[Midnightsky228]

You know, over the years I have been a hard critic of these new safety systems auto manufacturers are creating and adding to new cars. I say things like "You shouldn't need these systems if your paying attention like were all supposed to be". Then one day(today) Im driving home in stop/go traffic, we are slowly moving forward, I feel like a mesquito has bitten me on my arm, I look down for half a second, half a freaking second, and buddy in front suddenly stops hard.......Im thinking, shit, too late, Im gunna hit him, not hard, but its an old smaller pickup truck and that's going to leave a bigger mark on me than him. My foot is halfway to the brake pedal which I know won't get there soon enough, and very suddenly and very sharply my Mazda stops. It even turned on traction control during the stop, as I normally leave it off when I drive. Just like that Mazda Smart City Braking System saved my bacon. So for those who knock it, all it takes is 1 stupid mesquito, and you could be having a very bad day. Thank you Mazda Smart City Braking System ???????

 

[Hisdem]

I was a critic of these systems as well. In fact, after driving other vehicles with adaptive cruise control and smart braking, I still think Mazda missed the mark on their calibrations. But a couple of months ago, I was in the passenger seat of a rental Nissan Maxima with a friend, and he dropped his phone on the ground at a light. Whilst crouching to pick it up, his foot let off the brake and he almost rear ended the BMW in front of us. I wanted to engage the parking brake as a last resort but it was a pedal so that was out of the question. And then... the car stopped itself, and we had a laugh about it.

These things actually are the future, whether we like it or not. And even the best of us get caught by surprise sometimes, so it's nice to have.

 

[2017mazda3]

I felt like you prior to picking up my car as a friend of mine with a 2016 mazda GT 3 Hatch was telling me about all the safety features. I'm not sure I have actually had to use the braking system but I have tested it a bit to see if it works....it does. My friend said it saved him from hitting a dog that ran out in the street. When I first got my 2017 GT hatch back in late 2016 I was distracted with the systems because I'm the kind of guy that wants to know exactly how everything works. Now I don't think about it. I think my favorite feature is radar cruise...it's great in general but love it on congested freeways and interstates. But then don't get me started cuz I hate people who sit on their cruise control on the open interstates when they won't speed up to pass an 18 wheeler.


The fact is these systems are all going to become standard on most cars...so you might as well sign up now. It does make us safer drivers and the car safer as long as we remain alert 100% as we should. However, I do see lawsuits in the future. A Cadillac commercial proudly flaunts a guy taking his hands off the wheel...Oh OK, I guess I don't have to pay attention now. I think the technologies are great and should absolutely move forward but only for the purpose of making driving and transportation safer, not driverless.


I'm a strong believer driverless cars and trucks will never happen and law enforcement will eventually push back hard. I'm absolutely astonished there is not more discussion about it. Think about it...In a perfect world where our last name is "Jetsons", maybe?

-What happens if the driverless vehicle is in accident? How/who does that get handled?

-What happens if there is some kind of detour or rerouting of an accident, say have to drive up on a curb or shoulder to get around something? That vehicle is not going to do that on it's own.

-The vehicle breaks down, then what?

-How is law enforcement going to handle a driverless vehicle breaking a traffic law?

-Think about the nefarious things people can do with a driverless vehicle as we worry about drones.

-Weather and traffic conditions...unpredictable.

-Besides we have already seen accidents and traffic infractions with driverless vehicles with both a driver and no driver inside.

The scenarios are several...all these systems should move forward for making driving safer and more efficient for the occupants, other drivers and pedestrians....but my prediction is driverless vehicles is a fad that will bankrupt GM since this is where they are putting all of their marbles right now.

 

[Davidval18]

It even turned on traction control during the stop, as I normally leave it off when I drive. Just like that Mazda Smart City Braking System saved my bacon.

The traction control was OFF and SCBS turned it ON when it was engaged? :confused1 1:

I might be wrong but if you turn traction control OFF then SCBS is also disabled by default...at least this is how it works in my car, so if traction control was OFF how did the SCBS got engaged? Or maybe in the US models you can turn traction control OFF and the SCBS will still remain enabled? :confused1 1:

Mazda Smart City Braking System (SCBS) has saved my butt twice already, it's amazing to have this feature , and thank G-d it comes standard on every trim model in the Israeli Market.

 

[zero_gravity]

-What happens if the driverless vehicle is in accident? How/who does that get handled?

Insurance just as now, it's a matter of who is at fault and who pays said insurance. Likely the manufacturer will be involved, possibly even be the insurance holder.

-What happens if there is some kind of detour or rerouting of an accident, say have to drive up on a curb or shoulder to get around something? That vehicle is not going to do that on it's own.

This is where AI comes into play. Billions of dollars are being put into AI research. I don't believe driverless will be a good option until that gets to more of a consumer item, but we're really not that far off.

-The vehicle breaks down, then what?

About the same thing that happens when any car breaks down. If you're referring to the unlikely possibility of a computer failure while in transit, the smart option would be to have a more basic backup computer that simply gets you off the road.

-How is law enforcement going to handle a driverless vehicle breaking a traffic law?

The first thing to know about computer programming is the computer does what it's told. We're not going to intentionally tell it to break the law. If it does this would be a programming bug and the manufacturer would be responsible for updating.

-Think about the nefarious things people can do with a driverless vehicle as we worry about drones.

With regards to hacking, this is the first point I agree with. Toss advanced AI into the mix it's a real unknown. Has anyone ever hacked AI? Not yet....nothing advanced anyway.

-Weather and traffic conditions...unpredictable.

I don't know, I find google maps does good here. You might want to give it a try. We already have ways to detect slippery conditions with traction control and abs.

-Besides we have already seen accidents and traffic infractions with driverless vehicles with both a driver and no driver inside.

We have seen accidents in prototypes yes. However if you'd have bothered to get the whole story you'd find that none have been the fault of the driverless car. Yes there was a pedestrian hit and killed in California. The company that owned that one cheaped out on sensors. As a result the computer had some significant blind spots.

The scenarios are several...all these systems should move forward for making driving safer and more efficient for the occupants, other drivers and pedestrians....but my prediction is driverless vehicles is a fad that will bankrupt GM since this is where they are putting all of their marbles right now.

If it can be done and if it will make money it's far from a fad. I think one possibility is in the future you may not own a car. Driverless uber for everyone. And why not?

 

[JDabzzz]

I always thought our SCBS was just a warning indication that popped up on our display panel. Even driving with traction control off, sometimes when I'm changing lanes closer to other cars, I'll see the warning light popup telling me to brake, however, I've never actually had the car stop for me.
Maybe I haven't gotten close enough? I think that could cause it's own issue if I'm trying to weave in between cars and it suddenly applies the brakes.

 

[cperrymsu]

I might be wrong but if you turn traction control OFF then SCBS is also disabled by default...at least this is how it works in my car, so if traction control was OFF how did the SCBS got engaged? Or maybe in the US models you can turn traction control OFF and the SCBS will still remain enabled? :confused1 1:

In my US M3 GT you have to go into the vehicle settings and disable SCBS, it is not automatically disabled if you disable traction control.

 

[hellow]

Sometime it just fail :

 

[CerealKiller]

I always thought our SCBS was just a warning indication that popped up on our display panel. Even driving with traction control off, sometimes when I'm changing lanes closer to other cars, I'll see the warning light popup telling me to brake, however, I've never actually had the car stop for me.
Maybe I haven't gotten close enough? I think that could cause it's own issue if I'm trying to weave in between cars and it suddenly applies the brakes.

The SCBS has activated on me twice while I was passing a car on the freeway. Both times I was in the fast lane (far left) trying to get around a car that was going much slower than the speed of traffic and the brakes activated just as I was reentering the fast lane. I guess I got too close to the car in front of me in the passing lane, but it was not in the path of my car.

It's also almost given me a heart attack 3 or 4 times from activating when I was passing a car turning right in front me. Once again, close but not in the path of my car, and the brakes activated as I passed it.

The SCBS and the traction control are separate buttons on my car. I can turn traction control off manually and I have to enter the system settings to turn the SCBS off. They have different lights on the dash to indicate they are off too.
CK

 

[arathol]

These nanny devices don't make safer drivers. In fact, they will tend to hide poor driving habits by doing what the driver should be doing anyway - paying attention. The first two incidents described here were driver error brought on by distraction at the worst possible time. Taking your eyes off the road in heavy stop and go traffic and screwing around with a cell phone can cause issues that may be easily avoided using proper driving skills, ie paying attention to the cars around you.
If new drivers are trained in an environment where its perceived as ok to drive without paying attention because the car will do it for them, whats going to happen when they are presented with a situation where the car stops being a nanny and they have to actually do things for themselves? This is exactly whats happening in the real world. Some kids today can barely function without cruise control because they can't manually keep the car at a steady speed and post streaming video on Facebook at the same time.....:shocked: Whats going to happen when you turn these kids loose in a car with lane keeping, hands free driving, auto-braking and auto-cruise with radar?
I won't even get into the whole infotainment system debacle. Some folks seem to think a car is unuseable because they don't have "connectivity" and can't text or conduct business meetings on their cell phone while driving 80 mph on the highway....:surprise:
Some of todays cars are reaching the complexity of an aircraft from the operators point of view. Maybe there should be stricter and more extensive training and licensing requirements to go along with the added complexity and added potential for distraction that goes along with it.

 

[Hisdem]

These nanny devices don't make safer drivers. In fact, they will tend to hide poor driving habits by doing what the driver should be doing anyway - paying attention. The first two incidents described here were driver error brought on by distraction at the worst possible time. Taking your eyes off the road in heavy stop and go traffic and screwing around with a cell phone can cause issues that may be easily avoided using proper driving skills, ie paying attention to the cars around you.
If new drivers are trained in an environment where its perceived as ok to drive without paying attention because the car will do it for them, whats going to happen when they are presented with a situation where the car stops being a nanny and they have to actually do things for themselves? This is exactly whats happening in the real world. Some kids today can barely function without cruise control because they can't manually keep the car at a steady speed and post streaming video on Facebook at the same time.....:shocked: Whats going to happen when you turn these kids loose in a car with lane keeping, hands free driving, auto-braking and auto-cruise with radar?
I won't even get into the whole infotainment system debacle. Some folks seem to think a car is unuseable because they don't have "connectivity" and can't text or conduct business meetings on their cell phone while driving 80 mph on the highway....:surprise:
Some of todays cars are reaching the complexity of an aircraft from the operators point of view. Maybe there should be stricter and more extensive training and licensing requirements to go along with the added complexity and added potential for distraction that goes along with it.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. I have witnessed first hand. As the "car guy" in my friend group, more than once I've had to teach friends of mine to turn on their lights at night, or even how to turn wipers on and off in cars they were not used to driving. All because, and this is a direct quote "my other car just did it by itself anyway."

Each year, we have more and more drivers who think driving is merely putting a car in Drive, and knowing the left pedal is the brake and the right is the throttle. There's much more to it than that.

 

[2017mazda3]

The SCBS has activated on me twice while I was passing a car on the freeway. Both times I was in the fast lane (far left) trying to get around a car that was going much slower than the speed of traffic and the brakes activated just as I was reentering the fast lane. I guess I got too close to the car in front of me in the passing lane, but it was not in the path of my car.

It's also almost given me a heart attack 3 or 4 times from activating when I was passing a car turning right in front me. Once again, close but not in the path of my car, and the brakes activated as I passed it.

The SCBS and the traction control are separate buttons on my car. I can turn traction control off manually and I have to enter the system settings to turn the SCBS off. They have different lights on the dash to indicate they are off too.
CK

The manual actually outlines these situations and scenarios...they tend to occur more often when passing big rigs or on narrow winding turns. Just returned from my 2nd 3000 miles road trip and this occurred on multiple occasions...but again this is why you need to be 100% all the time so that you can take over from the autopilot when necessary. No doubt these systems help avoid fatigue. In my 2 week trip I had four 500+ miles days.

 

[2017mazda3]

Insurance just as now, it's a matter of who is at fault and who pays said insurance. Likely the manufacturer will be involved, possibly even be the insurance holder.

Meanwhile, as you are waiting on the side of the road for Flo to show up is actually what I meant.



This is where AI comes into play. Billions of dollars are being put into AI research. I don't believe driverless will be a good option until that gets to more of a consumer item, but we're really not that far off.




About the same thing that happens when any car breaks down. If you're referring to the unlikely possibility of a computer failure while in transit, the smart option would be to have a more basic backup computer that simply gets you off the road.

Again, as your driverless car is sitting in the middle of the road blocking traffic on the interstate in gear and no way to get it to the side.




The first thing to know about computer programming is the computer does what it's told. We're not going to intentionally tell it to break the law. If it does this would be a programming bug and the manufacturer would be responsible for updating.

Ah yes...this is where the big corporation hides behind a "policy". Humans make policy but when a company says it's policy then it's no one's responsibility. It wasn't Ford's fault when the Pinto gas tank blew up and killed people even though they knew it would happen but it was cheaper not to do anything, so they just waited to let people fry and pay the 10 million dollar court settlement at the time and no human was responsible.




With regards to hacking, this is the first point I agree with. Toss advanced AI into the mix it's a real unknown. Has anyone ever hacked AI? Not yet....nothing advanced anyway.

-Not sure I understand...many car systems have been hacked...by college and high school students.



I don't know, I find google maps does good here. You might want to give it a try. We already have ways to detect slippery conditions with traction control and abs.

We already know the current systems including the Mazda systems malfunction when the radar systems, including the windshields and various sensors around the cars malfunction in severe conditions including just severe rain or when dirty...as in fact outlined in the manual. I have seen my warning lights come on multiple times alerting me they are not functioning properly in severe weather conditions.



We have seen accidents in prototypes yes. However if you'd have bothered to get the whole story you'd find that none have been the fault of the driverless car. Yes there was a pedestrian hit and killed in California. The company that owned that one cheaped out on sensors. As a result the computer had some significant blind spots.

Being from CA I'm very aware as you are aware the state of CA has made it difficult for driverless cars to operate because of safety and regulation and that is why they are going to other states even though CA seems to indicate they are more welcoming of the idea now...but few are flocking to the Golden State. I know the research. You would then be aware of a UBER driverless incident where the UBER Volvo which ran a red light and nearly struck a pedestrian in a cross walk on 3rd Street in San Francisco...I guess that is not the fault of a driverless vehicle or is it? You would know having done your research. Uber initially blamed it on the driver, but that turned out to be a lie and in fact UBER had to admit it was the driverless car at fault. AND even though CA has invited Uber back to test their cars, they have decided not to further test driverless cars since they were responsible for the death of the pedestrian in Arizona....What's funny is you are a fan of UBER who is worth billions and a fan of driverless cars and UBER cheaped out on sensors as you put it which resulted in a pedestrian death. What an irony I guess for one who did his research.

If it can be done and if it will make money it's far from a fad. I think one possibility is in the future you may not own a car. Driverless uber for everyone. And why not?

Asked and answered....A driverless Uber nearly hit a pedestrian in a crosswalk after running a red light and then sadly killed a pedestrian.

 

[Road Trip]

Answered accurately by @arathol, that these devices so not make for better drivers. However, when a driver screws up (notice I chose the word “when” — not the word “if”), these devices at times can prevent an accident, or even better, can prevent an injury or a death.

Will they do so all the time? Not even close. But will they do so some of the time? Yes, and given the poor skills and lack of attentativeness of many drivers, I am glad that these devices can reduce the number of incidents of all kind.

In 2,000,000 miles of driving, I have not had an accident that I caused (I was once rear ended when stopped at a red light). However, do I turn off all the safety devices in my car? No. Unless I am on the track, I do not turn off the traction control system.

If others choose to disable those safety devices on their cars, that is their choice. However, I am glad my Mazda and my others cars have them. I choose to leave them activated. If at some time one of them helps me, or totally prevents me from causing an incident becuase of my stupidity, in advance, I am glad I have them.

 

[arathol]

Will they do so all the time? Not even close. But will they do so some of the time? Yes, and given the poor skills and lack of attentativeness of many drivers, I am glad that these devices can reduce the number of incidents of all kind.....


If others choose to disable those safety devices on their cars, that is their choice. However, I am glad my Mazda and my others cars have them. I choose to leave them activated. If at some time one of them helps me, or totally prevents me from causing an incident becuase of my stupidity, in advance, I am glad I have them.

I'm not sure I like a lot of these nanny systems but this is exactly why they are needed. There are too many in-car distractions available to drivers now. Many drivers seem all to easily distracted and have put higher priorities on cell phones, entertainment systems, GPS systems etc than on actually operating the vehicle. These drivers need all the help they can get to keep from crashing into someone or something...

 

[mazda318gt]

I think my favorite feature is radar cruise...it's great in general but love it on congested freeways and interstates. But then don't get me started cuz I hate people who sit on their cruise control on the open interstates when they won't speed up to pass an 18 wheeler.

I love the radar cruise on congested highways too. I live south of Harrisburg, PA and I take I83 to work most days. The radar cruise has made the commute a lot less stressful. I hate when I get behind someone doing 60 in the passing lane, with no one in front of them, and the radar cruise just slows down and sits behind them so I usually step on the gas a bit to get them to move at least up to the speed limit of 65. lol

I also wish that more cars had the sensors and beeps when people are backing up. Hardly anyone looks behind them to see if anyone else is behind them, or backing up out of their parking spot, before they start backing up too. I am fine with all of the safety systems in cars these days, but I also think the marketing leads people to believe that they can be more distracted when they are driving because the car will stop itself. Little do they know that one of the last parts of the SCBS section mentions that coming to a complete stop depends on the speed you are going when SCBS is activated. If you are doing 40 and a car is stopped in front of you, you are most likely not going to stop and hit the car. You most likely will have slowed a lot and the injuries will be a lot less severe though.

 

[lordnikon]

That's why I always reverse park. Head-in parking and then backing up when you leave isn't worth it anymore.