Accident avoidance and lane following -- standard?

[bwilson4web]

NHTSA may impose more safety features | detnews.com | The Detroit News

Thursday, July 2, 2009
NHTSA may impose more safety features
Officials considering whether the cost of requiring the advanced systems is justifiable
David Shepardson / Detroit News Washington Bureau

Washington -- The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will decide whether to require two advanced safety features in new cars: systems that warn drivers when they are leaving a lane, and automatically brake ahead of an impending crash.

Safety experts say both systems show significant promise to sharply reduce the more than 40,000 yearly traffic fatalities and 2.5 million injuries in vehicle crashes.

In a report released Wednesday, NHTSA said it "will decide whether to require automatic crash-imminent braking ... (and) automatic lane-keeping" in 2011. It also sought public comment on its plans.
. . .

This is some of the best news I've read about vehicle safety in a long, long time. It is a sensible approach and made universal, it will bring the cost of these systems down significantly. It was the one option I wanted on my Prius but it would have cost $10,000 more due to the other 'eye candy' that I didn't need.

Bob Wilson

[Tideland Prius]

and add more weight to the base vehicle.

[yardman 49]

I worry about how much the automatic braking could contribute to highway backups?

Imagine that most cars on the road had this system. One car cutting into a lane could trigger a "deceleration cascade" reaction that could further contribute to those unexplained traffic backups that we all have probably experienced.

[Tideland Prius]

Originally Posted by yardman 49

I worry about how much the automatic braking could contribute to highway backups?

Imagine that most cars on the road had this system. One car cutting into a lane could trigger a "deceleration cascade" reaction that could further contribute to those unexplained traffic backups that we all have probably experienced.

Depends. When ggood was on the highway and some guy in a Lexus IS cut him off (California lane change from an onramp), PCS engaged the seatbelts but didn't brake so it won't cause a backup. Also, it'll let the car close into the other vehicle first (if at lower speeds). I tested the DRCC at 60km/h and it closed in before finally braking. (I had it set at the LONG setting).

[ggood]

The system will do some braking in various scenarios, but its not like it slams on the brakes (other than in extreme situations). It probably does a better job of slowing to just the right speed than most humans.

[hill]

I'm still missing & lamenting the Gen III (with collision avoidance) that we passed on ... . Trying to not dwell on that, here's another factor. From a products liability angle, it's highly likely ALL manufacturers will rush to standardize this feature, just like side curtain air bags are becoming more popular. Reason being, when technology is available, and manufacturers DON'T implement a proven safty feature ... and the feature would likely prevent the damage ... the manufacturer easily becomes responsible (at least in part) for the injury/damage. So to prevent exposure to negligent manufacturing claims, it's often more cost effective to just implement the safe feature as a standard feature.

.

[drees]

Originally Posted by yardman 49

I worry about how much the automatic braking could contribute to highway backups?

Automatic braking is only activated when the system detects that an accident is unavoidable.

So no, it won't contribute to highway backups. Hopefully, it will make accidents less severe so that highway backups are less severe when they occur.

[burritos]

Originally Posted by drees

Automatic braking is only activated when the system detects that an accident is unavoidable.

So no, it won't contribute to highway backups. Hopefully, it will make accidents less severe so that highway backups are less severe when they occur.

Can you deactivate the system if you wanted to intentionally run something or someone over?

[bwilson4web]

Originally Posted by burritos

Can you deactivate the system if you wanted to intentionally run something or someone over?

Roll up your windows so the 'beeps' won't be heard and use "R".

Bob Wilson

[drees]

Originally Posted by burritos

Can you deactivate the system if you wanted to intentionally run something or someone over?

Don't know, but it's not going to stop you from hitting something if you want to, only slow you down before you do.