Have Useless "Safety" Features gone too far?

Crazy Dazz · 11-02-2017, 10:53 PM

I'm all for safer cars. Especially cars that handle better, and are more likely to save your life in a serious crash.

But I'm starting to suspect that some features are not only useless, but dangerous.
Let me take but one example: "Lane Departure Warning" and it's big brother "Lane-Keeping Assist."
It is a well established fact that the biggest killer on our roads is inattention. Whether its caused by fatigue, alcohol, texting, whatever. Even when the cops say it was "speed" what they actually mean is that the speed outstripped the drivers ability to react.

SO, do we really need features that actively encourage drivers to be drongos?
Frankly, if you can't keep your car between the lines, I don't want you driving anywhere near me. At best, all this will do is encourage more morons to text or twit or check for zits whilst driving. Besides which, the worst category of drivers just so happens to be those who will most likely ignore (or not hear) any beeping. I have seen them cruising along, with a fire engine right up their clacker, full bells & whistles, and completely oblivious.

The only way this technology should be accepted, is if instead of a buzzer, it is wired to electrodes in the driver's seat, roughly near the genitals.

The lane-keeping assist should simply be outright illegal. What idiot thought encouraging himbos to take their hands off the wheel, was a brilliant idea?

And since this technology relies on marked white lines, what the hell happens when there aren't any?

vztrt · 11-02-2017, 10:58 PM

People are inattentive with cars that have little to no driver aids so doubt that.

Mind you to me i dont want those features. Have driven cars with them and not a fan.

.:4:. · 11-02-2017, 11:05 PM

Tafe dropped the common sense course years ago.

Junkyard-Dog · 11-02-2017, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .:4:.

Tafe dropped the common sense course years ago.

If it was anything like their other courses, they were probably asking an arm and a leg for it anyway.

.:4:. · 11-02-2017, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

If it was anything like their other courses, they were probably asking an arm and a leg for it anyway.

I believe it's along the lines of 13 and half for a non apprentice. That's for a 3 year course of course.

prydey · 11-02-2017, 11:46 PM

Well I think driver assist technologies are a good thing. It will be easier and more effective to add technology rather than try to change human behavior. History shows that human behavior rarely changes. The number of deaths in the road isn't going down due to drivers improving, it's because cars are safer.

commodorenutt · 12-02-2017, 12:06 AM

Totally agree with the OP. Watched a guy today in a late model Merc on the M7 who was speeding up & slowing down. When he sat beside me, he had both hands going through crap on the front seat, and wasn't even looking at the road - this was at 100km/h!

It makes it even easier for drop-kicks to fall asleep at the wheel now - the car will keep them in their lane, and autonomous braking will stop them at the first set of lights that are red. Even if that's 300km away. Unless they run out of fuel first.

I reckon if this technology is allowed in cars (eg Volvo's "follow me" cruise control - you set cruise, and if a slow car is in front, it slows down, and also stays in the lane by itself) then it should come with biometric sensors that detect if your eyes are off the road, or you aren't paying attention.

On one part of my commute I go through an affluent suburb, where euro SUVs are everywhere, and I've watched soccer moms in XC60s & XC90s turning around to the back seat while crawling along in 10-15km/h traffic - letting the car drive itself while they tie little Johnny's shoes and brush his hair. Fantastic example for kids to see.

.:4:. · 12-02-2017, 12:20 AM

I have bought it up before and I'll bring it up again. A few weeks back I pulled out of my street an gassed it up the hill in the wifes ecoboost g6. Old mate behind in his audi couldn't keep up on the incline. Back on the flat I stuck to 60. He came flying up behind me. Crash avoidance said no. He got stopped in his tracks. What a tool

ozrunner · 12-02-2017, 01:11 AM

Totally agree Crazy Dazz.

In fact, I was only thinking today if I had membership I would respond to that idiot bagging the Mustang for not having this very same feature and thus it is a safety s*****x. So in his mind he considers this is required in a high performance vehicle so drivers can text on their phone without actually have to always look where they are freaking going and thus can rely on this crap to stay on the road. Dumbass.

If you can't keep a car between the lines then you shouldn't have a licence.

Cars are getting like Microsoft putting features in their products that have no use whatsoever other than stuff you around and only all for the sake of being able to do it.

You'll never see my rectum in a driverless electric car

XByoot · 12-02-2017, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

Well I think driver assist technologies are a good thing. It will be easier and more effective to add technology rather than try to change human behavior. History shows that human behavior rarely changes. The number of deaths in the road isn't going down due to drivers improving, it's because cars are safer.

Until you have a disengaged driver and the system fails or cannot sense a certain scenario. Most typical human reaction is the startle factor of what's going on,they were expecting the system to protect them and it didn't,typical reaction is "why didn't it" rather than actually managing the emergency...this stuff is a huge issue in aviation,many many good reads. Basically for every advantage,there is a new complexity and possible disadvantage introduced. This stuff is coming,but driver education better be up to the task...which I doubt it will be.

NX74205 · 12-02-2017, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XByoot

Until you have a disengaged driver and the system fails or cannot sense a certain scenario.

In which case it would be the driver's fault for not paying attention. Technology does not breed disengaged drivers, the lack of driver training does that more than adequately.

Using your aviation analogy, the first thing that a pilot should do in an emergency is to fly the damn thing. This is part of pilot training. Same applies to driving, if technology fails, stuff it, keep driving.

It's just silly to blame the very features that are added to assist a distracted driver stay in the lane and to prevent or minimise accidents. The person that should be blamed is the ******** behind the wheel, and the system that allows inadequately trained drivers a little plastic card that says "Driver's Licence".

chrisandsharon · 12-02-2017, 07:26 AM

Lane assist/departure - yes we need it imo and no I don't think these safety features 'actively encourage drivers to be drongos'. Overall I think the vast majority would still drive responsibly with the safety technology in the background monitoring your position on the road.

The technology may have saved my very good friend, he had a head on with a road train in NW WA.
Seconds before the collision the truck driver said my mate looked like he was looking for something in or around the glovebox when he drifted into the trucks lane. He was an excellent driver and was driving a new HSV GTS. He left a wife and 2 young children behind. Absolute tragedy. No one is perfect, the technology might just save you from yourself or from someone else one day.

.

XByoot · 12-02-2017, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NX74205

In which case it would be the driver's fault for not paying attention. Technology does not breed disengaged drivers, the lack of driver training does that more than adequately.

Using your aviation analogy, the first thing that a pilot should do in an emergency is to fly the damn thing. This is part of pilot training. Same applies to driving, if technology fails, stuff it, keep driving.

It's just silly to blame the very features that are added to assist a distracted driver stay in the lane and to prevent or minimise accidents. The person that should be blamed is the ******** behind the wheel, and the system that allows inadequately trained drivers a little plastic card that says "Driver's Licence".

Sure it's the drivers fault,that does not prevent the accident actually happening,I totally agree with you in your opinion the driver "should" take control.

Your comment about technology breeding disengaged operators is incorrect from what I've seen,it's a huge issue we face in the modern world...we all "let the computer do it" in our daily lives and ignore the behind the scenes operation or cross check it's solution...we trust them,and for most it's OK,mostly.

The example I use in aviation is unfortunately cold hard facts...it's happened. Pilots are of course trained and they still have problems coming to grips interfacing with technology and it's been a huge learning curve. Ever heard of pilot error? Same as driver error mate,it happens and it's a huge issue with modern technology.

Have a bit of a read about this issue in aviation,it's very interesting and quite relevant to the situation we are speaking of. An example is Air France A330 that stalled at high altitude due to pilot error. Any aviation buffs out there please forgive my basic description of this accident.

A simple sensor failure caused erroneous readings,they have three primary computers,three secondary computers and two back ups all to make the fly by wire solution to a control input and protect the pilot and passengers and keep the plane safely within the design envelope...it won't let you do dumb stuff basically.

So,very very basically they saw a decrease in altitude so they pulled up and got stall warnings,you cannot stall an Airbus in normal operation due to the computer protection...so,because it won't let you so they kept pulling up to regain altitude,they weren't trained to recover because Airbus claimed it was a waste of time because you cannot stall our planes,they are protected from such issue. The conversation and confusion carried on all the way to the ocean which they hit at a rate beyond comprehension . The plane was perfectly flyable and indeed stalled due to their inputs and the failure of the systems allowed them to do that,but due to them forgetting a very very basic part of pilot training they got lost in technology and unfortunately lost their and all the passengers lives. It's the basic human response of what?why? And how. What is it doing? Why is it doing it? And hopefully you get to "How" to get out of the situation. Sometimes in an emergency people should go straight to the "How" but get tangled up in the first two.

Now these pilots were trained professionals,familiar with the plane and systems and they still got it wrong. Yes it's their fault,they did not go to work with the intention of crashing,neither does a driver get into a car in sound mind intend to crash a car,but it's the drivers ability to have the situational awareness and the knowledge of the machine to manage a potential issue and avoid a prang. Yes,modern tech may help in some situations,but you should be there aware of the situation and monitoring the resolution the computer has come up with.....how many average punters will do that rather than place whole reliance on the system and be more focused on doing their nails or whatever?

There are literally piles of videos on this subject,YouTube stuff like situational awareness or there is a classic. From American Airlines called children of the magenta that discusses the very real issues of interfacing humans and automation...you'll be amazed if you care.
Technology can certainly help in some situations,problem is there is usually other negatives that arise for every gain,very much a minefield. Forgive my ramble,but it's a huge issue well will likely all have to come to grips with

RANGEREST · 12-02-2017, 09:05 AM

I'm not sure if they have gone too far in general, but the lane departure/assist in the Everest is a pita on the narrow country roads around where I live, it wont let you hug a white line, even when the lane is barely a car wide, then once it realises this it turns off till the road straightens up.
I turn it off most of the time.

4stanger · 12-02-2017, 09:35 AM

I'm not a perfect driver, once tried setting a cruise control on a car I was unfamiliar with, eyes on speedo when setting cruise speed, when finished glanced up to the road and my drivers side wheels were on the centre line, any longer setting cruise I would have been in the oncoming lane.

Recent years I see a lot more common news reports on early morning TV of cars crashing into suburban houses over night, I would like to know the various causes of those incidents.

Many years ago when computer controlled efi cars came out, I used to think wouldn't it be good if the police had some special device to point and aim at these cars to disable the computer and stop the car, such a device would be good these days with police chasing speeding stolen cars.

CyberWasp · 12-02-2017, 09:35 AM

Like it or not it is here to stay.
Here is a quick example of when technology works.
The car was doing 110kms an hour when this was recorded and was in autopilot mode.
If the car in front had of (been paying attention) or had the same technology it would not have happened.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FadR7ETT_1k

yakabot · 12-02-2017, 09:42 AM

With regards to the "Lane Departure" warning, it may be a good idea, but i would like it to disable the car if it goes off 3 times in 5 minutes. I imagine it is designed with fatigue/tired driver in mind. 3 times in 5 minutes means driver is fatigued, system slows down car and shuts off for 15 minutes for driver power nap.

XByoot · 12-02-2017, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4stanger

I'm not a perfect driver, once tried setting a cruise control on a car I was unfamiliar with, eyes on speedo when setting cruise speed, when finished glanced up to the road and my drivers side wheels were on the centre line, any longer setting cruise I would have been in the oncoming lane.
.

That's acutually a very good example. So why did the vehicle drift into the centre of the road? My answer would be you were involved in carrying out a very basic chore of setting the computer and were distracted from the primary task of driving the car and temporarily lost situational awareness?

So how do we fix the problem? Add more automation? Make current automation more user friendly so the driver doesn't come distracted? Remove it completely! Train drivers on the correct time to carry out these chores?

Please,I'm not having a go mate,we all do this type of stuff, it it's a really good,simple example of what we must be preparing ourselves for. This tech will come,all I'm saying is we all must be very very ready for it.

XByoot · 12-02-2017, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

Like it or not it is here to stay.
Here is a quick example of when technology works.
The car was doing 110kms an hour when this was recorded and was in autopilot mode.
If the car in front had of (been paying attention) or had the same technology it would not have happened.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FadR7ETT_1k

Thanks for that,really great example of the benefits. System worked well,no doubts about it..

Taking it one step further,how would the driver in the car filming the accident react if the car actually failed to respond? They were filming the accident and chatting about it,expecting the automatic protection of the car to do its thing and stop,throw in a few seconds of startle factor and the old "what"is that warning? "Why"isn't it doing something and finally "how" do I fix the problem I'm in.....if they actually did manually brake they may have lost valuable seconds and become part of the accident themselves. It's a very interesting subject,but this stuff is definitely headed our way.

Express · 12-02-2017, 10:30 AM

As far as I’m concerned you can’t have too much safety.

As I’ve grown older I’ve felt time diminish things like my reflexes and stamina and I’m not the only one on the road who should be honest enough to say the same thing.

If you youngsters believe avoidance safety systems are unnecessary or a hindrance to good driving skills then good on you for being perfect drivers, personally when I’m out cruising I don’t see too many like you on the roads.

Most vehicles have the ability to accelerate fast today and for sure they handle better but many roads are still below par and many drivers are still distracted or inattentive so bring on the safety features to take up the slack in my opinion.

Like everything they’ll only get better as they’re refined over time.

.

FPV+fteT3 · 12-02-2017, 10:35 AM

You either enjoy driving and are good at it or your uninformed and/or dont care how dangerous a task it can be and are easily distracted much like children by phones, gloveboxes, hair, make up, music, etc... and need all the help you can get to protect you from yourself. Drivers that rely on all this tech to survive should be on public transport. For me it would ruin a good drive having nanny intervening when hitting an apex or pushing through some twisties or having autonomous braking when closing speeds that allow for an easier overtake and less time on the wrong side of the road intervene. I dont need that negative shyte in my life.

lra · 12-02-2017, 02:31 PM

None of my cars have any of these ‘safety’ features.
They have have ABS, ESP and Traction Control, all of which are related.
One has a driver reminder that goes off after 2 hours of driving. The first time I experienced it, I spent nearly 5 minutes trying to work out what the alarm was, distracting me from the primary task of pointing it in the right direction.
I am more interested in whether my car’s structural crashability is up to the task when things go bad.
All the other gizmos, to me, are an unnecessary electronic addition that will go wrong as the car ages, and are an incentive the ‘dumb down’ the ability to operate a machine.
If a driver is drunk, stoned, on a self destructive mission, or just plain stupid, these features a not going to save them or others.

Itsme · 12-02-2017, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by commodorenutt

Totally agree with the OP. Watched a guy today in a late model Merc on the M7 who was speeding up & slowing down. When he sat beside me, he had both hands going through crap on the front seat, and wasn't even looking at the road - this was at 100km/h!

It makes it even easier for drop-kicks to fall asleep at the wheel now - the car will keep them in their lane, and autonomous braking will stop them at the first set of lights that are red. Even if that's 300km away. Unless they run out of fuel first.

I reckon if this technology is allowed in cars (eg Volvo's "follow me" cruise control - you set cruise, and if a slow car is in front, it slows down, and also stays in the lane by itself) then it should come with biometric sensors that detect if your eyes are off the road, or you aren't paying attention.

On one part of my commute I go through an affluent suburb, where euro SUVs are everywhere, and I've watched soccer moms in XC60s & XC90s turning around to the back seat while crawling along in 10-15km/h traffic - letting the car drive itself while they tie little Johnny's shoes and brush his hair. Fantastic example for kids to see.

Safety features in cars or not at all, I see plenty of drivers these days not paying attention as one should do when driving, just damn bad habits people have.

Nothing wrong with the safety features it is just the culture of people being distracted by trying to do other things as they drive cars, one example is talking on the mobile phone.

TheGreenKugaaah · 12-02-2017, 03:12 PM

Reminds me of the dilemma currently facing autonomous vehicles.

The car is driving towards a crowd of people on the road and there is not enough time to stop. Does it A - save the crowd by swerving and crashing at the expense of the driver? B - plough through the crowd knowing the driver will be safe?

In my opinion the focus should be on better educating drivers, better quality driving tests and implementing re-testing every time you renew your licence.

chrisandsharon · 12-02-2017, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGreenKugaaah

Reminds me of the dilemma currently facing autonomous vehicles.

The car is driving towards a crowd of people on the road and there is not enough time to stop. Does it A - save the crowd by swerving and crashing at the expense of the driver? B - plough through the crowd knowing the driver will be safe?

In my opinion the focus should be on better educating drivers, better quality driving tests and implementing re-testing every time you renew your licence.

Better education - it's out there already and many do not listen. The attitude is 'it will never happen to me'. The majority know how to drive properly and safely but choose not to. Many chose to drive in a fashion that flouts the law and in a way that generally just ****es off other drivers doing the right thing.

Look at the use of mobile phones whilst driving. Drivers of all ages and experience are smashed with info about the dangers of using mobile phones whilst driving, doesn't make any difference with many. Alcohol whilst driving - meh, I'll be ok to drive home at .09. Many drivers attitudes whilst driving are disgraceful.

I'm all for safety technology leading to safer cars. I'd rather put my faith into
technology rather than relying on the sort of driving and accidents we're seeing everyday.

**PG2** · 12-02-2017, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGreenKugaaah

Reminds me of the dilemma currently facing autonomous vehicles.

The car is driving towards a crowd of people on the road and there is not enough time to stop. Does it A - save the crowd by swerving and crashing at the expense of the driver? B - plough through the crowd knowing the driver will be safe?

In my opinion the focus should be on better educating drivers, better quality driving tests and implementing re-testing every time you renew your licence.

I'm only quoting your post for reference.

If you are about to plough into a crowd of people you probably weren't paying attention in the first place.

An autonomous vehicles will more than likely never get into the above situation in the first place.

The autonomous vehicle will see the crowd before you will, will brake with plenty of time to spare and will not be put in the situation that it needs to make that sort of decision.

paulb351 · 12-02-2017, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakabot

With regards to the "Lane Departure" warning, it may be a good idea, but i would like it to disable the car if it goes off 3 times in 5 minutes. I imagine it is designed with fatigue/tired driver in mind. 3 times in 5 minutes means driver is fatigued, system slows down car and shuts off for 15 minutes for driver power nap.

I have lane departure on my Everest and when testing it out by deliberately wandering into (empty) lanes it corrected as expected but after a few goes the car showed a fatigue warning and an alarm sound... much better than the arbitrary 2hr have a rest break warning the falcon had... it also detects if you take hands off the wheel and again a warning comes up.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**russellw** · 12-02-2017, 05:07 PM

History repeats.

Reminds me of the early 80's and the fuss made about ABS as it became standard on more common models which raised the same cries about intervention and good drivers not needing it, however, endless research in the intervening years has reliably proven that except for a very few edge cases the ABS system beats even the best drivers every time and now nobody doubts the obvious benefits of it.

Likewise, the early TCS systems were a bit primitive in terms of how they intervened but they have become more sophisticated and in 'sportier' models the manufacturers generally allow settings to minimise their impact and this will continue to improve.

EBD, Stability control, EBA, BLIS and LDW systems are all at various stages of their development cycle and operate with greater or lesser degrees of effectiveness based on their maturity but they will improve and become more prevalent and if they are implemented correctly they should be unobtrusive until required.

It's a bit like aging - you may not like it but it's going to happen anyway.

Cheers
Russ

Mercury Bullet · 12-02-2017, 05:23 PM

I hate the blind spot warning in my Volvo.
Damn mirrors flash constantly at night from going past trees on country roads.

Nobody dies on the unlimited section of the Stuart hwy doing 240. Speed forces you to concentrate.

Express · 12-02-2017, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lra

None of my cars have any of these ‘safety’ features.
They have have ABS, ESP and Traction Control, all of which are related.
One has a driver reminder that goes off after 2 hours of driving. The first time I experienced it, I spent nearly 5 minutes trying to work out what the alarm was, distracting me from the primary task of pointing it in the right direction.
I am more interested in whether my car’s structural crashability is up to the task when things go bad.
All the other gizmos, to me, are an unnecessary electronic addition that will go wrong as the car ages, and are an incentive the ‘dumb down’ the ability to operate a machine.
If a driver is drunk, stoned, on a self destructive mission, or just plain stupid, these features a not going to save them or others.

To put it basically, structural integrity is there to save you in low impact crashes where avoidance systems are there to help keep your mind on the job and correct errors at higher speeds and the key word is ‘avoid’.

Many of the comments here remind me of all the similar negativity towards seat belts when they were being mandatorily introduced.

Really you shouldn't need to worry, if you are such a good driver then many of the avoidance systems should never need to click in.

Not knowing what an alarm was shows you didn't bother to take the time to familiarise yourself with your car before you drove it and if it was distracting you from driving for 5 minutes then you should have pulled over.

It also may have been of benefit if you had some other avoidance systems fitted to help you out while you were being distracted.

.