Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 512 posts

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#341

Post by erhaetherth »

ics wrote: post #50
jacquesm wrote: post #6

This almost got me into a serious accident, twice. Definitely would not recommend and I switched cars because of it. The last thing I need is buggy software with the capability of instantly changing the trajectory of my vehicle (slippery surfaces, cornering). A brand car as well (MB) so really, really disappointed, what should have been a safety feature actually was the opposite. Dealer said everything was fine so th…

I wrote up a long comment that got scrapped by my focus filter but I feel the need to voice strong agreement here. I have a recent Mazda which in almost all ways is my perfect car except for the newfangled safety features all new cars seem to have. Lane correction and emergency braking, even set to the lowest sensitivity levels, are bad to outright dangerous in city (and some country) driving. In NYC it's common to h…

> somehow universally implemented across manufacturers... maybe.

They'd need to be implemented and then turned off for 15 years until 99% of the old cars are off the road and then flipped on simultaneously for every car.

If a car suddenly breaks then the car behind it better be able to suddenly break too.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#342

Post by IanCal »

ghostpepper wrote: post #205
IanCal wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and punish people who actually pay attention on the road. It can benefit people who have reaction times slower than silicon.

It can also cause accidents, and some people go their whole lives without getting in an accident.

Including those that drive cars with aeb.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#343

Post by sammyjoe72 »

I’m conflicted on this one, it has both saved me, and also almost caused a real crash… it’s save me twice when reversing, once a guy pulled in behind me after I had checked mirrors and started reversing, and the auto brake engaged and saved a collision… but it has also jammed the brakes on when driving down the street because it detected an obstacle that was fixed, and I was driving around it comfortably

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#344

Post by janalsncm »

Tanoc wrote: post #124
ceejayoz wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Statistics are meaningless to the individual. This is just blatantly untrue. > means little compared to an individual who already drives safely without it Until emergency breaking stops a bad driver from T-boning you in an intersection as they run a red light. “I’ll just drive safely” was the argument against seatbelts, airbags, and antilock brakes. Motorcycle helmets, too.

Forward emergency braking systems don't detect such situations. You'd be hit regardless. They only have a 170 degree field of view at the best of times in their current implementations. Somebody two hundred feet away closing at sixty miles an hour will hit you in the side regardless of forward emergency braking simply because it's not designed to look for something moving that quickly that far away at that extreme of…

This reminds me of the fact that many foreign subway systems have outer doors (so you can’t just walk onto the tracks) and inner doors. Most people won’t just walk onto the tracks in America but the outer doors address inattentive people, tired people, and people who want to do the wrong thing.

In a lot of places the outer gate is only chest high which isn’t insurmountable but is enough of a barrier to avert 99% of the bad cases. I think the analogy to automatic braking holds.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#345

Post by aposticknit »

taeric wrote: post #278
ramblenode wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The scenarios and questions you ask are easy to explore in the data. This sounds like the beginnings of the McNamara fallacy: that there is some abstract "data" where all the relevant variables can be explored to decide the best course of action. The reason it's a fallacy is that data is itself only a reflection of conscientious decisions about what to measure and how to measure, and these are invariably limited to…

Again, you are contriving bullshit to scare folks. And you didn't look at the studies. 38% decrease in accidents along with decrease in fatalities. In the data. For the worries you are sprouting, the data would have to look very different.

I think they have a great point though, accurate measurement of the types of incidents is just as important if not more than the total.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#346

Post by Glawen »

jacquesm wrote: post #80
nradov wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you haven't already done so, please file a formal safety defect complaint with the NHTSA with details on that bridge incident. Once the regulators receive enough similar complaints they will open a formal investigation and potentially issue a recall. https://www.nhtsa.gov/report-a-safety-problem

Good one, not in the USA but I will do this here in NL with the equivalent service. It never crossed my mind so thank you very much for this option.

is there a similar service in NL or Europe? NTSHA is really an institution that's lacking in the EU, the recalls and safety bulletin are a feature I would like to see in the EU.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#347

Post by globalise83 »

Traffic safety would be greatly improved by a system whereby cars could automatically communicate their speed, rate of acceleration / deceleration etc. to each other. Has anyone considered using brake and parking lights as a way of doing this? I could imagine that by rapidly flipping on / off some of the LEDs, it would be possible to communicate simple information to following vehicles with capability to read the signal, while to other vehicles without such capability they would flicker so fast as to just look like normal brake lights.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#348

Post by aposticknit »

taeric wrote: post #279
Dylan16807 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not listening. The 38% number can be true and there can be particular groups that are hurt more than helped. Nobody is trying to "argue against" the 38% number.

In a cost benefit, if the number drops 38%, you are going to have to work to show it isn't worth it. What would the number have to be? Can they make the system even better by finding cases it didn't help? Almost certainly. Progress isn't a straight line, but increases are increases.

It isn't a binary choice, you can disable the function for situations it's not suited for. Nothing should be forcing us to enable harmful scenarios just because.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#349

Post by arghnoname »

randomfinn wrote: post #78
mkmk wrote: post #19

This feature once saved me from what would have otherwise been a very nasty crash, many years ago. I was driving too fast in a borrowed car over a small hill and hadn't realized that traffic had stopped just out of my sight until too late. I heard a beep and saw flashing on my dash and I started braking but a moment later the emergency braking system kicked in, braking much harder than I would have been able to. The…

> braking much harder than I would have been able to Any idea why you weren't able to apply full brakes? I remember reading that most people don't in an emergency and that's why the emergency brake boost was created, but haven't seen the reason for it.

I'm not sure what the exact amount of force is, but I took a more performance oriented driving course that included some hard braking at highway speeds.

It's fairly violent. In normal driving we never do this, it would cause someone to rear end you and it's not necessary. So we have lots and lots and lots of practice braking at a moderate pace. Braking fast in normal day to day life is maybe a 70% force. We're used to trying to think how much pressure is the right amount of pressure.

What they told us is basically to try to break the pedal off. I think it's the easier way to remember, if the crap hits the fan, just put your foot through the floor and get stopped. The less thinking and modulating, the better.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#350

Post by ExoticPearTree »

ics wrote: post #297
hnick wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My new car has lane keep assist and AEB and I haven't had these issues. From what I hear it's very much to do with a maker's implementation (mine is Hyundai, who for various reasons seems to have a bad reputation in North America but a good one in Australia). For the lane keep assist I feel a nudge but it's extremely easy to overcome just through a normal grip on the wheel - if I don't budge it won't move. It's been…

> From what I hear it's very much to do with a maker's implementation Right, if I had to condense my issues into something more constructive it is just that: if regulators want to pursue a mandate for these systems, they should also work on establishing testing criteria and specifications that cover the many different conditions drivers face and reduces variation between manufacturers as possible. Not an easy task. T…

Automaker implementation and the chosen hardware to do the implementation on. Meaning that, for example I drive a Honda which has a camera and a radar. The camera is for lane assist from what I gathered and the radar for ACC and AEB.

If I accelerate into traffic and get close to a car while accelerating, it will start flashing a warning light and if I still don't stop accelerating or braking, it will intervene, but if the other car accelerates it doesn't do anything. So the radar setup is quite well done and it gives very few false positives.

The lane assist system is a bit bad though because once it identifies the lane markings it does not take into account potential hazards that want me to change a lane or exit it for a few seconds to avoid road hazard lights or something similar.

The point I am trying to make is that there should be a high standard to what drives the AEB and it should not rely on cameras, which seems to be what automakers want to implement driving assisted features to save on more advanced tech. And somehow I don't think they're gonna pony up for high-speed cameras that can replace a radar at accuracy.

Maybe the intention is good, but most likely the implementation will suck.

Post reply on HN