[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Lafourche1

Actually, I have, too. I've had the braking kick in on our MKT, flashing red lights and all, for little reason that I've seen. It has happened once or twice in our ownership, some 24,000 miles. Fairly rare.

Hope nobody was tailgating you too closely. Else a case of a safety system actually causing an accident could have been the result.

I really prefer ABS braking in real life and on the track. I am glad that I have an airbag or 6 or 10. I don't want to use them, but I am glad they are there if they are needed.

Even I can stipulate to ABS at least having better consistency.

Reality would tend to lend itself to the last marketing strategy.

What I'm afraid of.

It pissed me off enough as it is when I started getting silent text advertising coming through on my wife's car's FM radio display when the "display artist and song title" feature was activated. Had to change the display down to frequency only. Seems they'll try anything.


Norm

[fastball]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

It pissed me off enough as it is when I started getting silent text advertising coming through on my wife's car's FM radio display when the "display artist and song title" feature was activated. Had to change the display down to frequency only. Seems they'll try anything.


Norm

Advertising through RDS has been going on for years, almost as long as RDS has been around. There’s Cleveland stations who’ve been advertising car dealers on their RDS since like 2008.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by dfwcowboy

It happens from time to time in my Tahoe. It doesn't take long before you adapt to it. If my Tahoe starts braking when I don't want it to, I can push the fuel pedal to override the action.

Shouldn't have to "adapt to" anything like that. Would you tolerate a passenger somehow managing to activate the parking brake while you're driving?


Norm

[Lafourche1]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Hope nobody was tailgating you too closely. Else a case of a safety system actually causing an accident could have been the result.

The cause of the accident would have been someone tailgating (small nit that I am picking - I admit it).

[Gunkk]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Shouldn't have to "adapt to" anything like that.

Driving a "smart cruise" car takes some practice to keep the car from doing dumb things like jamming brakes and getting rear ended at 80 mph in busy traffic when some joker cuts you off. Same thing can happen in an AEB car.

[dfwcowboy]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Shouldn't have to "adapt to" anything like that. Would you tolerate a passenger somehow managing to activate the parking brake while you're driving?


Norm

It’s more a matter of you managing the automation vs the other way around.

I fly jets for a living and while I can certainly fly a plane with little more than a whiskey compass and an oil temp gauge, I really wouldn’t want to nor would it make me safer. I use all the automation I have and learn it backwards and forwards so it does what I want it to do. So I suppose I have a different attitude about it. To me it’s a tool just like many others that I want to utilize to my advantage.

[Number 3]

Just so I understand the discussion so far, NO ONE has claimed that a forward collision system FAILED to operate and they actually rear ended someone because the system failed to perform.

Also, although there have been some inadvertent activations reported, NO ONE has reported anything other than spilling coffee.

The ONLY complaint is that in preventing collisions, it might actually activate when incorrectly sensing and responding. Of course we all know it actually responded correctly to the inputs. It doesn't just activate for no reason.

If that is all, that is an AWESOME trade off.

[dfwcowboy]

The direction the technology is going is eventually our cars will talk to each other and intervene before an accident happens making fatal multiple car collisions a far less frequent event. I see this happening long before fully autonomous driving is the norm.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Just so I understand the discussion so far, NO ONE has claimed that a forward collision system FAILED to operate and they actually rear ended someone because the system failed to perform.

Not on a Ford or a Chevy that I know of, but it has happened. I think Volvo had a failure to stop during a demonstration that was supposed to be showing off AEB goodness, which ended up in a video showing at least a couple instances of AEB failure.

The ONLY complaint is that in preventing collisions, it might actually activate when incorrectly sensing and responding. Of course we all know it actually responded correctly to the inputs. It doesn't just activate for no reason.

GIGO. Isn't that just like a computer!

If that is all, that is an AWESOME trade off.

Individual opinions may vary because individual experience definitely does . . .


Norm

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Not on a Ford or a Chevy that I know of, but it has happened. I think Volvo had a failure to stop during a demonstration that was supposed to be showing off AEB goodness, which ended up in a video showing at least a couple instances of AEB failure.



GIGO. Isn't that just like a computer!



Individual opinions may vary because individual experience definitely does . . .


Norm

Benefits FAR outweigh the perceived and very rare issues due to a false application.


And to your last line, what is your experience that has you so down on the technology? It seems as if you are just worried about a possible negative outcome which would be a bad driver behind you not paying attention and tailgating. Remember, it is your job as a driver to be aware of whatever happens in front of you and you are supposed to leave enough space so that if that car has a panic brake situation you can deal with it safely.

So the possible negative outcome is only if there is a bad driver behind you AND you have a very rare false emergency braking.

And as for any case where it failed to do what it was supposed to do, the outcome of that was identical to not having the technology at all. So in the end, the technology did not cause a worse situation.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Benefits FAR outweigh the perceived and very rare issues due to a false application.

I was going to clarify that a bit. It's universal mandated fitment that just might not be a good trade-off for everybody taken individually.

And to your last line, what is your experience that has you so down on the technology? It seems as if you are just worried about a possible negative outcome which would be a bad driver behind you not paying attention and tailgating. Remember, it is your job as a driver to be aware of whatever happens in front of you and you are supposed to leave enough space so that if that car has a panic brake situation you can deal with it safely.

Any time I'm braking more than gently I'm also glancing in the rearview mirror so that I can judge my stop to give any following vehicle as much room as I can spare. Yes, I modulate even emergency stops on the street (to the maximum extent possible under the circumstances). I'm being completely serious and honest here. I would not want an AEB to go into a "throw out all the anchors" mode assuming that the guy behind me was adequately capable of doing his job.

So the possible negative outcome is only if there is a bad driver behind you AND you have a very rare false emergency braking.

Reasons enough.

And as for any case where it failed to do what it was supposed to do, the outcome of that was identical to not having the technology at all.

You're flat-out wrong here. Not for the Volvo incident, nor the Tesla that drove under that trailer, nor the Uber that ran down the pedestrian even though the system had sensed her presence. AEB has to be a component in autonomous vehicle capability, and if anything more fully thought out than AEB in a human-driven vehicle need be. GIGO, bad logic, poor error-trapping, makes no difference.


Norm

[fastball]

I've been involved in technology and computers for my degree and career since 1994. If you count playing video games since the mid-80s I guess you can say for around 30 years. The one thing that has NEVER changed in technology is the chance of a computer freezing up and failing. I don't care if it's a 1982 Atari 2600 or a 2019 Tesla Model S or the damn Space Shuttle. Computers fail. Always have and always will.

If anyone thinks for one second that an autonomous car is safer than having complete human control you are nucking futs. Even with drunk drivers, inattentive drivers, kids on their cell phones or simply people talking to their friends or shaving/eating a hoagie while drinking a cup of coffee and combing their hair.

What happens when a system fails or locks up on an autonomous car and it cuts the wheel while you're doing 60 mph on a 150 foot high bridge? Or locks the brakes up because it thinks it sees a pedestrian 200 feet away when there is none? You are going to convince me some how that when "all the bugs are ironed out" that it will never happen?

No truckin way. Not in a million years.

You can have assists that ALARM if you must, but don't EVER make cars where any system is complete autonomous. Radar cruise, Cadillac's super cruise, those are fine because they will let and insure the driver can/will take complete control of the car when/if they need to.

But the driver must always have the ability to take control 100% of the car 100% of the time with ZERO computer interference. Always.

What is Google thinking of making a car with no steering wheel or brake and accelerator pedals? Good God don't EVER once believe that car would EVER in a MILLION years be safer than a car with the ability for the driver to take and maintain complete control of the vehicle and all times.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by fastball

I've been involved in technology and computers for my degree and career since 1994. If you count playing video games since the mid-80s I guess you can say for around 30 years. The one thing that has NEVER changed in technology is the chance of a computer freezing up and failing. I don't care if it's a 1982 Atari 2600 or a 2019 Tesla Model S or the damn Space Shuttle. Computers fail. Always have and always will.

If anyone thinks for one second that an autonomous car is safer than having complete human control you are nucking futs. Even with drunk drivers, inattentive drivers, kids on their cell phones or simply people talking to their friends or shaving/eating a hoagie while drinking a cup of coffee and combing their hair.

What happens when a system fails or locks up on an autonomous car and it cuts the wheel while you're doing 60 mph on a 150 foot high bridge? Or locks the brakes up because it thinks it sees a pedestrian 200 feet away when there is none? You are going to convince me some how that when "all the bugs are ironed out" that it will never happen?

No truckin way. Not in a million years.

You can have assists that ALARM if you must, but don't EVER make cars where any system is complete autonomous. Radar cruise, Cadillac's super cruise, those are fine because they will let and insure the driver can/will take complete control of the car when/if they need to.

But the driver must always have the ability to take control 100% of the car 100% of the time with ZERO computer interference. Always.

What is Google thinking of making a car with no steering wheel or brake and accelerator pedals? Good God don't EVER once believe that car would EVER in a MILLION years be safer than a car with the ability for the driver to take and maintain complete control of the vehicle and all times.

Thank you... Its about time someone had common sense.

I am a network engineer and have worked for several fortune 500 companies. None of them had any computer systems for even their own corporations that were flawless regardless of how many millions (yes millions) they spent on data redundancy and fail-less systems. There is just no such thing. Yes a computer can do more things than a human can at any given time, but the trade off is...when a computer f*cks up... it f*cks up BIG.

[Stex]

I can see the ad for aeb now:
"Have no clue what the 3 -5 second rule is, over drive traffic and conditions, drive distracted, hate looking out the windshield, bothered by people suddenly stopping at yellow/red lights, tired of inflated air bags.....our no fail AEB is for you! And for grins we kick it in from time to time....

My friends body shop had a newer toyota suv that rear ended a truck and the AEB did not kick in and the air bags did no go off...? And it added big time to the repair cost

I think it should be an option so drivers can deside if they need/what/should pay for it...if not option allow it to be deactivated like the other nannies.