Driver aids.

[au350hp]

Auto manufacturers are building in so much technology into cars and there is a belief that other things can be done whilst driving in these ''time poor lives'' we all lead (apparently). In my opinion, I reckon just about every one of these driver aids makes us worse drivers. Don't get me wrong, I reckon power steering, LSD's & ABS are wonderful things but if your driving correctly and paying attention to those around you, there is no need for them. Generally, when any alarm sounds, they cause chaos. Also, many of these crash avoiding technologies, airbags go off at low speeds, interior lights go on, engines are shut down rendering power assisted options like steering & brakes virtually useless. I also understand these things can assist inexperienced drivers, but if we educated people with a proper advanced driving based test and a true real life hazard perception test, then perhaps their would be no need for them. Generally, too many bells & whistles tend to distract more than assist. Anybody remember graphic equaliser's

[DJR-351]

https://youtu.be/ZfAobT5F3qg

[mwb235]

Ooooh Graphic Equalizer. Mine had 10 bands!

[au350hp]

Originally Posted by mwb235

Ooooh Graphic Equalizer. Mine had 10 bands!

You beat me. I only had seven.

[Uncle_Ken]

I've had my drivers aid for over 35 years now, works in every car I have owned.
Most days she doesn't mind my driving.
UK
And no I havent upgraded at any point.

[.:4:.]

Things like abs and traction control don't take control away from the driver so drivers don't get lazy. It's lane departure and blindspot monitors that make people lazy when they rely on the car to tell them to pay attention. A number of months ago I pulled out of my street and gassed it up the hill in the wifes car leaving an audi q5 well behind. Naturally old mate in the audi decided it was a good idea to attempt to rage and at the roundabout I slowed for came flying up behind me untill his fancy crash avoidance system stopped him in his tracks almost causing him to nearly get rear ended. One of the apprentices at work backed a van into a pole because that van had a camera and he had been driving mine for a while that had sensors and wondered why it didn't beep. Back in the day playing with the equaliser in my brothers car when driving wasn't distracting at all. It was in the glove box. ..

[XR6WGN]

I so agree with everything you guys are saying. I'd even go as far to say that they should not be used to learn to drive with.

Do away with teaching people to drive using the family car for maybe the first dozen lessons - take a basic MANUAL car with a competent instructor to teach the basics - then maybe introduce some aids - self park should be completely banned as far as I'm concerned!!

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by XR6WGN

I so agree with everything you guys are saying. I'd even go as far to say that they should not be used to learn to drive with.

Do away with teaching people to drive using the family car for maybe the first dozen lessons - take a basic MANUAL car with a competent instructor to teach the basics - then maybe introduce some aids - self park should be completely banned as far as I'm concerned!!

Yep. It's rediculous that auto reverse parallel park is allowed in the p plate test. I doubt I'd still have my ute by the time my 8 year old son does his driving test, but it's the perfect car. 6 speed manual, no reversing sensors or aids, abs brakes and 6 airbags if the worst happens (it's a single cab) and dsc kicks in late. Forward eye sight crash protection is controlled by paying attention to the 2 tonnes of car you are driving.

[Express]

The key word is aids, they are there to assist not control.

If as a driver you can't understand that principal then you are probably not good enough to drive with or without them.

Advancements in safety should be embraced and driver's should be schooled in why they're there, I know if I was to get into serious trouble or have a serious accident I'd rather be behind the wheel of my Merc and not my XY.



.

[ebv8]

my brothers ranger steered him into an oncoming truck, he was driving a country road the truck swerved into his lane, he swerved to the verge and the lane departure sensed it and turned him back into the path of the truck, lucky the truck corrected before there was a head on.
so first thing he does now is turn all that bullcrap off
i'm all for lights and buzzers but not self steering

[Streets]

There is a Nissan commercial on TV at the moment that advertises adaptive cruise control on one of their cars, and the voice over says: "Worry less about what's going on around you with adaptive cruise control". This attitude scares the **** out of me. What are they thinking?! Driver aids are not so you can turn your brain off.

[LG17]

An older female friend has just upgraded to a new Honda CRV.
She feels much safer knowing that her car will "fix her mistakes."
Unfortunately my wife and I don't, therefore we are only in her car if there is absolutely no other choice...

[Burnout]

These so called drivers aids, lane departure control, adaptive cruise and that ilk are just the manufacturers experimenting with the early autonomous systems they reckon we all need.
There are 5 levels of the autonomous car systems.
We are not at level one yet.

[au350hp]

Originally Posted by ebv8

my brothers ranger steered him into an oncoming truck, he was driving a country road the truck swerved into his lane, he swerved to the verge and the lane departure sensed it and turned him back into the path of the truck, lucky the truck corrected before there was a head on.
so first thing he does now is turn all that bullcrap off
i'm all for lights and buzzers but not self steering

I read a story in a Just Cars mag of a bloke in a Discovery 3 Land Rover who hit a Roo at night, country road, doing the limit. The Land Rover drove over the Roo, knocking it off the road and the driver kept control. Then the cars early accident detection system took over, deploying a bunch of airbags, hazard & interior lights go on and with the combo of airbags & the dust, the driver cant see out, and to top it off, the motor shuts down rendering power brakes & steering useless. The article goes on to say these systems aren't tested in all the situations we come across in Australia like country roads and all the various surfaces etc. Back in the 80's, Bosch had to recall the first ABS cars here because driving on poor roads played havoc with them .

[tranquilized]

I'm all for them, but they can definitely go too far.

DSC, or ESC or what ever you wanna call it would have to be the most important and effective safety feature ever invented. Most people don't understand what it is or what it does so it's not like it affects their driving style. I bet it's saved a lot of drivers without them ever realising it.

I really want radar cruise in my next car, would make freeway driving a lot less frustrating.

Would prefer my car wasn't able to steer itself though.

[Franco Cozzo]

I got driver AIDS when I bought my Holden

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

I got driver AIDS when I bought my Holden

What? A friend for life that will eventually kill you?
I said it before but things that don't take control away from the driver I'm all for. Both my parents cars will self steer as part of the lane keeping feature. Yeah you can fight against it but if it kicks in for a reason you obviously aren't paying attention. I like having dsc in my company vehicle because I carry varying loads in the back and for insurance reasons it has to use LT tyres that are typically horrible in the wet. My old company vehicle didn't have dsc and while you can tell when the rear was going to start to slide in the wet and I know how to counter, it's nice knowing the car isn't actively trying to kill me. I still have control of the steering and brakes and accelerator so unless I'm doing something stupid if I hit a pole with dsc on there's a high chance I was aiming for it. Even if that was the case my current work car has airbags that my last one didn't so whilst the car will die it atleast has the courtesy to try not to kill me.

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by ebv8

my brothers ranger steered him into an oncoming truck, he was driving a country road the truck swerved into his lane, he swerved to the verge and the lane departure sensed it and turned him back into the path of the truck, lucky the truck corrected before there was a head on.
so first thing he does now is turn all that bullcrap off
i'm all for lights and buzzers but not self steering

Cars can now override the drivers steering put & steer them elsewhere? I had no idea cars could do that. And yes, that is very very dangerous & should never be on cars..

[FG50T]

I was driving mid sweeping bend. Roadworks bollards put up along the dividing lane. My car sensed it as a pedestrian, slammed on the brakes and just about caused a pile up behind me

[roKWiz]

If this trend continues I'm going to be joining a public transport forum.

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by Roostercam

Auto manufacturers are building in so much technology into cars

They build cars according to focus groups, like many other major industries. however focus groups rarely translate to real world sales. Focus groups say they want more technology and gizmos, but then go and buy a cheap featureless shotbox.

[au350hp]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

They build cars according to focus groups, like many other major industries. however focus groups rarely translate to real world sales. Focus groups say they want more technology and gizmos, but then go and buy a cheap featureless shotbox.

I don't quite understand the focus group thing, but if the obvious connection between these bloody smart phones and the average centre console these days has anything to do with it, then I reckon your on to something.

[Hawkeye84]

Originally Posted by Roostercam

Auto manufacturers are building in so much technology into cars and there is a belief that other things can be done whilst driving in these ''time poor lives'' we all lead (apparently). In my opinion, I reckon just about every one of these driver aids makes us worse drivers. Don't get me wrong, I reckon power steering, LSD's & ABS are wonderful things but if your driving correctly and paying attention to those around you, there is no need for them. Generally, when any alarm sounds, they cause chaos. Also, many of these crash avoiding technologies, airbags go off at low speeds, interior lights go on, engines are shut down rendering power assisted options like steering & brakes virtually useless. I also understand these things can assist inexperienced drivers, but if we educated people with a proper advanced driving based test and a true real life hazard perception test, then perhaps their would be no need for them. Generally, too many bells & whistles tend to distract more than assist. Anybody remember graphic equaliser's

WRONG

http://www.caradvice.com.au/591434/s...onnected-tech/

"In my opinion" just doesnt cut it

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye84

WRONG

http://www.caradvice.com.au/591434/s...onnected-tech/

"In my opinion" just doesnt cut it

Road trauma could be “significantly reduced” by widespread adoption of the latest active safety and connected features.

COULD!

Unless the definition of the word could has changed since I read the dictionary last, i'd say the jury is out.

[prydey]

I might set up a tin foil hat stand just outside this thread. I'll do a roaring trade by the looks...

Quoting the experience of a couple of people doesn't make technology in cars bad.
If a person thinks the technology means they can do their make up and check face book instead of driving, that's not the fault of the technology.
The very fact that cars are controlled by humans means technology is an absolute necessity.
What scares me more is the folks who say they don't need it because they are superior to the computer...

[solarite_guy]

Originally Posted by prydey

What scares me more is the folks who say they don't need it because they are superior to the computer...

No doubt computer hash through algorithms much faster than any human. However, I have yet to see the perfect computer algorithm and I have been in the software industry since the 70s.

In fact on my last contracts, involving National and State Security and Public Safety, very critical final decisions are determined by trained and experienced Subject Matter Experts.

Even the simple automation built into todays onboard safety systems have serious flaws that you won't see advertised on tv. There is a long way to go before we can put complete confidence in these systems.

I don't want to be a guinea pig while the bugs are worked out. Anyone in the software industry can tell you the end user winds up conducting the so called final phase of testing, which is really a never ending iterative circular process.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by solarite_guy

No doubt computer hash through algorithms much faster than any human. However, I have yet to see the perfect computer algorithm and I have been in the software industry since the 70s.

In fact on my last contracts, involving National and State Security and Public Safety, very critical final decisions are determined by trained and experienced Subject Matter Experts.

Even the simple automation built into todays onboard safety systems have serious flaws that you won't see advertised on tv. There is a long way to go before we can put complete confidence in these systems.

I don't want to be a guinea pig while the bugs are worked out. Anyone in the software industry can tell you the end user winds up conducting the so called final phase of testing, which is really a never ending iterative circular process.

Of course, but let's not throw the baby out with the bath water!

[DJR-351]

And apparently this is where it's all leading

Aust could be key player in driverless cars

http://www.skynews.com.au/tech/techn...ss-cars_111017

Former US transport secretary Rodney Slater says Australia could be at the 'forefront' of driverless car technology given remote-controlled vehicles have long been used in the mining industry.

Experts in autonomous cars gathered in Sydney on Tuesday for a roundtable discussion on the future of road transportation.

Mr Slater believes balancing innovation and safety is the key to ensuring that future is more like heaven than hell.

'I would say Australia could be among those at the forefront,' the former secretary told AAP.

Pointing to remote-controlled vehicles used in Australia's mining industry, Mr Slater said the country was making significant strides in the right direction towards automation.

'You've got these huge vehicles being guided by individuals who are not in the driver's seat - we can learn a lot from Australia and your companies.'

Some 94 per cent of car accidents are caused by human error so driverless cars could greatly reduce road deaths.

Automation should also increase mobility for disabled people and the elderly, ease road congestion and potentially cut costs.

Mr Slater was joined in Sydney by key stakeholders including NRMA chairman Kyle Loades and Squire Patton Boggs Australia managing partner John Poulsen.

Mr Loades said driverless cars were expected to hit Australian roads by 2025 so adequate structures and regulations were needed for the transition to be seamless.

But Mr Poulsen said the technology still had some way to go before it could cope with certain challenging scenarios.

'One of the biggest problems with driverless vehicles at the moment is around bicycles,' he told AAP.

'The technology can't recognise this very strange beast because one minute it's riding along at 40 kilometres an hour then, suddenly, it slows down and the rider can walk.'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1BQPV-iCkU

[solarite_guy]

Originally Posted by prydey

Of course, but let's not throw the baby out with the bath water!

I never suggested that. I did clearly point out there is a long way to go and it will be a long drawn iterative process where the "end users" will be the final testers and that, in the end will never result in a perfect product. If you have ever received a SW upgrade, you should be aware by now those "upgrades" come along with plenty of new broken things. I have no intention in being one of the guinea pigs.

University studies are notorious for failing to take real world conditions into account.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by solarite_guy

I never suggested that. I did clearly point out there is a long way to go and it will be a long drawn iterative process where the "end users" will be the final testers and that, in the end will never result in a perfect product. If you have ever received a SW upgrade, you should be aware by now those "upgrades" come along with plenty of new broken things. I have no intention in being one of the guinea pigs.

University studies are notorious for failing to take real world conditions into account.

Considering the OP mentioned active and passive safety systems, I'd rather have them than not. To blame poor driving standards on technology is a stretch is what I'm saying.

Not talking about driverless cars.