Driver assist tools leading to disconnected drivers?

If I may harp: even better than buttons, say for Heating/Ventilating controls, are knobs and sliders, with detents. Near at hand you can adjust controls without ever taking your eyes off the road. A row of uniform buttons, you still have to look down, recognize and grok the icon. Even more distracting is a single button that you have to push repeatedly, while watching an LCD display, to cycle through all the options. Go too fast, you go by the one you want, have to start from the top. This isn't progress.

 

Your conclusion is unsupported.
I contend, that while some drivers may rely too much on driver assist tech, more of them are safer because of it.
Due to driver assist safety features, there are fewer accidents and the ones that do occur are less severe than without the driver assist tech.

Yes, fatalities are up. Do you have any evidence that any part of that is due to driver assist technology?

 

i never said more were in danger or less because of tech, the whole premise here is that some people are letting it lull them into a false sense of security.
you're creating a new argument then the article states, and i'm not sure why, or what you're trying to accomplish by it.

 

Except, the claim 'there are fewer accidents' is demonstrably false. Overall traffic fatalities are rising, and much faster than the increase in vehicle miles traveled.

Causes and effects remain TBD.

Nope, I do not yet see any evidence or consensus as to the cause and effect, other than increased miles driven due to the improved economy can account for, at best, one-third of the increased deaths.

Likewise, I believe you lack any evidence of the true role played by any driver assist technology. It remains TBD. It is theoretically possible for risk homeostasis or other factors to completely wipe out the potential advantages of this technology, either as a whole, or as individual pieces among the many components.

 

No, it is quite reasonable to expect that the there are fewer accidents in vehicles operating with driver assist controls active.
That is a subset, and as the majority of cars don't have this tech yet, it would not be enough to fully offset the increase due to other reasons.

According to one article I read, some of the preliminary reasons given are increased miles driven, alcohol, increased speed and distraction.
Distraction includes putting on makeup, reading, eating, texting, etc.

Now, I don't know that driver assist controls have been responsible for avoiding more than two accidents last year. Likewise, you don't know they haven't.
The original article is a poor one, as people seem to be inferring that driver assist tech is leading to more accidents, when that has not been shown.

 

I'm guilty of drifting too.

 

radio's/music are probably still distracting to this day. i think the point missing in the above studies is that 'some' people allow themselves to be more distracted because they think their car is safer and can do more. which it is, and it can, but dangerously without driver attention.

 

No, it is quite UNreasonable to assume that such has actually happened in the real world, until the evidence starts coming it. So far, it remains too early for that. The real result remains TBD.

Many previous safety improvements have produced substantially less fatality reduction out in the real world than earlier research projected. Risk homeostasis, or risk compensation, seems to be one of the reasons for actual results to fall short of expectations. I know of no reason why these new driver assists should be exempt from this phenomenon.

As Raspy quoted another source:

I believe the key word here is 'eventually'. At this particular point in time, the expectations of many drivers and commentators are clearly getting ahead of the currently deployed technology. We simply don't know whether or not we are yet achieving an overall benefit. It is quite possible that complacency generated by over-expectations could wipe out the safety gains of the less-than-fully-autonomous systems.

I'm still waiting for the measured results.

 

I'd like "number of fatalities" to be re-defined, or at least the statistics broken down. Here, a few years ago, the authorities were making a big deal about speed being a killer. (nope, a revenue raiser). Then finally was a statistic - a real one - which implicated alcohol with a vast percentage of those fatalities. But it's easier to catch a speeding motorist than one who is "over the limit" - unless he's dead. In the same report it indicated that MotorCyclist deaths increased dis-proportionally more than with cars - I reckon they should be a separate statistic altogether, along with late night drunk pedestrians.

It would be particularly interesting to see how many of the fatalities were in cars had City Safe Braking, DRCC, Lane Assist etc (proportionally)?

 

Now, of only they could forecast tomorrow's UK weather with such certainty!

 

No more unreasonable than to assume driver assist technologies are causing more accidents overall.
I agree, the evidence, beyond anecdotal, is minimal at this point.

You misunderstand me. I am not suggesting it is immune from that phenomenon.
I'm simply saying this tech is preventing some accidents. How many? I don't know.
I do not, however, believe the tech is causing more accidents than it is preventing.
Thus, the statement that this tech is lulling some drivers to be disconnected is true.
But this tech is preventing some accidents is also true.

My position is simply that the later statement represents a greater number than the former.

Interesting quote, but the bold doesn't mean the first part is canceled out...

I believe the key statement is "is also helping mitigate...", present tense.
Again, my position isn't that this technology has eliminated the risk of inattention.
My position is that this tech mitigates the dangers of distraction more than it increases it.
What you quoted backs that up.

 

" .. .. nope a revenue raiser"

Ok so it's slightly off topic, but I want to challenge this often repeated claim that speed is not a killer and that the only reason for having speed limits is to raise revenue.

The underlying logic seems to be that motorists, or at least I the motorist, not always everyone else, should be trusted to decide what is an appropriate speed for me.

The culture here in the UK has swallowed this to the extent that many or even most people regard speed limits as optional and advisory unless there are Police or speed cameras about.

So is it ok for someone, if they in their judgement think it's ok, to drive at 50, 60 or 70mph, whatever speed they decide, past your front door or not Alan? Or past the school when your children are coming out? Or down a busy shopping street?

We either need speed limits or we don't. And if we need them, they won't exist in practice unless they are enforced. How can they?

Posted via the PriusChat mobile app.

 

I have had more close calls in my Prius than in any other car I've owned, it's ranked up there with my motorcycle. Part of that is certainly the safety sense. Just the other day taking the ramp from 6th ave to I-25, traffic was backed up on the ramp, I saw it but didn't watch it, I was busy watching a Ferrari on the other side of the interstate. I got the "BRAKE!!!!" sign and beeping. Truly I got the car shut down easily enough but I do seem to rely on those systems more and I feel I let myself get more distracted behind the wheel of the Prius than my other cars. I don't play with my phone but I play tourist much more, looking around at sights and sounds, making myself a sandwich, etc... That said, so far I'm very happy with Safety Sense and I wouldn't buy another new car without a similar system. I am curious how it will be on ice though. I'm not sure if I stomp the brake harder when I get the "WHOA, IDIOT!!! WHOA!!!" beeps or if the car is priming-the-pump to give me panic braking capability, but it seems to engage the stoppers pretty hard and I swear I've heard the tires lockup but no ABS kicks on.

Another (larger) part of my closes calls is other drivers. It seems as though no one gives the Prius any respect. They just pull out in front of it or cut it off on a regular basis. I don't think most people are doing this because Prius, I think the reason is because it's a small car (relative to what else is on the road) with a relatively small frontal area. I run with the DRLs on, I can't imagine what it'd be like without them. It also seems to sneak up on and surprise pedestrians quite a bit, which I find entertaining to be honest. I roll through parking lots at 5 mph or less so they're at a minimum risk from me compared to so many SUVs running closer to 30 mph. I guess people don't hear the noise maker on the front of it, or they don't associate that sound with "here comes a car." Either way, I really should get a dash cam because it's just a matter of time until this car gets wrecked because of another driver (or maybe my distracted self).

 

i think it's because it's a prius. i've run small vehicles all my life, never had this happen in my miata, mob, try and etc. sure, they don't always see small cars and motorcycles, but there are a lot of intentionally dangerous maneuvers around the prius. sorry for the drift/rant!

 

Sure, all car accessories including phones, children, coffee, radio and all distract from the main purpose....driving.

Plus, driver aids lead to a false sense of invincibility.

FWIW My best advice is to drive like you are invisible to other vehicles and pedestrians.

 

Don't you think that second part only applies to those with attention deficit disorder.

 

Does that mean that the German government will also instruct plane manufacturers and airlines to stop calling autopilot in planes autopilot, it smacks of nanny state. The amount of warnings that Tesla's give about the autopilot function being a drivers aid and not a self driving function, they even have an explanation and disclaimer come on the screen when you initially enable it.

Why is it that we end up having to dumb things down to the lowest common denominator, people really need to take responsibility for themselves.

 

if you have to ask, you'll never know.