Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Jun 03, 2026 00:57

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » News » Road Safety, Speed Camera and Policy News

All times are UTC [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
Gatsobait
 Post subject: Automatic braking
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 03:10 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
No, I'm not talking about the Pavlovian response of some drivers when they see a Gatso :). There was something on either Teletext or Ceefax last night about an idea, supposedly EU, to have cars fitted with a system that would avoid collisions by detecting hazards by radar and hitting the brakes. It did not sound like one of these advanced cruise control jobs, since it seemed to suggest it would always be on. I've been trying to find out more about it online, but so far I haven't found anything that seems to match what I saw earlier (except a couple of references to an experimental system that Honda are playing with).

Anybody know any more about this? I've trying to keep an open mind until I know more, but it does sound like yet another device that removes the responsibility of the driver to drive safely, and I'm not convinced that's ever a good thing.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Gizmo
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 08:47 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
You should never take away driver control. If a bird flew in front of the car would it hit the brakes... :?

In the driving test you have to check the mirror before braking. I assume you would not get the option in this case.

A warning system would be much better.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
diy
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 08:57 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 19:19
Posts: 1050
You should not perform rear observations when performing emergency breaking.

It's been a long time since I did the car test, but this is the current advice for the bike test.

Having said that we need to be careful about what we define as emergency breaking.

I pretty much always check my mirror if I come up sharp on a traffic queue. (1. avoid being squished and 2 to see if I can filter) I wouldn't see this as emergency breaking though.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Rigpig
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 09:36 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 09:59
Posts: 3544
Location: Shropshire
Gizmo wrote:
A warning system would be much better.


Yeah, I agree. I'm sure a system could be developed that illuminated a warning light if the vehicle it is fitted to gets too close to the vehicle in front for the speed at which it is travelling.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Twister
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:45 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:05
Posts: 1044
Location: Hillingdon
Rigpig wrote:
Gizmo wrote:
A warning system would be much better.


Yeah, I agree. I'm sure a system could be developed that illuminated a warning light if the vehicle it is fitted to gets too close to the vehicle in front for the speed at which it is travelling.


Like the one Jaguar have already developed?

http://www.jaguar.com/uk/en/_glossary/acc_2.htm
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Max Wilson
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:01 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 10:42
Posts: 77
Location: Rutland
Twister wrote:
Rigpig wrote:
Gizmo wrote:
A warning system would be much better.


Yeah, I agree. I'm sure a system could be developed that illuminated a warning light if the vehicle it is fitted to gets too close to the vehicle in front for the speed at which it is travelling.


Like the one Jaguar have already developed?

http://www.jaguar.com/uk/en/_glossary/acc_2.htm


That Jag cruise control worries me, it is inevitable that the driver will pay less attention to the traffic in front because of it. I remember a trial in the US a while ago on the automatic braking and the whole thing was dropped for fear of litigation when a crash occured!

Max

_________________
Tailgaters - Please Pass
You have an Accident to go to!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Colinjg
 Post subject: Automatic braking
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 13:20 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 10:36
Posts: 31
Location: Belfast
Too much reliance on these robot devices is a dangerous thing. If this is a EU Directive, they obviously haven't thought it through properly and besides, "IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT!".
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Colinjg
 Post subject: Automatic braking
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 13:49 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 10:36
Posts: 31
Location: Belfast
I've had further thoughts about this system. How well would such a system sense the road conditions? Braking distance is affected in adverse weather conditions such as rain, ice or snow or even if there's mud on the road.

Secondly, just how reactive could an automated braking system be? If the system suddenly activated in response to a hazard detected at 70mph, wouldn't inertial force cause injury (e.g. whiplash) to the vehicle occupants?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Twister
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 15:20 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:05
Posts: 1044
Location: Hillingdon
Found this article on Yahoo News during my lunchtime nose around the net...

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050118/323/faj52.html

Quote:
Tuesday January 18, 05:05 PM

EU gives green light to anti-crash radars

BRUSSELS (AFP) - The European Commission gave the legal green light to anti-crash radar technology which could spell the end of smashing into the car in front, or snagging out-of-vision obstacles in carparks.
The EU executive said it has approved specific frequencies for short-range radars that can detect collision dangers and automatically apply a cars brakes.

The technology should be available by mid-2005, it said, urging car makers to immediately take advantage of the move.

"Short-range radar can save lives," said Viviane Reding, the EU commissioner responsible for the decision, which opens radio bands while preventing radio interference to other essential users of these frequencies.

"The commission thereby provides a sound legal basis for an EU-wide market for short-range radar technology. I hope the automotive industry will make full use of this opportunity," added Reding.

Anti-crash devices have been around for some time, but to permit their legal use an EU-wide radio frequency band had to be made available which would not interfere with other equipment such as mobile phones or police radars.

The EU decision is the first large-scale application in Europe of Ultra-wide Band, a low-power wireless technology that re-uses spectrum already employed by other radio services.



Which makes me wonder - if the EU have only just provided a legal frequency range for use with on-car radar systems, then what exactly is the legal status of the Jaguar radar system?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Gatsobait
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 17:45 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
That sounds like what the Teletext article was on about.

Yep, it does seem as daft as it first appeared. "Could spell the end of smashing into the car in front"? Crap. How is a short range radar going to help stop taligating idiots on the motorways? Oh, when they get too close the system applies the brakes for them. :roll: I don't know about anyone else but I wouldn't be too happy for my car to start deciding when it wants to brake at motorway speeds.

Like I said in my OP, this is not a substitute for driver responsiblity and never can be.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Pete317
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 19:45 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 13:50
Posts: 2643
I agree, we shouldn't place too much reliance on these things.

For example, how is a device like that going to know that it should hit brakes when it sees a ball bouncing into the road from behind a parked van - it probably won't even see the ball.

How will it know that it should slow right down when there are kids ahead playing silly bu**ers on the pavement?

I believe it'll take several decades before electronic devices can be relied upon to be aware of hazards, and to anticipate them the way that flesh-and-blood drivers do (or, at least, are capable of doing)

Even with something like maintaining a gap - what does it do if someone cuts into your lane directly in front of you? Does it immediately go into emergency braking mode? Or does it analyse the situation and take the most appropriate action, as a driver would do? I think not.

Regards
Peter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dratsabasti
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 21:29 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 00:08
Posts: 748
Location: Grimsby
Atou braking by radar will be a good thing, once, and only once, every single motor vehicle in the world has it fitted, until then, I believe it will be a danger to road users that don't have it fitted.
An auto system will be able to react far quicker than a human system will ever be able to, so there will IMHO be an increase in tailend shunts, caused by the auto system working quicker than a human possibly can.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Homer
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 19:51 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 14:04
Posts: 2325
Location: The interweb
Dratsabasti wrote:
An auto system will be able to react far quicker than a human system will ever be able to,


Of course the flaw with this thinking is, an automated system can only react to what has already happened. A human can anticipate and react earlier.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Twister
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:09 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:05
Posts: 1044
Location: Hillingdon
Homer wrote:
Dratsabasti wrote:
An auto system will be able to react far quicker than a human system will ever be able to,


Of course the flaw with this thinking is, an automated system can only react to what has already happened. A human can anticipate and react earlier.


That's not strictly true though. We anticipate the future based on reacting to stuff we've just seen - e.g. we see someone get into the drivers seat of a parked car, and we can then anticipate them pulling out into the road straight in front of us, or we see a ball roll into the street and know that a child will most likely be right behind it. But there's no reason why, given sufficient sensing capability and processing power, an automated system couldn't also anticipate these, or many of the other events we anticipate based on our experiences.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
SafeSpeed
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:40 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Twister wrote:
Homer wrote:
Dratsabasti wrote:
An auto system will be able to react far quicker than a human system will ever be able to,


Of course the flaw with this thinking is, an automated system can only react to what has already happened. A human can anticipate and react earlier.


That's not strictly true though. We anticipate the future based on reacting to stuff we've just seen - e.g. we see someone get into the drivers seat of a parked car, and we can then anticipate them pulling out into the road straight in front of us, or we see a ball roll into the street and know that a child will most likely be right behind it. But there's no reason why, given sufficient sensing capability and processing power, an automated system couldn't also anticipate these, or many of the other events we anticipate based on our experiences.


That sort of artificial intelligence is a very very long way off. We'd also have to be extremely concerned about bugs in the AI system at that level.

In fact it's so complex that I don't believe that "good performance" will ever be achieved. As drivers we make good qualitative judgements - and that's what's required for road safety. Machines make quantitative judgements and are presently a million miles away from the finer judgements that would be required.

There's also a problem of subtlety. An experienced driver may learn a lot about what's likely to happen from a glint seen through a hedge or a faint moving shadow seen under a lorry. Visual processing at this level isn't even a dream for computer vision at the present state of the art.

[edit: more bloody typos]

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Last edited by SafeSpeed on Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:14, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Twister
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 13:24 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:05
Posts: 1044
Location: Hillingdon
SafeSpeed wrote:
That sort of artificial intelligence is a very very long way off.


True, I was just responding to the implication that it would never occur.

Quote:
We'd also have to be extremely concerned about bugs in the AI system at that level.


Considering the way some drivers behave in such scenarios, I think I'd rather take my chances with a buggy AI system than with them :wink:
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
SafeSpeed
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 13:39 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Twister wrote:
SafeSpeed wrote:
That sort of artificial intelligence is a very very long way off.


True, I was just responding to the implication that it would never occur.


I think my professional judgement is "never".

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Homer
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:02 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 14:04
Posts: 2325
Location: The interweb
Twister wrote:
Homer wrote:
Dratsabasti wrote:
An auto system will be able to react far quicker than a human system will ever be able to,


Of course the flaw with this thinking is, an automated system can only react to what has already happened. A human can anticipate and react earlier.


That's not strictly true though. We anticipate the future based on reacting to stuff we've just seen


I'm not sure that's always the case, and certainly a lot of the time I will just 'know' something is not right. I may be reacting subconsiously to something I have seen but it will take and extremely powerful and well written system to make that sort of judgement.

Quote:
But there's no reason why, given sufficient sensing capability and processing power, an automated system couldn't also anticipate these, or many of the other events we anticipate based on our experiences.


I work with programmers, I would not trust them to make my driving decisions for me. Not now, not in a million years.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
SCE
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:56 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 22:00
Posts: 193
Location: Rutland
Quote:
I work with programmers, I would not trust them to make my driving decisions for me. Not now, not in a million years.


I am a programmer, and neither would i!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
SCE
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 11:04 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 22:00
Posts: 193
Location: Rutland
Any system designed to avoid accidents has to be told what to expect, so someone has to decide what scenarios could happen and how to deal with them.

There will always be incidents that do not fit the rules, a driver can call on their experiences as a driver, cyclist, pedestrian etc and can make split second decision that may not seem logical to a computer but may well avoid a collision, or make any collision less severe. To take too much of the decision making process away from drivers will only make them less alert and less aware.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » News » Road Safety, Speed Camera and Policy News

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.095s | 10 Queries | GZIP : Off ]