My PCS Experiences

Interesting... I do worry about these false activations. I remember someone here on Priuschat (Thai?) had some reproducible problems w/this. To me, false activations could lead to being rear-ended.

 

Glad you've been around and posting for a while so we can take this seriously... Usually posts that are liability-oriented like this are by first-time posters who never respond as we start talking amongst ourselves.

I don't know enough about how these systems work but perhaps we're talking about a calibration issue? Or maybe a bad sensor? Is there an error-reporting mechanism for this system? Sounds like a good one to take straight to as high of a level of Toyota as possible.

First time I've heard of a situation like this...

 

There are some other cases I quickly dug up. There are probably others.
Pre-collision system activation | PriusChat
Unexpected auto braking | PriusChat

 

Wow... No wonder it's taking so long to get the Google Car components to market.

 

Well, there are a lot of potential liability issues. If there's an accident, who's responsible? Software isn't perfect. There can be bugs. Some situations are unavoidable. What about traffic tickets like speeding? Who's responsible for that?

As someone who studied computer science, I can tell you a lot of difficult problems were solved in order to complete the DARPA Grand Challenge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia then the Urban Challenge. I'm amazed that they were solved.

I've started a new thread at autonomous driving vehicle discussion | PriusChat to carry on the discussion.

 

The answer is very simple. The operator is at fault. Period! If you can't trust the PCS leave it off. I turned it off by accident shortly after getting the car, and after reading about false triggering -in the Owners Manual- I left it off.
Now I don't have any problems with it.

Another thing that happened to me on the way home from the Dealer when I picked up the car new, is I was on cruise control, and approaching a speed change (drop to 80 from 100) I just prepared to drop the speed as I used to in the GII by holding the cruise lever down or pulsing it down. Good thing the guy in the pickup behind me was awake! The GIII braked (regen) to slow down when I was expecting to coast down. Sigh!

 

On the other hand, I was driving in heavy traffic last weekend, and it might've helped prevent a crash when somebody in front of me stopped faster than I expected them to. I didn't get close enough to cause it to brake, but I did get the alarm, and it's possible the car was applying more braking than normal (or faster than normal). That was the first time I've gotten the alarm that I've actually been worried about a crash; I've gotten it maybe twice before when I could tell that I had some margin left (e.g. the car in front was starting to speed up).

However, I see that this particular feature (Pre-collision brake assist) is not disabled by the switch anyway - if you're already braking and it senses a likely collision, it applies increased braking force relative to how hard you're stepping on the brake. The only thing that the switch disables is the braking when you're not on the brakes at all. In any case, I've never had a problem with it falsely detecting anything. I have far more confidence in the PCS than in a human, including myself: there are plenty of people on these boards that have been in accidents, and none that I know of that have been caused by the PCS. (In any case, if the PCS were to detect something and brake suddenly, the most likely accident would be somebody rear-ending you - and in that case, they are generally at fault for following too closely or not paying attention. But I can understand that a lack of fault isn't much consolation if you're worried about damage or injury.)

 

10k miles with mine. Had half a dozen or so stage 1 activations (just beeps and icon flashing, no seat belt or brake action), all from the car in front of me slowing down for a turn. Since I know they will get out of the way in time I was not braking, but the computer could not tell they are turning and freaks out. Have not seen any stage 2 activation or false activation. I do keep my car clean. The manual says a dirty emblem might be bad for the signal.

SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 ? 2

 

This problem is related to some DRCC problems as the PCS is getting pre-collission signals from the radar sensor used by the DRCC.

Last summer we had a bunch (7) of false detections (as discussed here). Our problems seemed pretty much related to heat, but they do point to Toyota having some issues with the radar sensor assembly and refusing show any interest whatsoever. I did post a report with the NHTSA about this (and you should too) to get these malfunctions federally documented as Toyota has a history of otherwise ignoring safety issues.

 

Seems to me that Toyota and other companies are getting waaaaaay ahead of themselves almost to a ridiculous point with technology that just isn't advanced enough to make life-altering decisions for people. Some things are just plain best left to the most complex beings on this planet, humans.

 

Lots of car companies are doing research into safety related technologies and it's something they have to do, in order to stay competitive. What if one company offers something, others follow (doing research in parallel) and some are left flat-footed?

Then, there's also the issue of patents. If some company A is successful in developing something then patenting it, even if it's not sold and company B comes along and violates that patent, company A could sue, ask for licensing fees, have some sort of patent swapping agreement, etc.

I posted Official: Nissan reveals camera-guided pedal misapplication prevention technology [w/video] | PriusChat awhile ago and stumbled across these: Nissan Technology Protects Walls | The Truth About Cars and Nissan Technology Protects Walls | The Truth About Cars.

 

not really... a few years from now there will be cars driving themselves and they'll be far safer than humans could ever be... People were terrified of cruise control for a long time too, but the technology was quickly refined and for the most part is still pretty fool proof,

 

Good point about staying competitive however, the level of sophistication with each new automatic safety feature increases and all scenarios are impossible to predict therefore impossible to test. It also seems that there really is no industry standard on how any particular auto safety mechanism engages and with there being so many possible variables, I still believe some things are just too complex for 1's and 0's.

 

I heard/read a little bit about the self-driving cars...wouldn't be caught dead in one of those lol.

 

I got to ride in one, as I posted at Google's self-driving cars take TED attendees for a wild ride | PriusChat. It was just in a large parking lot though.

If one wants to discuss self-driving cars, do it at autonomous driving vehicle discussion | PriusChat.

 

They've already been licensed to freely roam the roads of Nevada for almost a year now. And not to be upstaged the California legislature passed a bill that ordered their DMV to license them for California roads ASAP.

There's plenty of people on the roads that have no business behind the wheel and in less than a decade these people will be killing far less often than ever before because of this technology!

 

Research & Development of new technology is one thing. Actually producing RELIABLE new technology is another! And providing effective field testing and support is critical for these technology. Toyota has proven time and time again that they fail miserably with the last part!

 

Can you substantiate your claim?

In my view they don't fail miserably at all... There is no bigger car company for a reason! It's because their vehicles have been top of the charts in reliability for decades and they're the leading pioneers of new technology, especially hybrid technology.

As for product liability they're more accountable and responsible with recalls and repairs than any other, even doing free warranty/recall work on a Prius that's 12 years old. No other car maker comes close to that kind of high standard.

Lastly, as for the unintended acceleration litigation, they never had to admit wrongdoing because they proved they weren't at fault and any doubts that have been raised have been addressed with their offer to spend a billion dollars to help eliminate as many design problems as possible that may create a higher risk of driver error.

 

Sure, just look at what this particular thread is about. Problems with the Radar system (be it manifested in the PCS or in the DRCC). There are clear malfunctions, yet Toyota chooses to (again) bury their head in the sand. These critical systems have no effective error detection and reporting systems so the dealers are not able to detect that a problem has occurred.

Toyota was fined, not because people were complaining, but, rather because they buried the (unintended acceleration) problems.

It this case, they are ignoring/burying problems with the PCS/DRCC. Fortunately for them, there are not a lot of these systems out there - so to Toyota, our problems with the Radar is just "random noise".