Overcoming ISA and Lane Assist etc on post July 2024 Cars

[Sebring440]

drdino said:

119 said:

Some lane assist systems use the parking sensors.

I'm not aware of any such implementation and find difficult to believe they exist. Some PSA cars use the ultrasonics for blind spot detection (and the 308 mk1 and C4 mk1 had a weird system with cameras under the front bumper), but none that use them for lane assist.

I think he's getting confused with "park assist", but hey, it's the internet, and anyone can post anything.

Perhaps 119 can tell where he got this notion from?

[Mr Whippy]

Whataguy said:

The LKA on my 23 Toyota is great, as it's a semi-smart system.

It knows if there is a car stopped in your lane ahead that you are going to have to go around it, so won't trigger if you don't indicate.

If you take firm hold of the steering wheel when crossing white lines, it also knows you are in control and will not trigger. I can see from the dash that it has allowed it, as the white line display goes green to show allowed.

It's also smart enough to know that if you indicate one way and go another it will trigger. I had a VW loan car recently that was only programmed to check if the indicators were on, not which ones. You could indicate left and cross a white line on your right and the system wouldn't trigger - whereas the Toyota system can't be fooled.


I agree regarding the Honda system with my own 21 that was disposed of after a year it was so bad. Apparently it couldn't be updated, but Honda knew there were issues as newer models had a different camera unit with a wider field of view combined with improved software.

But aren’t you smart enough, and trained sufficiently, and physically capable, of doing all those tasks already any way?

So where is this helpful?

If you’re lazy, distracted, physically inhibited?


I’m baffled at that indicating logic. Who indicates say left, then turns right, by accident?
If you’re doing that you’re doing it on purpose, so what is it trying to stop you from doing? Exactly what you’re intending to do by the sounds of it?

[Smint]

I can understand AEBS because so many are simply not competent enough, and sadly too many could benefit from lane departure audible and vibratory warnings as they wander all over the shop distracted by the toys they must have, but i draw the line at any system which physically interferes with the steering, next thing you know they'll be itching to fit steer by wire only with the steering not actually connected mechanically giving an experience like some arcade type simulator, how is a driver supposed to feel through the steering as well as the seat of his/her pants what's actually happening under the tyres, what could possibly go wrong.

I'm about to be issued with a brand new tractor unit, despite such nudging systems being predicted by the maker's insiders themselves for some time now i'm so very glad it hasn't yet come to pass at least on what i'm getting, who the hell thinks that the steering nudging the drivers of 44 tonners is a sane idea, i'm thinking of fast moving twisty A roads where trucks and buses have to run on nearside and other white lines plus miles of shoddy road repairs and broken verges multiple times whilst passing each other with inches to spare at 100mph combined speeds, again what could possibly go wrong.

[blank]

Smint said:

I can understand AEBS because so many are simply not competent enough, and sadly too many could benefit from lane departure audible and vibratory warnings as they wander all over the shop distracted by the toys they must have, but i draw the line at any system which physically interferes with the steering, next thing you know they'll be itching to fit steer by wire only with the steering not actually connected mechanically giving an experience like some arcade type simulator, how is a driver supposed to feel through the steering as well as the seat of his/her pants what's actually happening under the tyres, what could possibly go wrong.

I'm about to be issued with a brand new tractor unit, despite such nudging systems being predicted by the maker's insiders themselves for some time now i'm so very glad it hasn't yet come to pass at least on what i'm getting, who the hell thinks that the steering nudging the drivers of 44 tonners is a sane idea, i'm thinking of fast moving twisty A roads where trucks and buses have to run on nearside and other white lines plus miles of shoddy road repairs and broken verges multiple times whilst passing each other with inches to spare at 100mph combined speeds, again what could possibly go wrong.

It's quite hard to implement on trucks (for now) as it relies on electrically assisted steering, whereas most trucks are still hydraulic.

It will come eventually though, and also open up "hands free" driving ability at the same time!!

[Pit Pony]

Smint said:

TheDeuce said:

In the case ok LKA that's plainly not true!

Am I not driving carefully and sensibly when I pull over to the edge of a narrow road when a truck is coming the other way? The LKA is determined to steer me away from the verge and back towards the truck!

That's not the system being an 'aid' is it? And I would go so far as to say that attempting to murder is 'that bad'

Won't life be interesting when said oncoming truck has the same system fitted.

I work in Product Development in the truck industry.
I've met the people that are responsible for making this happen....be afraid. (LoL)

[Pit Pony]

drdino said:

119 said:

Some lane assist systems use the parking sensors.

I'm not aware of any such implementation and find difficult to believe they exist. Some PSA cars use the ultrasonics for blind spot detection (and the 308 mk1 and C4 mk1 had a weird system with cameras under the front bumper), but none that use them for lane assist.

Maybe the parking assist uses the lane assist sensors?

[Smint]

blank said:

It's quite hard to implement on trucks (for now) as it relies on electrically assisted steering, whereas most trucks are still hydraulic.

It will come eventually though, and also open up "hands free" driving ability at the same time!!

Thankfully this tractor will be my last one.

[FMOB]

Pit Pony said:

Smint said:

TheDeuce said:

In the case ok LKA that's plainly not true!

Am I not driving carefully and sensibly when I pull over to the edge of a narrow road when a truck is coming the other way? The LKA is determined to steer me away from the verge and back towards the truck!

That's not the system being an 'aid' is it? And I would go so far as to say that attempting to murder is 'that bad'

Won't life be interesting when said oncoming truck has the same system fitted.

I work in Product Development in the truck industry.
I've met the people that are responsible for making this happen....be afraid. (LoL)

So, when the powers that be decided there was to be a the requirement and the spec for this was written, did any one consider the human factor or the broad spectrum of human responses to the intervention of the computer?

We already know the answer to this but was a consideration part of the spec or left to manufacturers to decide how much people will love or hate their implementation.

[Whataguy]

Mr Whippy said:

But aren’t you smart enough, and trained sufficiently, and physically capable, of doing all those tasks already any way?

So where is this helpful?

If you’re lazy, distracted, physically inhibited?


I’m baffled at that indicating logic. Who indicates say left, then turns right, by accident?
If you’re doing that you’re doing it on purpose, so what is it trying to stop you from doing? Exactly what you’re intending to do by the sounds of it?

It’s now the law we have to have these systems - from a numbers point of view they will stop so many useless drivers from having accidents. If they annoy/cause crashes for a few experienced careful drivers, they don’t care from a numbers point of view.

Proving that if someone is indicating right but starts to drift out of their lane to the left because they aren’t paying attention, the poorly programmed system won’t stop the accident.

Edited by Whataguy on Monday 25th March 08:49

[Whataguy]

Smint said:

I can understand AEBS because so many are simply not competent enough, and sadly too many could benefit from lane departure audible and vibratory warnings as they wander all over the shop distracted by the toys they must have, but i draw the line at any system which physically interferes with the steering, next thing you know they'll be itching to fit steer by wire only with the steering not actually connected mechanically giving an experience like some arcade type simulator, how is a driver supposed to feel through the steering as well as the seat of his/her pants what's actually happening under the tyres, what could possibly go wrong.
.

The mk4 Honda jazz has been experiencing brake failures just out of warranty - £1800 to fix on a 3 year old car.

What’s failing is the ‘brake simulator’ that’s supposed to make the pedal feel like a normal car!

If it can happen to a safety critical system like brakes, it could easily happen to future steer by wire too.

[740EVTORQUES]

Mr Whippy said:

But aren’t you smart enough, and trained sufficiently, and physically capable, of doing all those tasks already any way?

So where is this helpful?

If you’re lazy, distracted, physically inhibited?


I’m baffled at that indicating logic. Who indicates say left, then turns right, by accident?
If you’re doing that you’re doing it on purpose, so what is it trying to stop you from doing? Exactly what you’re intending to do by the sounds of it?

Because even super smart, highly skilled drivers like you occasionally make mistakes. Why wouldn't you want a secondary layer of safety?

[Smint]

Whataguy said:

The mk4 Honda jazz has been experiencing brake failures just out of warranty - £1800 to fix on a 3 year old car.

What’s failing is the ‘brake simulator’ that’s supposed to make the pedal feel like a normal car!

If it can happen to a safety critical system like brakes, it could easily happen to future steer by wire too.

Exactly.

The whole point being, what was wrong with a steering mechanism mechanically linked so in the event of power assistance failure the driver still has steering control heavy as it might be.
Same with brakes.
The old saying is as valid today as it ever was, if it aint broke don't fix it.

[Smint]

Pit Pony said:

I work in Product Development in the truck industry.
I've met the people that are responsible for making this happen....be afraid. (LoL)

We are.
Pound to a penny those coming up with these bright ideas have never spent any appreciable length of time out on the road in the vehicles they're busy making 'safer' for us all.
We all know what its really about, the utopian dream of driveless vehicles, can't wait for 44 tonners to be going baout the country when error 404 crops up.

[Mr Whippy]

740EVTORQUES said:

Mr Whippy said:

But aren’t you smart enough, and trained sufficiently, and physically capable, of doing all those tasks already any way?

So where is this helpful?

If you’re lazy, distracted, physically inhibited?


I’m baffled at that indicating logic. Who indicates say left, then turns right, by accident?
If you’re doing that you’re doing it on purpose, so what is it trying to stop you from doing? Exactly what you’re intending to do by the sounds of it?

Because even super smart, highly skilled drivers like you occasionally make mistakes. Why wouldn't you want a secondary layer of safety?

So what is the risk in the above case?

I make two mistakes? Indicate one way then turn the other?

And another driver manoeuvres based on my indication and comes into conflict with me?


And that instead, upon turning the wrong way, the car buzzing the steering wheel, wakes me up, makes me indicate the other way whilst still steering, and within that second the other driver who also was only observing my indication and not my actual path, now also us suddenly awake, notices the updated indicator (despite my path being a clear indication at this late point), and avoids the accident?

Please explain where this prevents accidents.




For me, I feel that if the car is ‘buzzing’ me, it should explicitly do it only when I’ve made a genuine error.

If it’s doing it all the time I’ll ignore it or turn it off.

Almost every day I indicate one way but turn the other because of parked cars, road layouts, tight junctions etc.

[TheDeuce]

Smint said:

Exactly.

The whole point being, what was wrong with a steering mechanism mechanically linked so in the event of power assistance failure the driver still has steering control heavy as it might be.
Same with brakes.
The old saying is as valid today as it ever was, if it aint broke don't fix it.

What was wrong with walking/riding a horse?

Powered personal transport was a nice idea, so we developed it.

There are several benefits to bbw and sbw, so we're developing those things too. There are bound to be problems along the way.

[Pit Pony]

Smint said:

Pit Pony said:

I work in Product Development in the truck industry.
I've met the people that are responsible for making this happen....be afraid. (LoL)

We are.
Pound to a penny those coming up with these bright ideas have never spent any appreciable length of time out on the road in the vehicles they're busy making 'safer' for us all.
We all know what its really about, the utopian dream of driveless vehicles, can't wait for 44 tonners to be going baout the country when error 404 crops up.

To be fair, many of them have driven lots of test miles on both road and test track.
Not me. Never even sat in a truck.
And yet sometimes in meetings I feel like I've got more insight into what might go wrong....previous jobs have been project managing the development of smaller autonomous off road vehicles for military applications and putting automation into tanks and humvees, and before that in machinery safety in factories.

https://dconcepts.co.uk/products/x-series

https://dconcepts.co.uk/case-study/fv510-warrior

[jonvamplew]

SuperPav said:

As somewhat involved in the topic...

Re non uk compliance with GSR
Superpav have you any of this in writing
I import 16 to 40 seat coaches based on merc sprinters
The coach builder & europe is currently on melt
Over end of series derogation, to get vehicles in build registered after july 2024
Im trying to get it in black & white that uk is not going down tte route of gsr in 2024 (next order batch will all be gsr which will be 2025 deliveries)
Ive tried contacting vca in uk but have no reply

The requirement for ISA is a UNECE requirement falling under GSR II regulations

1) It currently applies to EU type approval
2) It does not apply in GB as GSR II has not been adopted. Note that it *does* apply in Northern Ireland, somewhat complicating things.
3) Manufacturers who build cars in Europe so far have been reluctant to "code it out" for GB cars, as most of them currently rely on a EU certification which gets (in simple terms) copied across for a GB Type Approval. As the CoC document printed when the car rolls off the factory has an EU type approval number, they must technically meet those requirements when they're built. This will continue as long as manufacturers still use the EU type approval as their basis. Once the scheme runs out in a couple of years and a GB type approval is required, then you may see slight divergence in spec/logic.
4) UK manufacturers who build cars here and have GB type approval and directly already print CoCs with the GB Type Approval number on it can easily not have this feature on by default, but so far it seems they're not using this freedom....
3) As it is not required by GB type approval, the "default setting" of ISA can be disabled before registration in UK without any issues not withstanding the above concerns of EU-type aproved and manufactured cars.
4) ISA "default setting" can also be disabled after registration without any legal issues. Worth asking your manufacturer to disable it via a service fix (I suspect all will have a complete variety of responses to this!!)
5) Disabling it yourself (or via third party) via coding will have the same impact as coding anything else out on a car with regards to warranty. It should not affect any hardware warranty claim, but if your car has a module or electrical fault, then it could be a factor (which is fair as there is no guarantee that during coding some bizarre network message or other unwanted side effect doesn't take place).
6) I wouldn't have thought that disabling the default setting flag would make any difference to the insurance as it's a system taht even by it's legal definition needs to be able to turned off ("driver in full control at all times"), but I work on the auto side of things and not insurance so someone else will be best placed to advise.


Lane keeping is under different regulations and is trickier as that part of UNECE has been adopted into GB type approval requirements. So anything Pre-Registration is out. Post-registration as above, as technically not part of C&U regs.