Mandatory anti-tailgate technology after EU ruling

[toon10]

It would have to work better than it does now. I borrowed the Mrs XC60 last week and was driving through the Tyne Tunnel. The cars in front came to a stop and I had anticipated this and started to brake when the car decided that maybe my efforts weren't good enough so decided to judder, ping alarming sounds and flash messages at me on the screen. It was really distracting and off putting. The juddering was the worst part. The only part of the whole experience that could have caused an accident was the way the car took over and not my own inputs.

I'm all for safety and protecting my family but there's a lot of work to be done to make these systems behave in a safe way.

[sospan]

Is there a minimum standard that these systems must meet?
Comments indicate that the system makes false decisions caused by traffic in different lanes, roadside obstacles being common reasons.
Surely the ability to differentiate these must be up to a minimum standard? If a system allows such misreading then how can it be deemed fit for use?
Speed cameras have to be approved and meet accuracy standards but thereafter an allowance is built in to allow for vehicle speedometer inaccuracy.
I am getting a new car next week and am going to check out how such systems work.
Adaptive cruise control I might be in favour of, lane sensing less so, auto braking a big no. I don’t have confidence in it based on the anecdotal evidence of failings.

[vaud]

toon10 said:

It would have to work better than it does now. I borrowed the Mrs XC60 last week and was driving through the Tyne Tunnel. The cars in front came to a stop and I had anticipated this and started to brake when the car decided that maybe my efforts weren't good enough so decided to judder, ping alarming sounds and flash messages at me on the screen. It was really distracting and off putting. The juddering was the worst part. The only part of the whole experience that could have caused an accident was the way the car took over and not my own inputs.

I'm all for safety and protecting my family but there's a lot of work to be done to make these systems behave in a safe way.

I have an 2014 XC60 with the full BLIS pack and haven't encountered that. Which year is yours?

[aterribleusername]

Its Just Adz said:

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.

We have DAF trucks at work too and the AEBS is woeful, good to hear it's common and not just ours. One of our drivers had to explain why he had a spilled load (a part load fell over inside the back, didn't escape) after the AEBS slammed the brakes on at 56mph on a clear road for no reason whatsoever. The dashcam footage showed a small bird crossing his path for a split second but that seemingly was enough to trigger a full-blown emergency stop. We all turn it off as a matter of course now.

[Countdown]

vaud said:

toon10 said:

It would have to work better than it does now. I borrowed the Mrs XC60 last week and was driving through the Tyne Tunnel. The cars in front came to a stop and I had anticipated this and started to brake when the car decided that maybe my efforts weren't good enough so decided to judder, ping alarming sounds and flash messages at me on the screen. It was really distracting and off putting. The juddering was the worst part. The only part of the whole experience that could have caused an accident was the way the car took over and not my own inputs.

I'm all for safety and protecting my family but there's a lot of work to be done to make these systems behave in a safe way.

I have an 2014 XC60 with the full BLIS pack and haven't encountered that. Which year is yours?

My wife has a 65-plate XC60 D5 and it's only activated once (City centre traffic, A-Class in front of me had to emergency brake. I braked but possibly not hard enough and the AEB kicked in). It's never activated ay any other time, to the point where I used to think it might not be working!.

Re: the thread - I wonder if people felt the same way about ABS or airbags or crash helmets when they were first made mandatory.....it's not in the manufacturers interests to make the systems inefficient and unwieldy and (IMO) if they become mandatory they'll improve pretty quickly to an acceptable standard. And if it stops nobheads from tailgating then all the better.

[Its Just Adz]

aterribleusername said:

We have DAF trucks at work too and the AEBS is woeful, good to hear it's common and not just ours. One of our drivers had to explain why he had a spilled load (a part load fell over inside the back, didn't escape) after the AEBS slammed the brakes on at 56mph on a clear road for no reason whatsoever. The dashcam footage showed a small bird crossing his path for a split second but that seemingly was enough to trigger a full-blown emergency stop. We all turn it off as a matter of course now.

I'm on a Volvo truck now which has a similar system, though doesn't seem as intrusive.
I turn off the lane keeping thing as its just annoying., but leave on AEBS.

[r3g]

Its Just Adz said:

I'm on a Volvo truck now which has a similar system, though doesn't seem as intrusive.
I turn off the lane keeping thing as its just annoying., but leave on AEBS.

I don't know a single wagon driver that doesn't turn that crap off as soon as they get in ! They can't even get that right either - the stupid thing goes into a frenzy if you're going through roadworks where the white lines have been partially painted out. Pretty much all of these supposed driver aids are more of a hindrance and distraction than a help.

[vaud]

Do any truck insurance premiums require the use of the fitted safety systems?

[irc]

Derek Smith said:

I have it on my VW cruise control. The gap it leaves is such that I keep having cars pull into the gap I leave, meaning my car slows, frightening the life out of the driver behind. In fact, it's got to the stage where I now disengage CC when I realised someone's going to confuse the damn thing. I mean, I end up going backwards in top gear.

Similar system on my Skoda. Makes it unusable in many situations. Nothing more annoying than the car braking when an actual driver , at most, just eases off the pedal, maybe the gap closes a bit, then applies the gas again when required.

As an aside. Does the cruise control braking hit the rear brake lights?

As for the brake warning. Regular false activations. Typical example I'm following a car turning off I don't brake because I know it will be out my way when I reach it and even if was to do an emergency stop I can steer behind it.

Sometimes an the nearing the crest of a hill it will activate because it sees an overhead gantry as being at road level. For example ....

https://goo.gl/maps/UVketev1Dq7uMqaF8

The VW/Skoda system will brake for up to 19mph.

"Judging the speed and distance of other road users isn’t always easy, so Front Assist does it for you. It uses radar sensors to measure the distance and relative speed of other vehicles ahead and provides you with an early warning system. If it detects a potential rear-end collision, Front Assist alerts you visually and audibly, while also preparing the brakes for emergency braking.

The city emergency brake function is active in urban traffic at speeds up to 19 miles per hour. If you don’t brake enough Front Assist boosts the braking pressure to prevent a collision. And if you don’t brake at all Front Assist automatically steps in and does it for you. It’s a bit like having an attentive front passenger beside you with their own brake pedal."

https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/en/technology/driver-...

I'm fine with that. I wouldn't be happy withthe car braking for me at higher speeds as false activations could be risky.

At parking speeds it applies the brakes hard if you are about to hit a high kerb or wall. Abit irritating if you are reversing against a hedge but on balance a good thing. Would also brake if someone walked behind your car while you reversed.

Edited by irc on Saturday 25th June 19:01

Edited by irc on Saturday 25th June 19:05

[bigothunter]

vaud said:

Do any truck insurance premiums require the use of the fitted safety systems?

For cars, ADAS has increased cost of insurance premiums in the States

npr said:

Many new cars sold today can take preemptive action to help prevent crashes — hitting the brakes before a collision, steering around obstacles or alerting drivers to hazards in their blind spots.

Those safety features — collectively known as advanced driver-assistance systems, or ADAS — reduce the risk of crashes. It might seem logical to assume that as a result, they'd reduce the cost of car insurance.

But instead, these advanced safety features can actually drive premiums up. That's because when such cars do get in crashes, the repairs are more expensive — thanks to the suite of sensors and computers that make these features possible.

"At least thus far, the improvements in safety and accident avoidance hasn't been significant enough to overtake the increase in cost to repair vehicles," says Michael Klein, the president of personal insurance at Travelers. The increase in repair costs gets passed on to consumers, he says.


https://www.npr.org/2019/06/15/728256381/why-safer...

[M4cruiser]

JimSuperSix said:

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.

Everyone should always drive so that they can stop if the car in front stops for any reason, Even from 70 to 0 in the middle lane of a motorway with no reason, the driver behind should always be able to stop.
But then we all get it wrong sometimes.
And overtakers pull in front of me before they are 2 seconds ahead.

I'm amazed how some drivers seem to assume their car will always work. Mechanical things do go wrong. Brakes do fail. Suspensions break. Even transmissions lock up at speed.

[Vanity Projects]

bigothunter said:

Armchair_Expert said:

The system is downright dangerous and regularly misunderstands parked cars, passing wildlife and angles of approach.

Awful idea.

Mandatory AEB can still be switched off after starting the engine. But default is switched on and most drivers won't interfere.

Seems fun time is coming

Wife’s Jazz has it and pulling away from the kerb on the school run the other day it triggered and emergency stopped on me because I lifted for a large speed bump and the down pitch of the nose (at sub 10mph) was enough to trick it into thinking the raised bump was the arse of a car.

Full anchors in the road and many puzzled parents wondering why I’d stopped dead in the middle of the road

[skwdenyer]

M4cruiser said:

Everyone should always drive so that they can stop if the car in front stops for any reason, Even from 70 to 0 in the middle lane of a motorway with no reason, the driver behind should always be able to stop.
But then we all get it wrong sometimes.
And overtakers pull in front of me before they are 2 seconds ahead.

I'm amazed how some drivers seem to assume their car will always work. Mechanical things do go wrong. Brakes do fail. Suspensions break. Even transmissions lock up at speed.

Not being able to stop seems to have been normalised now. When Chris Harris crashed his 911 not so long ago, his justification was that he’d come around a blind bend and found another vehicle stationary, so what could he do?

Obviously older 911s of the slow in / fast out persuasion might have been safe for him

[MustangGT]

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.

In all the cars I have driven with it it does not operate unless you fail to indicate for a lane change, I personally see no problem with it.

You could even go as far as saying it helps teach proper driving skills by warning you to remember to indicate on changing lanes?

[irc]

MustangGT said:

In all the cars I have driven with it it does not operate unless you fail to indicate for a lane change, I personally see no problem with it.

You could even go as far as saying it helps teach proper driving skills by warning you to remember to indicate on changing lanes?

But lane change signals are not always required. Changing because nearside lane is closed and there are no other cars nearby etc.

My wife's Suzuki has it and the first thing I do is turn it off.

[anonymous-user]

irc said:

MustangGT said:

In all the cars I have driven with it it does not operate unless you fail to indicate for a lane change, I personally see no problem with it.

You could even go as far as saying it helps teach proper driving skills by warning you to remember to indicate on changing lanes?

But lane change signals are not always required. Changing because nearside lane is closed and there are no other cars nearby etc.

My wife's Suzuki has it and the first thing I do is turn it off.

Signals are not always required. You only need to signal if there is someone there to benefit from said signal.

[carlove]

I've had AEB for 4 years now, it's activated twice, once it saved me, once it caused an issue.

First time approaching an empty roundabout, I think car in front has gone, double check right, car emergency stops, car in front had stopped for an invisible car.

Second time less good, car in front simultaniosly brakes hard and puts a left indicator on at the last possible second, I start moving around said car as seems better than slamming on and i have a clear view ahead of it, car has other ideas and slams on.

It does occasionally panic at parked cars, beeps at me, then calms down again, never braking in those situations.

I think overall it works pretty well, saved me once, caused an issue once. In 4 years and nearly 100k miles, I don't think that's bad going. It's on it's most sensitive setting, as that's what it defaults to when I turn the car on.

[AW111]

BertBert said:

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.

The first car accident I ever had : numpty cut in front of me and braked (on a wet road, pre ABS being common), I stopped about 1" from his bumper...

... and the car behind me ran into me
... and the car behind ran into them
...
In total, seven cars ran into the car in front.

[MustangGT]

Mr Spoon said:

irc said:

MustangGT said:

In all the cars I have driven with it it does not operate unless you fail to indicate for a lane change, I personally see no problem with it.

You could even go as far as saying it helps teach proper driving skills by warning you to remember to indicate on changing lanes?

But lane change signals are not always required. Changing because nearside lane is closed and there are no other cars nearby etc.

My wife's Suzuki has it and the first thing I do is turn it off.

Signals are not always required. You only need to signal if there is someone there to benefit from said signal.

Agreed they are not always needed, in those circumstances I just ignore the warnings and change lanes, however, surely you agree that the vast majority of lane changes do need a signal?

[jm doc]

MustangGT said:

Mr Spoon said:

irc said:

MustangGT said:

In all the cars I have driven with it it does not operate unless you fail to indicate for a lane change, I personally see no problem with it.

You could even go as far as saying it helps teach proper driving skills by warning you to remember to indicate on changing lanes?

But lane change signals are not always required. Changing because nearside lane is closed and there are no other cars nearby etc.

My wife's Suzuki has it and the first thing I do is turn it off.

Signals are not always required. You only need to signal if there is someone there to benefit from said signal.

Agreed they are not always needed, in those circumstances I just ignore the warnings and change lanes, however, surely you agree that the vast majority of lane changes do need a signal?

What, every time you want to move back into a lane after overtaking you signal? It's a complete pain.