Edmunds Reviews Ford's BlueCruise Hands-Free Driving Technology (edmunds.com) 52
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Edmunds, written by Cameron Rogers: BlueCruise operates on the same principle as Super Cruise. Once the vehicle is traveling on one of the 100,000 miles of qualified roadways (Ford dubs these Hands-Free Blue Zones) and certain conditions have been met, a graphic appears in the instrument panel to let you know that BlueCruise is ready for activation. Simply press the cruise control button on the steering wheel and you can take your hands off the wheel to let the vehicle drive itself. Like Super Cruise, Ford's BlueCruise system is not autonomous. As the driver, you have to be alert and prepared to take the wheel at any time. BlueCruise will not take evasive action if there is a small obstruction in the road -- a box on the freeway, for instance -- and you must be ready to perform advanced maneuvers if necessary. To that end, BlueCruise includes a head and eye position sensor to make sure you're watching the road ahead. Divert your attention for too long and the system will deactivate. And because BlueCruise relies on clearly visible lane markers, traveling on highway sections that lack them will deactivate the system. The first vehicles to receive BlueCruise functionality will be two of Ford's newest models -- the 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E and 2021 Ford F-150. In both cases, the BlueCruise hardware is tied to the Ford Co-Pilot360 Active 2.0 package.
I had the opportunity to drive both an F-150 and Mustang Mach-E with BlueCruise, and there was no functional difference in how the system behaved in each vehicle. The system itself melds several driver aids that are already present on the majority of cars today, but with a head- and eye-tracking component that makes sure you're paying attention. Once this is established -- and you're driving on a preapproved road -- a ring will appear around a graphic of the vehicle in the digital instrument panel. This lets you know that BlueCruise is ready to activate. Simply press the cruise control button and acceleration, braking and turning is handed over to BlueCruise. In this way, BlueCruise functions similarly to GM's Super Cruise. The primary difference is that GM vehicles with Super Cruise have an LED light bar integrated into the steering wheel to let you know when Super Cruise can be activated. Ford's system isn't so obvious in letting you know when it's ready. When you press the cruise control button, however, the instrument panel graphics turn blue to inform you that BlueCruise is active and you can take your hands off the wheel.
The other difference between the two competing systems is that GM's Super Cruise has one prescribed distance for the adaptive cruise control (ACC) aspect. Ford has decided to treat BlueCruise like a typical ACC system in which you can choose one of four following distances. When engaged, BlueCruise does a good job at approximating typical human driving behavior. I never had to adjust the following distance from one of the medium settings, and the system gives you a few beats to put your hands on the wheel when it needs you to resume control. I didn't experience many technical issues in either vehicle on my limited test drive, but there was one instance in which I was forced to make an emergency maneuver. A Civic driver with little concern for their personal safety accelerated to merge right in front of my F-150, and the truck didn't slow down quickly enough. This wasn't necessarily a fault of BlueCruise itself -- I have found that ACC systems in general are slow to react to vehicles merging into or out of my lane -- but it goes to show that you still need to have your wits about you at all times. "Like GM's Super Cruise, Ford's BlueCruise provides a hands-free driving experience on certain limited-access highways," writes Rogers in closing. "It certainly takes some stress out of driving in bumper-to-bumper traffic, and should be similarly pleasant on long-distance road trips. But these are not autonomous systems, and drivers need to be ready to take the wheel at any time to react to changing road conditions."
I had the opportunity to drive both an F-150 and Mustang Mach-E with BlueCruise, and there was no functional difference in how the system behaved in each vehicle. The system itself melds several driver aids that are already present on the majority of cars today, but with a head- and eye-tracking component that makes sure you're paying attention. Once this is established -- and you're driving on a preapproved road -- a ring will appear around a graphic of the vehicle in the digital instrument panel. This lets you know that BlueCruise is ready to activate. Simply press the cruise control button and acceleration, braking and turning is handed over to BlueCruise. In this way, BlueCruise functions similarly to GM's Super Cruise. The primary difference is that GM vehicles with Super Cruise have an LED light bar integrated into the steering wheel to let you know when Super Cruise can be activated. Ford's system isn't so obvious in letting you know when it's ready. When you press the cruise control button, however, the instrument panel graphics turn blue to inform you that BlueCruise is active and you can take your hands off the wheel.
The other difference between the two competing systems is that GM's Super Cruise has one prescribed distance for the adaptive cruise control (ACC) aspect. Ford has decided to treat BlueCruise like a typical ACC system in which you can choose one of four following distances. When engaged, BlueCruise does a good job at approximating typical human driving behavior. I never had to adjust the following distance from one of the medium settings, and the system gives you a few beats to put your hands on the wheel when it needs you to resume control. I didn't experience many technical issues in either vehicle on my limited test drive, but there was one instance in which I was forced to make an emergency maneuver. A Civic driver with little concern for their personal safety accelerated to merge right in front of my F-150, and the truck didn't slow down quickly enough. This wasn't necessarily a fault of BlueCruise itself -- I have found that ACC systems in general are slow to react to vehicles merging into or out of my lane -- but it goes to show that you still need to have your wits about you at all times. "Like GM's Super Cruise, Ford's BlueCruise provides a hands-free driving experience on certain limited-access highways," writes Rogers in closing. "It certainly takes some stress out of driving in bumper-to-bumper traffic, and should be similarly pleasant on long-distance road trips. But these are not autonomous systems, and drivers need to be ready to take the wheel at any time to react to changing road conditions."
So -- software rails (Score:3, Interesting)
It looks like they set themselves a much lower bar than Tesla or one of the other FSD competitors. They can only drive along predetermined routes that are loaded into the GPS. In other words tracks are built in software.
I suppose this gives them a lot higher chance of "success" because it is a lot easier to do.
Musk says they are "solving the vision problem" which is of course much harder to do. But if they do it there are a number of capabilities you get that are out of reach for the simpler solutions, like dealing with road obstructions or changes in the map.
Long term, I bet on Tesla. Short term? we'll see.
Re: (Score:1)
Waymo blows Tesla (and these others) out of the water including Lidar. They're so far advanced you ride in the back seat. There's no risk of the driver inattention crashes these promote. The only incidents Waymo's had are other drivers hitting them afaik. At this point, they're doing other regions for extreme weather testing.
Re:So -- software rails (Score:4, Insightful)
Waymo blows Tesla (and these others) out of the water including Lidar.
Debatable.
The average driver doesn't want the current Waymo. Sure its a piece of amazing tech (it's legit Level 4) but its a glorified suburban taxi. The average driver wants a system that lets them disengage from highway driving more, and we've seen that trend with driving tech -- speed cruise control --> radar speed control (for bumper to bumper traffic) --> auto lane keeping --> and now we have some systems that will handle interchanges for you.
Start putting L4-Waymo on certain highway commute routes NJ-NY or Virginia-DC, and more people will start to consider it more seriously. That said, the current Waymo does have a market, but it'll have to show its capable of urban driving I think.
Re:So -- software rails (Score:5, Informative)
Highway driving is actually much easier than urban driving, which is why Waymo started with urban. They want to get the hardest problems solved and reliable, rather than slowly building up to it with half measures and beta code. They actually considered the build-up route but found that drivers didn't pay enough attention to be safe, so decided to go for full level 4.
It might be a smart move. With the technology still adding some significant cost and making the car somewhat unattractive the first users will likely be commercial ones, like taxis and freight. In both cases having a driver around for urban driving and doing nothing on the highway defeats the purpose, they might as well just do it all. A truck that can drive itself from warehouse to warehouse with no driver though, that's a revolution.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think that's quite true. The summary suggests they use cameras to see lane markings. That's not exceptional either, some cars have had lane assist for twenty years.
I suppose the geographic limitations are so they know there are no intersections and know where the merges and exits are. I don't really think it would be much more useful than adaptive cruise control and assisted lane keeping.
Re: (Score:3)
That's pretty much exactly what it is.
How it works
Ford BlueCruise builds upon available Intelligent Adaptive Cruise Control with Stop-and-Go and Lane Centering and Speed Sign Recognition. It allows you to operate your vehicle hands-free while you are monitored by a driver-facing camera to make sure you’re keeping your eyes on the road, with the potential for more enhancements in the future.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It sounds like they've finally reached the level of Tesla driver assist from several years ago, but that's to be expected of Detroit.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but the difference is that theirs actually works. The Tesla system is jank and could not go hands-free because the only method Tesla used to ensure that the driver was paying attention was hands-on-wheel torque monitoring.
Most of these systems are based on MobileEye tech. MobileEye have demonstrated fully self driving vehicles that are much more advanced than what Tesla does, and even a camera-only system, but they don't put them into consumer vehicles because the tech is still beta. They wait until it
Re: (Score:2)
MobilEye? I hope their driving tech is better than their security cameras, which were junk. We installed them at a customer site once (customer provided), and then ripped them out because half failed in a couple of months and the other half were about to fall over.
Re: (Score:1)
It looks like they set themselves a much lower bar than Tesla or one of the other FSD competitors.
Or maybe it's the reverse, they're setting the bar much higher bar before releasing their technology to the public.
Because in San Francisco, it's not fleets of Teslas that are criss-crossing the San Francisco hills in self-driving mode 7 days a week 24 hours a day, it's the GM's Cruise cars and the Waymo cars that are.
What a lame name! Blue Cruise, blew crews ... (Score:2)
Since Full Self Driving is already taken by Tesla, the minimum Ford has to do is Completely, really, Completely Self Driving, And I Pinky Swear as the trade mark.
Some day the features and their names will match. Sadly that day is not today.
Only thing more horribly misnamed are the names given to bills in Congress. If Congress calls something Wetlands Projection Act you bet your last dollar the last thing it will project would be wetlands.
Unlike AUTOPILOT. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Unlike AUTOPILOT. (Score:5, Insightful)
From Wikipedia: "An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft, marine craft or spacecraft without requiring constant manual control by a human operator. Autopilots do not replace human operators. Instead, the autopilot assists the operator's control of the vehicle, allowing the operator to focus on broader aspects of operations (for example, monitoring the trajectory, weather and on-board systems)."
That is exactly what Tesla's system does. Sounds like it is named correctly to me. Are you confusing it with autonomous self driving?
Re: (Score:3)
This argument is basically the same one as that old joke where someone sets the cruise control and hops in the back seat for a nap.
If you don't know what words mean, you probably shouldn't be driving a car.
Re: (Score:2)
Every state where I've ever lived required passing a written test, is that not the rule where you live?
Re: Unlike AUTOPILOT. (Score:2)
When I took my driver's test (in a rural state) back in the 90's, there was a guy there having the test read to him by a deputy.
This can apparently still be done in New York, and I assume, others:
"Can the DMV read the written test for a driver license to a person who has a learning disability or who has difficulty reading English?
Yes. A DMV representative can read the English version of the written test to an applicant for a non-commercial driver license (Class D, Class DJ, Class E, Class M, Class MJ, non-c
Re: (Score:2)
YGBSM. If you can't read the test for your driver's license, what are the odds you'll be able to read road signs—especially the ones calling out things like lane closur
Re: (Score:2)
I only picked New York as an example.
"Blue states." That's what you go straight to?
Re: (Score:2)
This argument is basically the same one as that old joke where someone sets the cruise control and hops in the back seat for a nap.
If you don't know what words mean, you probably shouldn't be driving a car.
Funny you should mention this [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
This old argument, if a ton of people misunderstand the term and that misunderstanding can lead to death which it has on several occasions then not using a term which can be widely misunderstood is more important than having a cool sounding marketing term.
AKA if a phrase is leading to people being killed then they should stop using that phrase regardless of whether or not most people get it.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
From Wikipedia: "An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft, marine craft or spacecraft without requiring constant manual control by a human operator..."
That is exactly what Tesla's system does. Sounds like it is named correctly to me. Are you confusing it with autonomous self driving?
Given that a Tesla automobile is not an aircraft, a marine craft, or a spacecraft, I would counter that the car's autopilot feature does not meet the definition you provided. In any case, you're being obtuse if your position is that "autopilot" does not mean "self driving" to the average person.
I'm willing to bet that if and when Tesla achieves full autonomous operation, they were still call it Autopilot.
Book Learning. (Score:1)
Re:Unlike AUTOPILOT. (Score:4, Insightful)
Does using Exxon brand gasoline makes any difference to the engine? Does it really put a tiger into the engine? Gasoline has to meet exacting standards set by SAE. All gasolines, not just Exxon's.
People have been bombarded with grandly named features and exaggerated claims by the advertisers for a long time and they have developed a good sense of how much to trust the claims of the manufacturer.
On one hand I wish Tesla took the high road and did not do this. Take the high road like they are opening the Supercharger network to all brands giving away an important brand differentiation selling advantage.
On the other hand I see FUD, from the latest Washingto Post article. Talking about one year old garage fire involving two Teslas. As though parked Teslas are catching fire williy nilly in every home. Meanwhile 500 gasoline cars catch fire every day in the USA. White House refuses to invite the largest and the most successful Electric Car maker in the world, the most American car maker, which dragged the entire automotive industry by the scruff of its neck, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century.
I will cut Tesla some slack in naming department. And deadlines and forecasting department too.
Road trains (Score:1)
The autonomous technology would lend itself well to road trains: restricted lanes were vehicles could travel bumper to bumper at high speeds. Preset your exit number and the vehicle exits the road train lane onto regular roads where the driver has to drive normally to his destination. But would require taking total control away from the driver while they're in the lane as drivers would take actions that might cause delays or accidents.
Re: (Score:2)
Glacial pace (Score:2)
They'll probably keep this on highway driving for about a decade, meanwhile highway driving is perfected in Tesla. In spite of all the trolls rallying against it, the FSD beta 9.2 already handles city streets with very little intervention needed. Human drivers in the US killed 40,000 people, worldwide the number is close to 1 million. The only way to reduce that number is with autonomous driving capabilities. Other methods such as telling drivers to please always drive nicely simply cannot work due to inher
Re: (Score:2)
False [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
The method in that video, even if it actually works, which it doesn't (but I dont wanna argue that)... reduces the fatalities by 50%, whereas autonomous would be overall cheaper and far less annoying to drivers AND can reduce fatalities 90% or more.
Re: (Score:2)
So far, but the numbers are still dropping as they work to redesign more roads and intersections. The final number may be 90% or more.
Maybe, but so far, autonomous hasn't made a statistical dent in road fatalities anywhere that I know of.
And if safer roads reduce fatalities by 90% and if autonomous cars will also reduce fatalities by 90%, then put together they will reduce fatalities by 99%. So let's do
Lane markers (Score:2)
And because BlueCruise relies on clearly visible lane markers, traveling on highway sections that lack them will deactivate the system.
What fun it will be when this deactivates on a curve with lane markers degraded enough from the rest of the road leading into / out of the curve.
Re:Lane markers (Score:4, Insightful)
It always puzzles me how Detroit is able to pretend that snow doesn't exist in Michigan, where lane markers in the northern part of the state essentially disappear for half the year.
Re: (Score:1)
What's the point of this then? (Score:3)
Re:What's the point of this then? (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly, what the fuck is this logic:
A Civic driver with little concern for their personal safety accelerated to merge right in front of my F-150, and the truck didn't slow down quickly enough. This wasn't necessarily a fault of BlueCruise itself -- I have found that ACC systems in general are slow to react to vehicles merging into or out of my lane --
No, my dear, this would be exactly the fault of BlueCruise. That other ACC systems do that as well is entirely irrelevant.
Having said that: It could be that the author's assessment of whether the truck didn't slow down quickly enough is incorrect. Slowing down quicker could increase the danger of accidents if there is a vehicle close (enough) behind you at the time. Without knowing the exact situation it's impossible to tell, although I'm not inclined to give BlueCruise the benefit of the doubt here.
Re: (Score:2)
Not only would this seem to make a driver less alert
Research in automatic driving tasks has shown that
it typically takes at least 5 or 6 seconds for a driver, after using
automatic driving for 10 minutes, to actually able to take
control in an emergency.
At 100 km/hr (62 mph) thats about 140 meters (one and
a half football fields), so you better be at least that far
away when somebody stumbles onto the highway in
front of you. Even at a city-legal speed of 50 km/hr (30
mph) you still need to have at least 70 meters, or a little
less than one NY city block to stop i
So essentially, about 1% of what Tesla do. (Score:3, Informative)
So it's essentially a radar distance-following system with a very accurate (you hope) map.
This is just unbelievably lame.
A Tesla can do those things - even without the self-driving option - but can do it on ANY road.
Add in the self-driving option, and it'll stop at stop lights and stop signs, handle lane changing to pass slow vehicles and to get into the right lane for turning and to avoid roadworks, adjust it's speed if the adjoining lane is going slowly,
My Tesla drove 3,600 miles across the USA and back - pretty much all by itself.
These map-following/distance-maintaining systems are obsolete by at least a decade...time to start pointing this out and not keep telling people that they are amazing new futuristic things.
Re: (Score:3)
That's Detroit for you,. When faced with declining luxury vehicle sales in the 1990s the executives asked Marketing why people were buying BMWs and Audis rather than Lincolns and Caddies. Rather than tell executives that the other cars were more reliable, more pleasant to drive, and had better performance they came up with "We believe it's because they use letter and number combinations in the vehicle names", thus leading to the revival of a several formerly extinct lines of vehicles like the Chrysler 300
Re: (Score:2)
I was wondering about about Tesla's self-driving feature last weekend when I was driving in I95. Traffic was heavy, and prevailing speeds were often 80-85. On multiple occasions traffic inexplicably came to a sudden standstill and almost immediately resumed, but you had to basically slam on the brakes.
Can Teslas handle that? Heavy traffic, high speed, little distance between cars, and very sudden stops?
Re: (Score:2)
On multiple occasions ... you had to basically slam on the brakes.
Can Teslas handle that? Heavy traffic, high speed, little distance between cars, and very sudden stops?
Teslas? I don't know but, given the accomplisments of other car companies [youtube.com], one would hope, and suspect, so.
Please note, just one random example of advances in the field, from ~4 years ago.
Adds to a driver's mental load (Score:2)
In addition to remaining aware of other drivers and road conditions, and being ready to react at any second, a driver must also be aware of what the software is doing (or not doing).
This makes driving harder rather than easier.
comma.ai is even better than Tesla Autopilot (Score:1)
comma.ai works on a lot of cars and is even better than Tesla Autopilot.
Not really new (Score:2)
Dangerous (Score:2)
So if I turn this thing on . . . (Score:2)
So when I turn this thing on, if I understand this, some weirdo in a striped shirt and an animated blue dog start driving my car?
I'm not so sure about this . . .