Volvo Introduces a Collision-Proof Car 743
carazoo.com sends along a story on Volvo's upcoming crash-proof car. The company will introduce a concept car based on the S60 this month at the Detroit Auto Show, looking ahead a few years to the goal that by 2020 "no one should be killed or injured in a Volvo car." The concept car will have forward-looking radar as a proximity sensor, and the ability to brake if a collision is imminent. When the car senses a collision, a light flashes on the windscreen display along with an audible warning. If the driver doesn't act, the car will brake automatically.
Re:And then.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Personally, I like to go the other way, and have a car I can control as much as possible: manual transmission, manual brakes (yes, I know they are supposed to be better, but, ABS creeps me out and won't let me lock the brakes when I WANT to)...
rear ended (Score:2, Interesting)
Only in foreseeable (Score:3, Interesting)
Usually someone didnâ(TM)t look in their rearview mirror and changed lanes right into a car or someone fell asleep at the wheel and drifted across traffic and because of a split second lapse of attention someone is dead.
Itâ(TM)s not a OH NOOOES THAT PERSON HAS BEEN STOPPED IN FRONT OF ME FOR 2 MINUTES BUT I DIDNâ(TM)T NOTICE AND NOW ITâ(TM)S TOO LATE TO BRAKE!!!
A car comes over a hill in the highway going 30 over the speed limit (we design those speed limits on purpose and itâ(TM)s because of things like this) and thereâ(TM)s a disabled car with a blowout or engine problem in the road ahead of you and braking simply slows you down. You still hit the car and the lady standing in front of it looking helplessly at her engine still dies because you wanted to cut 5 minutes out of your drive time.
There is also the question of allowing your car to decide when you should brake and ALL the potential hassles/problems/safety issues involved in that.
Anyway, back to the point, if Volvo thinks that by installing some sensor in the bumper that will trigger the brakes if thereâ(TM)s something in front of you will keep people from dying in their cars they are pouring a lot of money down the garbage.
This technology will solve 1 problem for all 50 it creates in a drivers experience.
Re:wishful thinking (Score:4, Interesting)
Her reasoning? She didn't want to mess up her clothing. I decided that I couldn't have someone that vain and short-sighted in my life. The break-off was easy, though, since she decided my refusal to drive with her un-belted was a control issue, so we both went away happy.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:5, Interesting)
Anti-lock brakes are designed to keep the wheels from locking up. They don't do anything to fix the problem of having absolutely no traction in some circumstances.
It's nice to see this. Some companies have been offering radar based cruise control for a while. It's unfortunate this is going to go through a series of lawsuits ("my car didn't stop for me", "my car stopped and spilled my soda over my priceless work of art", etc.).
Don't forget that the car could combine the information about external temperature and traction (from the traction control slip sensors, and the steering assist) to realize it would be hard to stop and plan for a larger stopping distance.
It will be REALLY interesting when this is combined with other sensors (like all the little proximity sensors that Ford's recently announced "help me parallel park" system has) to be able to not only brake, but identify that the lane to the right is empty and swerve to avoid the accident. This will be a while away though.
I wonder how much this will be abused? While it would be easy to try to let the computer do all the work (basically rely on it in emergencies) I would think that would be so nerve wracking most people wouldn't do it.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:2, Interesting)
Yup - it happened to be going down hill on slush. If the ABS had *not* kicked in, the wheels would have locked until the tires penetrated the slush and met the road.
But with the ABS active, the apply/release frequency was perfect to ensure the tires kept floating on top of the slush, so I slowly slid into the car in front of me.
I asked the dealer about disabling the ABS, they wouldn't do it.
Get on with it. (Score:4, Interesting)
So where does that leave us? We now have cars that will follow other cars to the point of stopping entirely, can park themselves, will stay in the lane on their own (to a point)...the obvious goal here is to remove more & more of human input from driving.
So can we just skip all of this crap and go right to the computer-driven car, so we never have to worry about insurance premiums, speeding tickets, drink-driving, falling asleep at the wheel, and all of the rest of the nonsense that goes along with cars?
On the flip side, if you're a sports-car enthusiast, this is likely to be the last generation where one can purchase a raw, loud, driver's car. We're going to wind up like the character in Rush's Red Barchetta before we know it.
Re:internet wiseguys (Score:5, Interesting)
What I mean is, if they see a 10-20% reduction in deaths in Volvos, but it turns out that this causes a 10-20% increase in minor accidents (those edge cases), or if people perceive the unwanted deceleration as a lack of control. Even if that perceived lack saved them from a much worse situation, or if the minor auto body damage saves them from death, popular response may be negative, and they might have to pull the features despite their success.
It might be hard to convince someone that their car did a good thing for them when they're saying, "I totally had it under control, but the car took over, and the guy behind me hit me and bent my fender, cost me $1000." People might not be convinced that that $1000 saved them a $5000 front-end repair, or their lives.
I remember one time, some dunderhead I knew in high school complained that her bike helmet was worthless. Why? Because when someone opened their car door in front of her, she flipped over, landed on her head, and the helmet cracked in two.
She didn't even get it when I pointed out that that could have been her head. She was just upset that her $30.00 helmet was ruined. I don't mean to be pessimistic about general intelligence, but I'd say that kind of response might be more the rule than the exception.
Re:yeah well (Score:3, Interesting)
Why is this marked troll? The original Hummer was a badass car that had real "macho" potential and retailed for about $70k. The H2 is a sissy-version that has the same size and poor fuel efficiency, but otherwise was scaled down so it could hit the more customer friendly $30k sales point.
And don't get me started on the "smaller/leaner" H3....
If you wanna drive a Hummer... accept no substitutes and get the original Hummer. And if you want to drive a car that'll survive an impact with a Hummer... get a Volvo (or another Hummer).
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:4, Interesting)
Geez...if they keep up with this trend, you might as well have a "Johnny Car" system that just automatically drives you around. Man...I hope I never see the day of that in the remaining days of my life.
I enjoy driving...that's why I've always owned 2 seater sports/performance cars. I don't want the machine to take over for me. If I want to slide, let me slide. If I wanna lock up the brakes...let me, etc. Next thing you know...they'll put govenors on all the cars to limit how fast you can go if you want to...nothing over 70mph.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's important to remember, in *theory* ABS makes the majority of the driving public safer drivers. Which is to say, an average driver with average driving skill is now a superior driver with regard to stopping distance and ability (no skid, controlled turns).
For a small percent of the driving population, ABS actually makes you a less safe driver as ABS can not and does not stop a vehicle is a shorter distance than what a better than average driver can accomplish - on any road surface. This means for a small percentage of the driving population, ABS actually made you a less safe, more dangerous driver.
Of course, that all assumes the driver is actually using their ABS system properly; and this is where theory breaks down. Most ABS drivers still pump their brakes. For a large percentage of the driving population, ABS actually makes the roads more dangerous and countless studies show a large percent of average drivers who are aware they have ABS, now tailgate, brake later, and create more dangerous driving situations for those around them under the false pretence ABS can keep them from harm. In other words, a large percentage of the driving population actually believe they can drive more reckless, and do so on a regular basis, because they wrongly believe they are now safer drivers than they were without ABS - more than compensating for their new found dangerous driving habits.
The end result is, statistically on average, ABS has actually created more dangerous roads for the majority of the driving population.
Re:internet wiseguys (Score:4, Interesting)
Popular sport amongst hoodlum gangsters around Tampa when the first airbag equipped police cars rolled out was "pop-a-cop," intentionally ram hard enough to get airbag deployment, effectively disabling the officers' ability to give chase for long enough to get lost in the city.
I envision a really nifty radar spoofing device that would panic stop these Volvos without doing anything other than re-transmitting a modified radar pulse back at them... I'm sure the police wouldn't use such a system, but I can picture suburban geek troublemakers messin' with the soccer moms.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:3, Interesting)
ABS doesn't decrease ideal braking distances - but then it's not designed to. It's designed to help maintain traction, especially in the hands of those not skilled in driving in such a situation.
ABS is for Joe Public, not Lewis Hamilton.
Re:yeah well (Score:2, Interesting)
Since everyone who replied to my post seems to have misunderstood what I said exactly the same, moronic way, I'll reply to it just once. You don't recklessly cut off an H2 the same way you would a small, light car. A driving mistake around an H2 is much more costly than around a car you can toss around easily. That's what commanding respect on the road means. An aggressive H2 driver will get his/her way more often than not because the H2 is dangerous in a collision, regardless of whose fault it is.
It's not the same kind of respect a Gallardo would get on the road, but it serves the same purpose -- you let it go where it wants.
This isn't new. (Score:3, Interesting)
The Acura RL has had collision sensing and avoidance as an option for several years, called the Collision Mitigation Braking System.
http://www.acura.com/index.aspx?initPath=RL_Learn_FeaturesOptions_SafetySecurity_Braking_CollisionMitigationBraking [acura.com]
Re:internet wiseguys (Score:4, Interesting)
Have you ever met someone who was convinced that a specific safety feature in their car (or it's excellent engineering) saved their life?
Yes, me (I know your statement was in the positive about this, so I'm not arguing with you, just giving my own little story here).
I was driving my company car in Australia (a Holden VZ Commodore Acclaim [wikipedia.org] (3.6 Litre "Alloytec" engine, 5 speed Automatic, Sedan body)) a couple of years back, and it was raining. As I was going through a roundabout, a guy came on in front of me WAY too close (I had right of way, but he claimed later that he didn't see me). Now, the Holden Commodore is a bit of a tank really - big, heavy and not so manoeuvrable compared to the "sportier" kind of cars I normally drive. I slammed my foot on the brake pedal and turned to move to the next lane of the roundabout - the ESP ("Electronic Stability Program [wikipedia.org]") did its job PERFECTLY and I made it off to the side of the roundabout without a collision. The other guy saw me at that point, and we both stopped just up the road, where he apologised.
A couple of days later, it was raining again, and I was at a similar roundabout. I made sure there were no cars in any direction, turned off the ESP (the driver can toggle it on/off with a simple button press) and tried a similar manoeuvre to see what the car would do - the wheels locked, skidded on the wet road, the car spun around twice and ended up off the side of the roundabout (just a dirt patch, so it was fine to do). I am therefore EXTREMELY grateful for the ESP when I needed it.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:3, Interesting)
Want to know how far away that thing behind you really is? Turn your head and look behind you.
Also, learn to drive.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:1, Interesting)
For a small percent of the driving population, ABS actually makes you a less safe driver as ABS can not and does not stop a vehicle is a shorter distance than what a better than average driver can accomplish - on any road surface.
[Citation Needed]
I believe you are absolutely wrong. Maybe your knowledge comes from yesteryear when ABS systems sucked, or maybe you're just guessing. Even the best drivers in the world can not stop as fast as a good ABS system. This has been tested time and again. The issue is that slamming on the brakes at 70 MPH has inherent risks, if you go over the edge then you lose control. Even the best driver can't account for every little flaw on the road and brake each wheel independently so there is no way for them to get maximum braking without risking loss of control. With ABS you can slam on the brakes at maximum force going 200 MPH and still be relatively safe. The ABS can brake each wheel with different forces, etc as the conditions merit.
ABS beats skilled drivers all the time in tests. Good traction control also beats skilled drivers for similar reasons. Why do you think there is so much hoopla in racing over ABS and traction control? They give the driver an advantage.
Re:snow tires (Score:3, Interesting)
You have more control if you drive out of it on ice than if you break.
Been in a similar situation myself in 2003/4, and managed to get back home without hitting anyone. When it started sliding I didn't break, I used the gas to carefully change my direction.
Mind you I've driven an American car in the past, and they handle like tanks. So there's probably little that you can do to control such vehicles on the ice..
Re:yeah well (Score:3, Interesting)
Ah, so "fear" == "respect" in your world.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:3, Interesting)
You are surely not correct. Automobile insurance companies offer discounts on policies for cars that have ABS. They would only do this if it were in their financial interest, which would mean that it is safer for the average driver to have ABS than to not have it.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:4, Interesting)
Where I am, there can be so many trains they essentially do get in traffic jams. They call it "waiting for an empty platform at the station ahead" or "held at a red signal". Also, there's way, way more normal people than objectionable ones (500 to 1? Maybe 100 to 1 at night). At peak times you still don't get a seat, but obviously the train still stops where you don't need to (so do cars, at junctions, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings etc). But they go fast between stations. Generally they go everywhere in the city, but not necessarily as fast as you might like, and outside the city it's a different story.
Self-driving cars would still suffer from a lack of road space, and maybe need somewhere to park. Big cities would probably need self-driving trains/trams, which already exist in some locations. The self-driving railway here still has a person to open and shut the doors, for "safety" (union pressure).
Having said that, I cycled to work for the first time today (I said I'd start in the new year, so I did). I enjoyed it, even though it's very cold (for London, forgive me if you're from somewhere with more than 2cm of snow a year). Apparently, cycling to work halves the risk of me getting heart disease, and should make me "10 years healthier" (like a 12 year old?), which is my main reason as I'm not especially fit at the moment. The government like this, as they've projected that half the National Health Service budget (£50bn) will be spent on obese people if nothing's done about it.
It's also slightly quicker than taking the train (30 minutes rather than 40-45), and much faster than driving. And a lot cheaper (even if I buy the fancy £500 bike I saw in the shop window on my way home).
That may have drifted off-topic somewhat.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:3, Interesting)
Illegal in parts of Canada?
Even in Ohio, we're allowed to run studded tires from November 1 to April 15. I'm looking at buying either two or four of them when the Blizzaks wear out on my 325i.
I don't think studs will help much in fresh, deep snow, at least on this car. The problem there seems to be more related to ground clearance than traction -- the undercarriage seems to float on top of the snow, and the tires don't have enough weight on top of them to grab anything meaningful. (I've considered mounting some sort of plow blade to the front, and/or installing rubber wedges in the coil springs to prop up the suspension, but generally I'm pretty happy to stay home when there's 8" of snow on the ground...)
On hard pack or ice, though, studs can't be beat. They're noisy, sure, and they tear up roads, but they work great and don't fail suddenly like chains or cables do.