when you actively break and the wheels are losing traction. How does having locked wheels improve your life in any way?
I think that the point of the OP was that the other three might have been better off if the driver wasn’t counting on his safety systems to protect them.
However, I found some completely contrary information while participating in another thread about the death of that rich guy on the Segway.
There is at least one study purporting to show that that theoretically more skilled professional drivers have accidents at rates higher than average drivers. I came across this claim in this story about the death of the Segway guy.
I’m trying to track down more detail on the study, and haven’t yet. but it seems to me the methodology is quite suspect. The “expert” drivers were “…national competition license holders from the Sports Car Club of America.” That in itself tells me they are way more likely to take on more risk than the average driver.
Anyway, if I can find a better link to the study, I will post it. Bastards at The Atlantic didn’t properly cite the source of their data.
I don’t know if ABS brakes still work this way, but at the time… To use them properly in an emergency stop situaion, IIRC, you were supposed to slam on and hold down the brake pedal like any idiot who didn’t know how to brake properly might do, and then then the ABS would do the pumping for you to retain control. If you manually pumped the brakes yourself (as you should do in an emergency stop with non-ABS brakes), the ABS system wouldn’t work properly, or so I was told.
I dunno, perhaps I was misinformed. I was unwilling to change my braking habits, which have worked very well for me, and surrender that element of control to an automated system.
The problem isn’t that the system failed 25% of the time but that you’ll have people counting on the technology have a 0% failure rate so they can be lazy.
My MIL can’t drive her enormous SUV, but she had no trouble at all driving her smaller car. She relies completely on technology that we already know is designed as a supplement, not a replacement for driving skills.
As Anne Neville said, some people have to drive even thought they suck, but then you have people like my MIL, who can drive just fine in her old car, yet chooses (counter-intuitively, IMHO) the SUV that she has a lot of trouble driving, because it has all these gizmos to drive for her.
We see this all the time. People who could learn to spell, but don’t bother because spellcheck will take care of it for them. You have newbie hikers getting lost because they relied on a GPS that got wet and shorted out, and they have no actual skills in orienteering and never bothered to even try learning. Or that woman who had to be rescued on snowy winter day, because her GPS told her to take an unplowed road that is only open in the summer.
If you tell someone that 75% of the time, their car will automatically avoid a pedestrian, they’ll think: “Oh, good, so I only need to pay attention 25% of the time!”
With seat belts, airbags, etc. it meant: “I’ll still get hurt really bad, but not as bad as before.” You still had the cost of wrecking your car, and personal injury to account for. So I don’t think those ever had the ability to contribute to driver laziness the way “my car can steer itself” can.
