Has your tow car got electronic driver aids? What do you think of them? Practical Caravan's tow car expert David Motton has his say in his latest blog – to read it, please click here.
Electronic driver aids
- Thread starter LizziePope
- Start date
that is the way to go, so it appears. it will make texting and putting on make up, for some soo much safer.you cant argue with that... our lorries have sensors and camera's fitting . the sensors work when you indicate left as does a specific camera , like having 4 mirrors there weren't enough. the sensors beep quite loudly inside the lorry as you drive past anything on your left, lamp post pedestrians a foot or so on the pavement and of course cyclist who clearly cannot read or have lost their common sense ect ect.. the sensors are a brilliant idea you are constantly looking over to your left just to double check you didn't miss anything a second ago when you checked all those mirrors! of course if you run into the back of somebody i surmise saying sorry i didn't see you will make a surprising change. i didn't see you because that dam sensor wouldn't stop beeping and holding my attention. so these new technology uses outside sensors mine play up when it rains hard what will these automatic break systems do?one car stops immediately and the car behind runs into the back because the driver relied on his auto braking system?.! cannot recall either my ABS or traction control ever kicking in unless i was seeing if it worked.apparently modern cars can stop so much quicker and in shorter distances then what is stated in the highway code. the reason they haven't changed the figurers is drivers are half asleep compared to 70 years ago, turning around to talk to passengers or fiddling with one fandango gadget or another . will all these safety gadgets make safer drivers? or will the already feeling safe in there box make them concentrate less than they do already...
I think many of us reading this have had the experience of a computer that freezes or does something we weren't expecting or at the worst time, which throws our concentration. We have become used to odd glitches in cars that puts it into creep home mode, but when it's hooked up to the diagnostic unit there's no record of a fault. It's these sorts of incidents that has given most of real scepticism about the reliability of computer controlled systems. And yet I doubt if any reader could hold up their hand and tell us they've never had a piece of computer technology that's never let them down. - Or could they?
In reality I doubt we are ever fully aware of all the systems we use that rely on some sort of computer or electronic wizardry as part of their control. If a system quietly gets on with what it's supposed to do it doesn't draw attention to the fact it's working properly, so well designed and reliable kit just doesn't get noticed.
That's fine for those items where a failure would be easily detected before a dangerous situation arises, but then we come to those device which are there as a safety net of some kind. ABS braking, air bags, Electronic Stability Control, ATC for trailers etc. These systems are normally dormant until they are needed, by which time it may be too late to recover a situation by other means. In these cases there is always that nagging doubt they will be there when you need them. The best the manufacturers can do is design them to do a self test when you turn on the ignition. But how do you know that self test is adequate to confirm the device will deploy properly under duress?
The fact is there is no electronic component that can be guaranteed to be 100% reliable. Mean time before failure (MTBF) rates can be up in the hundreds of thousands of hours but those are averaged and statistically derived figures and it actually means that a very few components may fail almost immediately, the bulk will survive for the stated MTBF and some will dramatically exceed the MTBF. The problem is you cannot know the life of every component used in your car - and you may be unlucky and get one with a short life.
Then we come to the software needed to enable the computers to do their job. Is it capable of distinguishing the difference between a car approaching on the other side of the road, or the gap closing between you and the car in front before applying the brakes?
The buying public are in no position to evaluate the manufactures development systems. WE do have BS/EU standards relating to the development of safety critical software and systems and we have to hope they are robust enough to ensure conforming designs will be functional and reliable. We also have to trust the manufacturers do use all the necessary techniques to design test validate and verify the safety of software and components.
But there will always be that nagging doubt......(Dare I mention VW and emmisions)
In reality I doubt we are ever fully aware of all the systems we use that rely on some sort of computer or electronic wizardry as part of their control. If a system quietly gets on with what it's supposed to do it doesn't draw attention to the fact it's working properly, so well designed and reliable kit just doesn't get noticed.
That's fine for those items where a failure would be easily detected before a dangerous situation arises, but then we come to those device which are there as a safety net of some kind. ABS braking, air bags, Electronic Stability Control, ATC for trailers etc. These systems are normally dormant until they are needed, by which time it may be too late to recover a situation by other means. In these cases there is always that nagging doubt they will be there when you need them. The best the manufacturers can do is design them to do a self test when you turn on the ignition. But how do you know that self test is adequate to confirm the device will deploy properly under duress?
The fact is there is no electronic component that can be guaranteed to be 100% reliable. Mean time before failure (MTBF) rates can be up in the hundreds of thousands of hours but those are averaged and statistically derived figures and it actually means that a very few components may fail almost immediately, the bulk will survive for the stated MTBF and some will dramatically exceed the MTBF. The problem is you cannot know the life of every component used in your car - and you may be unlucky and get one with a short life.
Then we come to the software needed to enable the computers to do their job. Is it capable of distinguishing the difference between a car approaching on the other side of the road, or the gap closing between you and the car in front before applying the brakes?
The buying public are in no position to evaluate the manufactures development systems. WE do have BS/EU standards relating to the development of safety critical software and systems and we have to hope they are robust enough to ensure conforming designs will be functional and reliable. We also have to trust the manufacturers do use all the necessary techniques to design test validate and verify the safety of software and components.
But there will always be that nagging doubt......(Dare I mention VW and emmisions)
Good write up Prof ,but could i point out that maybe using the VW emission scandal as an example is ,well it isn't an electronic fault or proof of computer problem. I f anything it was genius. the car sensed it was going into a test , the software in the ECU changed all its perimeters to lower its NOX levels , cheating of course but not a fault merely a clever software add on..
The Wyoming's ATC goes through a "self test" each time it is powered. The brakes are applied and servos run then a green light comes on saying "I'm ok".
But is it like a match? You only know it works when you strike it.
SWMBO new car has park assist and electronic things I've never heard of eg HAC ,sensors that allegedly stop / warn you not to change lanes. Brake assist .It parks itself between parked cars turns lights and wipers on and responds to voice commands.
They reckon by 2050 we will have driverless cars.
Do all these things make you a safer driver? No.
If you want to be safer than you are now take an advanced driving course and have your eyes opened B)
But is it like a match? You only know it works when you strike it.
SWMBO new car has park assist and electronic things I've never heard of eg HAC ,sensors that allegedly stop / warn you not to change lanes. Brake assist .It parks itself between parked cars turns lights and wipers on and responds to voice commands.
They reckon by 2050 we will have driverless cars.
Do all these things make you a safer driver? No.
If you want to be safer than you are now take an advanced driving course and have your eyes opened B)
I'm just fingers crossed that the manufacturer can programme an infra red secondary control pad for my car. At the moment we don't know but should hear by Monday. Also hope that my new electronic accelerator lever when fitted is reliable or anything could happen. Not much to go wrong with my old mechanical lever.
chrisbee1 said:I take it you don't fly too often Prof.
Hi Chris,
As it happens no I don't fly very often, mainly because my wings are getting tired. My dad and mom told me 'The knack of flying is throwing yourself at the ground... and missing" just before thy pushed me out of the nest :evil:
I have a relative who used to work for BaE systems.He claims that in our lifetime (I'm 73!), we will have pilotless planes, driven solely by computer.I asked what happens when the computer has a glitch? He said that it cannot happen, the computer could NEVER fail, all its systems were fail- proof.
But it would have a back-up anyway!
Oh, and Titanic was unsinkable.
Murphy's law number one: if it can go wrong, it WILL go wrong!.
But it would have a back-up anyway!
Oh, and Titanic was unsinkable.
Murphy's law number one: if it can go wrong, it WILL go wrong!.
On my last Helicopter, ( with my name on it) when the Beast didnt want to fly because one of the many computers would not Flash up, I would shut it down , to reboot the computers, stroke, and talk nicley to her , give her to my pilots and away she would go.
Computers are only Human.
Hutch
Hutch
I think all safety devices must be a good thing, but i don't think the driveless car is. The park assist is great not only for the person trying to park but its a good chance your car wont get nudged when they are trying to park? And yes it does happen.
On my sons Golf he has Active Cruise Control not only does it brake when driving if the distance decreases it also works at stationary and low speed for example try to pull away from a junction when you thought the car in front has gone (we've all done it?) and it will brake the car to stop you hitting the car in front, a safety device but also saves him money as his insurance is lower.
I have cruise on my car , most people have these days but mine will brake the car to stay at that speed going down a hill even with the caravan on the back. really weird when the peddle moves on its own.
On my sons Golf he has Active Cruise Control not only does it brake when driving if the distance decreases it also works at stationary and low speed for example try to pull away from a junction when you thought the car in front has gone (we've all done it?) and it will brake the car to stop you hitting the car in front, a safety device but also saves him money as his insurance is lower.
I have cruise on my car , most people have these days but mine will brake the car to stay at that speed going down a hill even with the caravan on the back. really weird when the peddle moves on its own.
MichaelE said:
Personally, I think driverless cars will be a lot safer than us, we can easily get distracted or get tired.
Also, think of the improvements to traffic flow when computers follow the rules, keep to consistent speeds and have better lane discipline that us lot, plus there wouldn't be a time when you have to give up your independence because of reaching an age where you are no longer safe behind the wheel.
Emmerson was absolutely right - what isn't there can't go wrong, but I would not like to go back to the 50's with wing mirrors you adjusted manually, windows you wound manually, no aircon ( but it wasn;t so hot then) etc.
However another well know law says 80% of the trouble comes from 20% of the kit, and with the modern car the electronic stuff must be close to or exceeding 20% of the variables.
Industrially, you use as few joints as possible in cables and pipes. The modern vehicle has plug in connectors everywhere.
Safety-critical software has to be checked and simulated to a fare-thee -well - ok for aircraft where one simulator can be used for dozens of the same type of plane but not so much fun in chemical plants which are nearly always 'one-offs'
Critical sensors are duplicated or in some cases triplicated with 2 out of 3 voting systems and sensors not from the same manufacturer or batch of products to minimise common mode failures. ( wonder why your medicines cost so much ?)
Now I would consider many of the systems in today's cars to be safety critical - lane avoidance, anticipatory braking etc. and the production volume is surely such as to justify a bit more quality that we get. Vehicle production of similar models is an order or two of magnitude greater than that of any aircraft - particularly helicopters so there is really no excuse.
However another well know law says 80% of the trouble comes from 20% of the kit, and with the modern car the electronic stuff must be close to or exceeding 20% of the variables.
Industrially, you use as few joints as possible in cables and pipes. The modern vehicle has plug in connectors everywhere.
Safety-critical software has to be checked and simulated to a fare-thee -well - ok for aircraft where one simulator can be used for dozens of the same type of plane but not so much fun in chemical plants which are nearly always 'one-offs'
Critical sensors are duplicated or in some cases triplicated with 2 out of 3 voting systems and sensors not from the same manufacturer or batch of products to minimise common mode failures. ( wonder why your medicines cost so much ?)
Now I would consider many of the systems in today's cars to be safety critical - lane avoidance, anticipatory braking etc. and the production volume is surely such as to justify a bit more quality that we get. Vehicle production of similar models is an order or two of magnitude greater than that of any aircraft - particularly helicopters so there is really no excuse.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Tracking Systems, should I go for the Sargent ?- Started by Saxo Appeal
- Replies: 19
-
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter