Wednesday 21st August 2013

Look where you're going! PH Blog

Volvo's cyclist detection system wins an award; why we should all be worried

---

A few months back I was invited onto the panel of a discussion about cycling as part of a series of eco debates held in Islington off the back of a blog I wrote here. Not natural territory for a PH editor? Well, I did fear I was being set up as 'the voice of the enemy' and the embodiment of motorised terror. But with Boris Johnson's 'cycling tsar' Andrew Gilligan on the panel too I took a punt on not being the most hated man in the room.

Why am I telling you this and what does it have to do with four-wheeled PHers? Well, we might fuss and moan about the death of the manual gearbox and subsequent loss of interaction with our cars but Volvo's Cyclist Detection system, which has just earned an award at the 'Techies', symbolises to me a more worrying and pernicious trend.

Autonomous driving, as tested by PistonHeads

Basically Volvo's system bleeps if a cyclist pulls out and can even brake the car to a halt. The designers clearly haven't ever driven in London because if that were to happen every time a bike moved in front of a car there'd be gridlock. And a lot of stationary Volvos, bleeping. Which would at least censor the responses of those stuck behind.

From a two- or four-wheeled perspective these systems scare the bejesus out of me, based on the fact that anything that removes a sense of responsibility from either party can't be a good thing. If cyclists think they can stick their headphones on and ride out in front of cars and they'll stop of their own accord and drivers reckon they don't need to look any more we're reaching a very worrying state of affairs.

Same applies to all these lane-keeping assistance systems, automated braking doo-dads, blind-spot warnings, sat-nav driven 'predictive' gear changing and the rest. If we're going to have autonomous driving then let's just crack on and do it - as PH has proved with typical scientific rigourwe're pretty much there already, freeing you up to, in Nick's case, do crazy jazz hands poses. Or text, or snooze or whatever else.

Meanwhile those of us Luddites who do still want to drive can get back to using the old Mk1 Eyeball and relying on common sense and a bit of mutual respect. Sound like a deal?

Dan

[Dan Trent]

I'll get in there first - let's not use this as a 'this berk on a bike...' or 'some idiot in a van...' anecdote face-off.

Please!

I'm sure we've all got plenty of stories of both types. I know I have. But there's a debate about the automation of driving in there and that's the on topic bit I'd like to focus on if poss.

Ta!

Dan

[Daffy]

This should be renamed the Dan Trent Fight Prevention System... I'd definitely get it installed.

[Froomee]

Safety devices that protect the occupants or pedestrians should be welcomed within reason i.e. airbags, seat belts, crumple zones, plastic bumpers, etc.

Devices that automate any of the basic aspects of driving should be forgotten about i.e. this, automatic braking, lane guidance maybe even automatic gearboxes

[Terminator X]

Too many "driver aids", please no fking more do they even ask drivers what they want ffs?!

TX.

[Impasse]

Dan Trent said:

let's not use this as a 'this berk on a bike...' or 'some idiot in a van...' anecdote face-off.

Good luck with that one!

[TheRoadWarrior]

"If cyclists think they can stick their headphones on and ride out in front of cars and they'll stop of their own accord and drivers reckon they don't need to look any more we're reaching a very worrying state of affairs."


As both a PH'er and avid cyclist-ist I completely agree.

[johnster1991]

TheRoadWarrior said:

"If cyclists think they can stick their headphones on and ride out in front of cars and they'll stop of their own accord and drivers reckon they don't need to look any more we're reaching a very worrying state of affairs."


As both a PH'er and avid cyclist-ist I completely agree.

+1

[Horse Pop]

I'd much prefer a system that slightly electrocutes you if it detects you fart arseing around with with your phone instead of watching the road.

[Dan Trent]

Impasse said:

Good luck with that one!

Can but try, eh?

And Daffy? Ssh.

Dan

[83AndyJ]

Dan's point is already proven every time fog, mist or rain descends to our roads. Countless cars with automatic headlights not lit! Many of the drivers in these vehicles have become so used to not concerning themselves about lights.

[mikeveal]

It does not need to automatically hit the brakes, or sound a beeper.

But if it automatically sounded the horn and aimed a washer jet at the offending two wheeled pedestrian, then it may become a popular system.

Education has to be better than last minute avoiding action, especially when the alternative is cyclists learning rely on the automated brakers to move with impunity. No?

[Cotty]

"Basically Volvo's system bleeps if a cyclist pulls out and can even brake the car to a halt".
At what distance? I can see this being a problem when you meet cyclists riding two abreast on a country lane. Every time you get near them to overtake the car will brake.

[Leins]

And here's where I get very worried, when cities start banning cars without these features!

[Zajda]

Terminator X said:

Too many "driver aids", please no fking more do they even ask drivers what they want ffs?!

TX.

But it's one of the few areas where a mass production manufacturer can profile itself above the rest these days. They can basically invent new driver assist system or new eco system, practical aspects are only going to be worse in future. Let's be honest, mechanically and in terms of handling, performance and driver enjoyment, cars already reached their pinnacle. Slight advances in technology from late 90's to nowadays are far outweighted by safety and emission demands. So what to do when you are no more able to differentiate your car in most important areas or even sustain the qualities of previous generations of your cars?

Edited by Zajda on Wednesday 21st August 14:13

[BOR]

Fact is that drivers can't be relied upon to not crash into pedestrians and cyclists.

Automatic rcognition/braking is needed simply because drivers have shown that they just don't have the skills they think they do.

[ianrb]

If this is the same "Collision Avoidance System" I have on my Volvo, then it's a load of crap. I beeps when you pass a parked car, it beeps when there is man walking his dog (on the pavement), it beeps when you're carefully threading your way between cars stopped on the approach to a roundabout, it pretty much much beeps at everything which you are in no danger of driving into. And then the one time it could be helpful it just becomes a distraction, ie dragging your attention from where it should be, what is happening outside the car, to a flashing red light on the dashboard.

After 6 months I concluded it was more of a liability than an asset, so I switched it off.

[AyBee]

Fully agree, the problem is, some people don't use the mk1 eyeball in any orientation other than straight ahead. Having said that, I would hazard a guess that the number of times this system will actually come in useful are extremely few in number and the number of times it will be a pain will be lots.

[theholygrail]

I always think of the humans in WALL-E when I read articles of this nature. If you've seen the film you'll know what I mean!

[Gazunder]

Terminator X said:

Too many "driver aids", please no fking more do they even ask drivers what they want ffs?!

No, they respond to the output of bureaucrats and politicians.

[Tomatogti]

Froomee said:

Safety devices that protect the occupants or pedestrians should be welcomed within reason i.e. airbags, seat belts, crumple zones, plastic bumpers, etc.

Devices that automate any of the basic aspects of driving should be forgotten about i.e. this, automatic braking, lane guidance maybe even automatic gearboxes

+1. Cars are becoming too automated. As a cyclist and a car driver I hate the thought of a computer ensuring a collision doesn't happen