Mandatory anti-tailgate technology after EU ruling

[martinbiz]

bigothunter said:

r3g said:

martinbiz said:

Whoever told you that is talking utter B*ll*cks

Company policy. Don't like it, there's the door.

Yup

Professional drivers have been provided with safety 'enhancements' and are expected to use them. Similar to Health & Safety procedures. I wonder if car insurance policies will work the same way.

I mistakenly thought r3g was saying his ins co had said it which would have been utter B*ll*cks, but I see he's talking about a directive from his employer and I agree they make the rules (to a point) however stupid

[BertBert]

No ideas for a name said:

Yes it is 'just' software.
In the case of active cruise, it is a fairly simple algorthm to lock on to the vehicle in front and do a follow. On mine, the gap can be adjusted, so it lets you tailgate quite happily (I am uncomfortable if set at its minimum gap - too close for me). Not sure if mine uses just radar, or if it uses the cameras as well, but very few times does it get confused.
In no way would I say this is anti-tailgating.

The AEB on the other hand, it is a very complex problem for a dumb machine to solve. A human, even a fairly dumb one can tell the differences between say trees on the outside of a bend, parked vehicles, moving vehicles and do a reasonable job of predicting the path of moving vehicles.
With the current state of play, it appears dangerous to me. I can't see how it has got through any approvals. I suppose there is a formula that 'proves' it saves more colisions than it causes.

Again, this doesn't seem to be anti-tailgating Maybe I don't drive close enough to see it kick in... only time I have had it panic is when someone on the Motorway pulled in front of me very closely when doing say 5mph MORE than me (ie. the gap was increasing), the AEB started shouting but didn't apply the brakes.

It worst feature at the moment is in the situation when approaching traffic lights with a left filter/slip. You can be driving along, indicate left with a clear road peeling off to the left, when it suddenly 'sees' the stopped traffic for straight ahead and slams on.

To be fair, though it is always a shock as it isn't consistant, it does let you overide it by just pressing the accelerator.

This

[Dog Star]

QuickQuack said:

There's one set of bollards on a curved section of road which triggers every alarm and abruptly slams the brakes on in Mrs QQ's car. Every. Single. Time.

Generally I’m all in favour of this stuff, however this is something I don’t want to happen to the car in front of me if I’m behind it on my bike cranked over and the car automatically slams the brakes on

[BertBert]

Dog Star said:

Generally I’m all in favour of this stuff, however this is something I don’t want to happen to the car in front of me if I’m behind it on my bike cranked over and the car automatically slams the brakes on

I know that the theory is that it's the driver behind who needs to keep a gap in case the car in front does an emergency stop, but in normal flowing traffic if the car in front does a random full emergency stop with all the power of an emergency brake assist system, it will cause an accident every time.

[Snappy89]

Not sure you can call this anti-tailgating technology.

It won't stop you sitting on someone's rear bumper if you're so inclined even with the system activated. It only cares about closing speed for the most part.
A system that prevented the car from getting within a set distance of a car in front in any circumstances would be a true anti-tailgate system.

[Red9zero]

Picked up a new (to me) Mazda CX5 a couple of weeks ago and it has a collision avoidance system on it. First time it went off was when the car in front of me suddenly braked and turned left. We were nowhere near him as we carried straight on, but the system decided to slam the brakes on. Luckily there was nothing behind us, as we stopped so quickly (I was actually impressed) they would have had a job to hit us. I have managed to turn the sensitivity down as much as I can, but it seems it can't be deactivated completely.

[Glenn63]

I had an incident with this great ‘safety technology’ in a Mercedes hgv a few years back. 40 mph limit going round a slight left bend with a car waiting to turn right in a centre hatched lane, out of no where full blown emergency stop to a standstill. I didn’t even know this technology was a thing back then. Luckily no one behind and I was empty but any other truckers on here that have had to brake hard no that when that cab dips under hard braking it feels like your getting launched out the windscreen! Also bruised my shoulder from the seat belt.

[eccles]

The other slight issue (well, on VAG cars) is that if you have snow or a build up of bugs the sensor can't 'see' so the the systems get turned off. So just when you need it on a snowy motorway the system doesn't work!

[Derek Smith]

JimSuperSix said:

ruggedscotty said:

There’s a presumption that the rear driver is to blame for a rear-end accident, but that presumption can be overcome. If a driver brakes very abruptly without a reasonable cause for doing so (like braking suddenly and totally in the middle of an open road with no traffic or traffic signals nearby) and a rear-end collision ensues, the lead driver may actually be the one who’s to blame.

Actually it would be very difficult to prove. and thats the thing. its always the one the drives into the other car to blame. unless they reverse into the other car...

Well really the car behind is still to blame as they should always allow enough space for car in front to do an emergency stop, no matter whether the stop may appear unnecessary to the car behind as there could be some reason thats blocked from view by the car in front.

Any presumption in law can be overcome, and that goes for rearending. There can be circumstances where the lead vehicle might share some of the blame, or even the majority. Most accidents are not 100% one driver's fault.

[anonymous-user]

Derek Smith said:

JimSuperSix said:

ruggedscotty said:

There’s a presumption that the rear driver is to blame for a rear-end accident, but that presumption can be overcome. If a driver brakes very abruptly without a reasonable cause for doing so (like braking suddenly and totally in the middle of an open road with no traffic or traffic signals nearby) and a rear-end collision ensues, the lead driver may actually be the one who’s to blame.

Actually it would be very difficult to prove. and thats the thing. its always the one the drives into the other car to blame. unless they reverse into the other car...

Well really the car behind is still to blame as they should always allow enough space for car in front to do an emergency stop, no matter whether the stop may appear unnecessary to the car behind as there could be some reason thats blocked from view by the car in front.

Any presumption in law can be overcome, and that goes for rearending. There can be circumstances where the lead vehicle might share some of the blame, or even the majority. Most accidents are not 100% one driver's fault.

Yes there are always exceptions, but in the described scenario of an open road then imho theres no excuse for the following car to not keep enough distance to avoid the vehicle in front doing an emergency stop. What you could persuade a court to make of it is something else i suppose - i wonder how they would aportion blame if the emergency stop was triggered by the cars electronics. Personally i still think the following car is 100% to blame as i dont think theres any excuse for driving too close.

[Its Just Adz]

r3g said:

Hope it works better on cars than it does on trucks. It is fking ste and incredibly dangerous. 4 completely different DAF artics I drive have it (AEBS) and for reasons completely unknown, the bridge on the M61 southbound at the top of the hill before Bolton services slams the brakes on just before you go underneath it, for no reason whatsoever. They've been into DAF umpteen times about it, no fault found, working fine!

We can switch it off, but they see if we have any kind of accident regardless of blame, we'll be deemed to be at fault for switching it off. Yeah...

Always slams on when you have a car in front of you that's peeled off onto a slip road exit on a dual carriageway. The car is long since out of the way and no hazard whatsoever, but the AEBS thinks you're about to ram into the back of it.

I had it on a DAF XF, fully loaded with crane parts and it went crazy and slammed brakes on as it saw a bridge on the M5.
I crapped myself.

[Biggy Stardust]

bigothunter said:

Armchair_Expert said:

Not always easy to find though. Mrs Experts Kuga has that f---ing lane change vibration fight the wheel thing, I haver to manually disable it every time and it's deep within a menu.

Because legislators don't want you to turn it off.

And on the next generation, you won't be able to

Stage 1- where's the problem? You can disable it
Stage 2- why do you need to disable it? What do you have against safety?

[BertBert]

Biggy Stardust said:

Stage 1- where's the problem? You can disable it
Stage 2- why do you need to disable it? What do you have against safety?

If it was safer then maybe. But actually I have a lot against safety. I do many things that I am happy with the risk. They can all be made safer by not doing them, but I'm happy with the level of risk.

I fell off my mountain bike on Sunday on Barry knows best. I could have been safer staying in bed.

I'm happy that me and my car brake just well enough thanks.

Bert

[Terminator X]

I'm not a fan of all this nannying however tbf my car has auto braked a couple of times and stopped me reversing into something. Almost causes whiplash though it is so severe and unexpected!

TX.

[anonymous-user]

How long before car stickers appear stating "this car has automatic braking"..... As a reason for the unexplained brakes...

[CoolHands]

It will all be fine

[playamonte]

Now if they could just design something useful like a system that prevents cars entering a motorway from immediately heading to the outside lane regardless of conditions or traffic around them.

Edited by playamonte on Friday 24th June 08:17

[rampageturke]

All I could think about from the title is this

https://youtu.be/jGThY173H-8?t=242

[catso]

Snappy89 said:

Not sure you can call this anti-tailgating technology.

It won't stop you sitting on someone's rear bumper if you're so inclined even with the system activated. It only cares about closing speed for the most part.
A system that prevented the car from getting within a set distance of a car in front in any circumstances would be a true anti-tailgate system.

If anything I think it encourages tailgating, disengage your brain and drive as close as possible to the car in front. I've certainly noticed more 'sheep' like following on rural and 'A' roads, not necessarily due to to tech but brain-dead drivers.

As for autonomous braking, my Wife's Audi Q2 has it and regularly applies the brakes for no apparent reason - there's a road nearby with a cattle grid at the bottom of a dip and on a sunny afternoon (with the sun in it's face) it will activate the brakes. A couple of times it has done it quite harshly, can only assume it 'thinks' the grid is a gate or something?

[NGee]

Biggy Stardust said:

Stage 2- why do you need to disable it? What do you have against safety?

Have you read the thread? It doesn't sound like much of a safety device to me.