It’s not a point I’d differ on.
The comparison, apologies if I communicated poorly was not intended to be a technical one. The observation for seatbelts is that they have been an improvement and the same is supposed for the subsequent driver assist features (in general). Are any perfect solutions, IE to assure zero injuries and fatalities?
Reality is that all have a balance of probability that they will be effective. Even the humble seatbelt relies on the probability the driver and occupants will use one consistently. It’s not a point of argument for me that the enhancements such as LKA (lane keeping assist) or blind spot detection have more complex interactions with the driver. Also that on the balance of probabilities the benefits of some of the technology may not always outweigh the risks. @PhilT responded appropriately as to the greater concerns where conditions and technology work against the user. My reservations are similar in nature. However we are responding to the experts and industry who do not necessarily note the exceptions as significant.
It would be useful and constructive if there was access in the community to the more reliably informed knowledge of those making the key decisions and the experts advising.
It’s an interesting parallel given in the USA the organisation that is the NTSB investigates and advises on Air crash investigations as well as motor vehicle incidents involving active safety systems. Noted also it was not subsequently supported.
Thoughts,
One outcome of this discussion concerns the quality and effectiveness of the technology behind enhanced vehicle safety systems. There are doubts some of the systems are fit for purpose in all conditions?
A second for which there is some greater divergence of ideas concerns how well or not so well the intended safety enhancements interact with the driver. Assuming there are issues with how drivers use and respond to the operation of the enhancements is there a need to better inform drivers and demonstrate competencies with the enhancements? The greater community does set standards for many operational competencies, far less skilful than piloting of aircraft. It would be encouraging to discuss the possible gaps in knowledge and competency relating to safe use of the latest in motor vehicles, and the options for improving the user experience. My experience of different brands and dealers is some offer less than others once the cheque is written. There after?
On lane departure and other safety systems further discussion is to be found by following,
The AAA (USA) has been doing some testing of it’s own on advanced driving assist features. The results revealed significant failings in the systems tested. Of course our current discussion is centred on more mundane tasks, such as staying in the correct lane!
Reflecting on the results, AAA said the collisions point to the need for constant human attention while drivers have their systems engaged,
The trouble with artificial intelligence is that it can’t think. Sometimes it might help - but others, it could lead to disaster. Your description is a good example - there ARE, for instance, times when you know perfectly well that you are “swerving” - because someone’s dropped a brick or something on the road - and you HAVE to drive around it, regardless of lane markings.
Thanks for the warning - we’re starting to plan our next car purchase, you’re the second person who’s flagged this problem, and I’ll make sure I avoid the risk it brings with it!!!
AustRoads is looking at physical road infrastructure such as pavement markings and traffic signals play an important role in supporting the uptake of automated vehicles (AVs).
Minimum Physical Infrastructure Standard for the Operation of Automated Driving
is a report by AustRoads.
AustRoads is the collective of the Australian and New Zealand transport agencies, representing all levels of government.
I’d found time to read some of the preliminary work last year. There are many decisions to be made by Government and their roads advisors, some time into the future. It’s useful to know that there is some progress towards better understanding the complexity of the operating environment and the need to reduce uncertainty. A consistent vision?
There are already successful examples of driverless rail transport in Australia as well as warehouse and factory pick and place systems. Discussed in this topic even the most basic driver assist systems face challenges to be reliable in all circumstances.
I was listening to an international radio station the other day an there was a brief discussion about car safety. Many manufacturers are starting to move towards zero fatality targets for vehicles they produce and used by drivers/consumers. Subaru is one if the earlier adopters of such a target and a some other manufacturers are starting to ‘join the bandwagon’.
The discussion alluded to more and more safety features, which potentially intrude into a driver’s operation of a vehicle are likely in the future to try and achieve the targets.
This isn’t possibly good news for those drivers who don’t favour such intrusions. As more and more manufacturers make similar targets, the race for more and more safety features will occur to gain a marketing position as being the safest.
Amen to that. Too many warnings are too insistent in situations where there is no benefit to the car, the driver or their safety.
Will a yellow warning flashing up all the time saying I am short of fuel help me navigate directly and safely to the nearest fuel station?
Will another flashing up telling me window washer water is down help me concentrate on the road more or will it distract me more than having to peer through dirty windows?
Why do these features not have a snooze button? Because then I might just press the button anyway and never enjoy the wondrous work of the engineer who gave his all to design these features. Maybe that engineer should learn something of human behaviour and work out that if you nag people you will be ignored much sooner than if you don’t.
Seriously why is it so hard to set these things up so they deliver the warning and maybe a reminder 15 minutes later and then shut the freak up?
Would it be meaningful to have well informed views contrasting the strategies employed in advanced light aircraft glass cockpits (EFD’s) vs the thinking embodied in the oversized tablet solutions provided in numerous EV’s.
Is the second designed with key selling points everything but driver safety? I get told off just reaching for the aircon temperature controls, in the car that is.
