Mandatory Automatic Emergency Braking

[SVT666]

By Justin King
Leftlanenews.com
Thursday, Mar 17th, 2016 @ 1:14 pm

Confirming an earlier leak, a group of 20 automakers has committed to making automatic emergency braking (AEB) a standard feature on all new cars by 2022.

The list includes all major automakers and many low-volume brands including Audi, BMW, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai/Kia, Jaguar Land Rover, Maserati, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Porsche, Subaru, Tesla Motors, Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo.

"A commitment of this magnitude is unprecedented, and it will bring more safety to more Americans sooner," says NHTSA administrator Mark Rosekind.

NHTSA, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and Consumer Reports will work together to monitor progress toward the 2022 goal. The IIHS and CR have already implemented programs to assess and rate performance of AEB systems, and the NHTSA is working on its own assessment framework for the 2018 model year.

The technology is currently implemented in different ways depending on the particular automaker and vehicle. Some systems only work at slow speeds and only slightly reduce impact speed, while others work at much higher speeds and attempt to avoid collisions altogether.

The IIHS claims the commitment "requires a level of functionality that is in line with research and crash data demonstrating that such systems are substantially reducing crashes." In the beginning, vehicles must earn an IIHS 'advanced' rating for front-crash prevention.

The IIHS relies on a point system to compare AEB technologies, with points awarded for performance in 12 mph and 25 mph tests. An 'advanced' rating can be earned for a 10 mph reduction from a 12 mph approach, but with no braking in the 25 mph scenario. Alternatively, a vehicle can qualify if it reduces impact speed by five to nine mph in both tests.

The National Transportation Safety Board had pressured automobile regulators to make the technology a mandatory feature on all new vehicles, however the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration claims the voluntary initiative will make AEB standard three years faster than could be achieved through formal rule changes.

"During those three years, according to IIHS estimates, the commitment will prevent 28,000 crashes and 12,000 injuries," the joint statement adds.


Read more: http://www.leftlanenews.com/20-automakers-promise-to-91274.html#ixzz43CIPfBgk

[CaminoRacer]

Boo

[ifcar]

It's not mandatory -- like the article says, the automakers are agreeing on their own to do it. And all or most systems can be switched off. There's very little downside here.

[12,000 RPM]

Uh oh....

RAZA

WARNING WARNING

CONTROL ISSUES TRIGGER ALERT!

SAFE SPACE! SAFE SPACE!

[SVT666]

It's not mandatory -- like the article says, the automakers are agreeing on their own to do it. And all or most systems can be switched off. There's very little downside here.

Let me rephrase then: Automatic Emergency Braking, you're getting it whether you like it or not.

[12,000 RPM]

"B-b-b-but what if the computer crashes and I get a BSOD!"

Just bracing myself for the BS

[SVT666]

BSOD?

[RomanChariot]

BSOD?

Blue Screen of Death

[Speed_Racer]

If it can recognize motorcycles, I'm happy.

[veeman]

I'm sure for cars that might be tracked, it can be turned off.

18 wheelers really need to have this thing.  I hate being in heavy stop and go traffic on a highway with a semitruck behind me. 

[VTEC_Inside]

It's not mandatory -- like the article says, the automakers are agreeing on their own to do it. And all or most systems can be switched off. There's very little downside here.

Downside would be having to pay for the radar unit that facilitates this "feature".

On one hand, assuming it can be shut off I have little issue with this.

On the other, I'm frustrated that more and more responsibility is ending up on the car rather than the driver.

People will still find a way to hit shit, I can imagine the law suits already.

[giant_mtb]

I'm sure for cars that might be tracked, it can be turned off.

18 wheelers really need to have this thing.  I hate being in heavy stop and go traffic on a highway with a semitruck behind me. 

I usually feel safer with a semi behind me.  They're professional drivers. They can see way farther ahead than me and read the traffic better.

[veeman]

I usually feel safer with a semi behind me.  They're professional drivers. They can see way farther ahead than me and read the traffic better.

99% of them sure.  1% are sleepy and if they fall asleep I'm pancaked as opposed to just "whiplash" if a guy in a Camcord hits me.

[12,000 RPM]

Downside would be having to pay for the radar unit that facilitates this "feature".

On one hand, assuming it can be shut off I have little issue with this.

On the other, I'm frustrated that more and more responsibility is ending up on the car rather than the driver.

People will still find a way to hit shit, I can imagine the law suits already.

Liability won't change. Unless the system completely took braking control away from the driver when activated, I don't think manufacturers have much to worry about. If they were on the hook they would not be pursuing this tech.

[AutobahnSHO]

The issue will be chain reaction panic stops. If the computer figures something's wrong and jams on the brakes, anyone following too close will also jam on the brakes, in a chain reaction. Older cars without the feature might hit the person in front of them, not giving the computer behind them time to react and so forth..

Just like rear-ends at red lights went way up in some places that put redlight cameras.

Unintended consequences......

[12,000 RPM]

The issue will be chain reaction panic stops. If the computer figures something's wrong and jams on the brakes, anyone following too close will also jam on the brakes, in a chain reaction. Older cars without the feature might hit the person in front of them, not giving the computer behind them time to react and so forth..

Just like rear-ends at red lights went way up in some places that put redlight cameras.

Unintended consequences......

Whats the human alternative to your suggestion.... the person hits the person in front of them at full speed, and the chain reaction happens anyway. Auto braking would help mitigate some of the damage to the cars its equipped in.

[ifcar]

The issue will be chain reaction panic stops. If the computer figures something's wrong and jams on the brakes, anyone following too close will also jam on the brakes, in a chain reaction. Older cars without the feature might hit the person in front of them, not giving the computer behind them time to react and so forth..

Just like rear-ends at red lights went way up in some places that put redlight cameras.

Unintended consequences......

The same would happen if it's just the driver who needs to slam on the brakes. If someone is following you too closely and you need to stop, there's a potential risk either way.

[giant_mtb]

99% of them sure.  1% are sleepy and if they fall asleep I'm pancaked as opposed to just "whiplash" if a guy in a Camcord hits me.

I thought you were talking about stop and go traffic.

[Raza]

"B-b-b-but what if the computer crashes and I get a BSOD!"

Just bracing myself for the BS

Lol, there's still a driver who is at the controls.  I have no problem with this.  Not a bad midpoint between your utopia where no one is allowed to drive (but somehow you still think you'll be allowed to ride a motorcycle) and your nightmare of actual human beings paying attention and being responsible. 

[Raza]

The issue will be chain reaction panic stops. If the computer figures something's wrong and jams on the brakes, anyone following too close will also jam on the brakes, in a chain reaction. Older cars without the feature might hit the person in front of them, not giving the computer behind them time to react and so forth..

Just like rear-ends at red lights went way up in some places that put redlight cameras.

Unintended consequences......

Yeah, there will likely be an increase in shockwave traffic.  Oh well, when people want to text and Instagram and SnapChat instead of drive, this is what we have to deal with. 

[12,000 RPM]

Lol, there's still a driver who is at the controls.  I have no problem with this.  Not a bad midpoint between your utopia where no one is allowed to drive (but somehow you still think you'll be allowed to ride a motorcycle) and your nightmare of actual human beings paying attention and being responsible.

Find me the post where I advocated for a world where nobody is allowed to drive, PLEASE.

Like I said, you've been triggered, and have long passed through the event horizon of insanity on this subject.

[SVT_Power]

I dunno about y'all but I wouldn't mind having this system in place

[MX793]

I'm not entirely opposed to it, but I also can't help but think that systems like this contribute to the general decline in driving ability.  How many people will start using systems like this as a crutch, letting the auto braking carry them through stop-and-go traffic while they diddle on their phones and don't pay attention to what's going on? 

A system like this should be a last-resort safety net.  It should be set up in such a way that if it is activated, it inconveniences the driver such that the driver will go out of their way to avoid the system having to step in.  Perhaps some kind of obnoxious and loud warning tone over the speakers that the driver must turn off every and any time the system kicks in?

[ifcar]

I'm not entirely opposed to it, but I also can't help but think that systems like this contribute to the general decline in driving ability.  How many people will start using systems like this as a crutch, letting the auto braking carry them through stop-and-go traffic while they diddle on their phones and don't pay attention to what's going on? 

A system like this should be a last-resort safety net.  It should be set up in such a way that if it is activated, it inconveniences the driver such that the driver will go out of their way to avoid the system having to step in.  Perhaps some kind of obnoxious and loud warning tone over the speakers that the driver must turn off every and any time the system kicks in?

It's already an abrupt slam of the brakes combined with an audible warning, and all or most of today's systems are "collision-mitigating" -- unless you're going slow enough, they don't even promise to prevent your crash, just to reduce your speed before impact. The IIHS gives a top score to a system if it can slow you by 22 mph while you're driving at 25 mph; that's still a crash.

Radar-based cruise control is the feature that lets you autopilot your way in gentle stop-and-go, and automakers frequently bundle the two because they use some of the same equipment, but it's not like there's no repercussion for constant inattention.

[12,000 RPM]

If the net effect is safer roads and less crashes I am for it. This system would have saved my bacon on my last accident, and I wasn't diddling around with a phone or w/e.

[280Z Turbo]

Find me the post where I advocated for a world where nobody is allowed to drive, PLEASE.

Like I said, you've been triggered, and have long passed through the event horizon of insanity on this subject.

Its inevitable. It will be considered an unnecessary risk.

[Raza]

Find me the post where I advocated for a world where nobody is allowed to drive, PLEASE.

Like I said, you've been triggered, and have long passed through the event horizon of insanity on this subject.

Illegal manual driving is simply the logical next step from autonomous cars, and you advocate for that all the time. 

[MX793]

If the net effect is safer roads and less crashes I am for it. This system would have saved my bacon on my last accident, and I wasn't diddling around with a phone or w/e.

So you rear ended somebody despite paying full attention to what was going on around you?

[12,000 RPM]

So you rear ended somebody despite paying full attention to what was going on around you?

Naw, I was making a right turn, watch for traffic for the road I was turning onto instead of the person in front of me. There wasn't anyone coming but the lady didn't go. Stupid mistake.

[12,000 RPM]

Illegal manual driving is simply the logical next step from autonomous cars, and you advocate for that all the time.

Next logical step.... if you are completely paranoid, and completely discount the large # of people who still want to drive (and the auto companies that build cars for them), as well as the millions of motorcyclists on the roads. Again you have passed the event horizon on this one, not much purpose having a serious discussion about this with you.