Europe Will Require New Vehicles to Include Autonomous Self-Braking System

Great news. No crazies driving into the back of my car and crippling me for life while their text messaging. The US should copy this.

Good technology but it will give people false confidence. Like stability and traction control. People think they can drive normally in bad weather. The system can only do so much. Lets just hope that people don't use AEB as an excuse. "I don't have to worry about breaking, the car will do it for me."

Good.

One step closer to getting maroons off the road.

I welcome the day when cars completely drive themselves. That will hopefully eliminate 99% traffic fatalities.

Technically, the concept is sound as I hate tailgaters. I like to see this developed and perfected.

Just another complicated system in a new car to fail and cost money to repair. Joy... I'll stick with older used cars that don't require a degree to maintain. I make it a policy not to drive into things so I don't see myself benefiting from it much. But I will concede that a good safety system generally isn't needed until it's really needed. I still don't like the concept of complicating cars further and making them more expensive to own.

This only takes away more control from you and puts it in the hands of unstable programming and finicky equipment, what happens when i decides that the piece of cardboard or tire that hits the sensor is a wall and you get a full break lock up while driving down the highway, or if you need to drive through a wall, this is a bad idea

There won't be any unstable programming.

It'll be running on Skynet 2.0. Perfectly acceptable.

I can imagine a thick fog what will happen in bumper to bumper traffic on a freeway with all cars having this feature it will be disastrous.

I believe it's dependent on the approach speed. It wouldn't kick in at 5 mph with a distance of 5 ft like in rush hour.

I wonder what's the sensing range is? The system isn't going to be effective when there's a car broken down in the middle of the highway and your car is going 60 mph and you have less than 100 ft left between the 2 cars. Most new car can stop between 100-110 ft and that's with performance OEM tires

"I can imagine a thick fog what will happen in bumper to bumper traffic on a freeway with all cars having this feature it will be disastrous."

Why?
Fog would be exactly where it has the best benefit.
Humans don't see through fog, the sensor they would be using wouldn't even know the fog is there (as in it wouldn't be affected by fog at all).

As for bumper to bumper traffic well if the traffic is going slow I think Antaro is right, and if they are going fast well isn't that the point? Stop these stupid people from tailgating and creating a situation where the car can't be stopped in time?

My biggest concerns for a system like this would be:
1) It failing and going off at the wrong time.
2) What does the driver do? After all they are still hanging on to that wheel and if they panic they are going to still be able to steer into the car next them.

BTW for the car broken down in the road, it seems to me, either the driver sees it, and gets out of the lane and there is no problem or the driver doesn't, and the system brings the car to a stop at least as quick (or quicker) then the drive would have, so there really isn't anything that is a minus with the situation, it just might not be plus either.

>>>> but hey--if the technology really can reduce accidents and improve road safety, maybe a strong nudge toward universal adoption isn’t such a bad thing.

But hey, if it really is that great and justifies the cost, a "strong nudge" won't be necessary.

What's with you guys? Does everything have to be either mandatory or illegal? can't the market just work?

PopSci and PopMech have government and regulation on the brain. Every other article reads like agitprop for a government bureaucracy. ESPECIALLY if it's about "the green economy".

There are going to be lots of ways for hackers and pranksters to have fun with those foolproof safety systems. Bring 'em on!

So now all accidents will be rear-end collisions.
That is, old cars running into unexpectedly-braking NEW cars.

The autonomous braking system is not smart enough (that is, too stupid to...) realize the guy behind YOU is too close as well.

Recap -- you can NOT introduce a partial-AI solution to a complex system.

@Robert_arvanitis: you aren't responsible for the actions of the driver behind you. At least I know here in Arizona 99% of the time rear end collisions are the fault of the person in back. Until vehicles are doing all the driving this system will still be beneficial. Even once the cars are doing all the driving nothing is ever perfect.

Plus a special compartment for storing your mistress

redarmed:

You may not be responsible for the guy behind you, in a court of law. But the laws of physics precede the laws of man.

It is cold comfort to get a partial restitution for being "right." I narrowly avoided that fate by seeing a fool behind me unable to stop, and managing to steer out of his way.

The key point is that partial automation is a guaranteed fail.

Note the key difference. ABS merely apply the brakes, at YOUR discretion, in a more effective manner. Automatic braking removes all driver judgment.

And just in case you wish to bet machine against man, recall that the US astronauts retained override, refusing to be "spam in a can." And Sullengerger saved passengers by landing safely in the Hudson River, well beyond the capabilities of any machine now available.

Yes, John Henry ("steel-driving man") won a temporary victory over the machine. But that was at the dawn of the industrial revolution.

My caution is this -- do not do piece-meal that for which we cannot fully anticipate consequences.

my roomate's aunt makes $83/hr on the laptop. She has been without work for 8 months but last month her pay was $8682 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site...NuttyR|ch.c0m

I agree with Robert. You can't give up control to a automated system. You have to give the driver some intervention to override. You don't know when it's going to fail.

Also just look at all the rear ender because the driver in front applies the brake manually the and guy behind is driving too close or too fast and can't react fast enough and rear ends the car in front. It would be the same if the car in front had the system and the car behind didn't.

Both cars would need the system. Otherwise, there's no point. I the end, it's every driver's responsibility to keep their car in control.

Bureaucrats will not be satisfied until cars cost $100,000 each and no one can afford them. Well actually they have said this in writing it's the UN's agenda 21. God bless the gun grabbing UN.

*fly flies in front of sensor* SUDDEN STOP BOOM xD

To me this will be one of those nice ideas in theory but in practice will result in nothing but frustration. I don't see how this system would work for those of us that live near major cities. We often are on the interstate at 70 mph with only one or two car lengths between cars. Even with that little spacing we still fight to keep people from jumping into the slot in front of us. So now I have AEB, first I assume it will make me maintain a proper 7 car lengths spacing and then each time a person jumps into the space ahead of me my car will brake to maintain the "safe" follow distance. Well that would be maddening, your car constantly braking as people jump in front of you and nothing you can do about it. Also if the car behind you doesn't have AEB and you start hard braking as cars jump in front of you it looks like you're asking for a rear ender.

Like I said, nice idea but don't see it working with the way people drive around here.

I say do a NASA with it- Redundancy is key. Have each car have a type or RADAR, laser distancing, and each have a built in, high powered Wi-Fi, and have the cars tell eachother "Hey moron, I'm slowing down".

The Wi-Fi could also be used for self driving cars, specially in BIG cities with a lot of traffic. Just set up nodes all along the roadways, and then let the cars work like an agent-based program. You set a destination, and then the car will give you warnings about when you are coming close, letting you know you need to take control again. Other than that, the cars will give themselves PERFECT distance, and youi could even do some work in your car, using the Wi-Fi to get online and do some paperwork.

Course that would cost millions and be a logical idea, so of course the governmant won't authorize it. Not the millions of dollars part, but the logical part.

I think it will highly reduce the car accident.This type of inventions make our life safer in today's rush world.we all want to thank to the brain behind this.

sajin is absolutely write in my opinion. I think we can reduce deaths.

Nice...

_____________
http://www.corporatewellness.com.au/corporate-massage.php