Off topic, but I thought people here might find this interesting:

"MSNBC is reporting that Honda Motor Co. unveiled an early crash-detection system for one of their vehicles. The system is unique in working even before the driver responds. A radar in the front of the car stashed behind the Honda logo detects vehicles within a range of about 300 feet ahead. It then taps the brake and tightens the seatbelt. A buzzer goes off and a light on the dash is illuminated. If the driver responds, the braking power is boosted. If the driver fails to respond, the system kicks in and brakes more while also tightening the seat belt. Unfortunately, Japanese regulations don't allow for the system to fully stop the vehicle."

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by onyx00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Off topic, but I thought people here might find this interesting:

"MSNBC is reporting that Honda Motor Co. unveiled an early crash-detection system for one of their vehicles. The system is unique in working even before the driver responds. A radar in the front of the car stashed behind the Honda logo detects vehicles within a range of about 300 feet ahead. It then taps the brake and tightens the seatbelt. A buzzer goes off and a light on the dash is illuminated. If the driver responds, the braking power is boosted. If the driver fails to respond, the system kicks in and brakes more while also tightening the seat belt. Unfortunately, Japanese regulations don't allow for the system to fully stop the vehicle." </TD></TR></TABLE>

300 feet? that's a damned football field. I'm within 300 feet of cars all day long. What parameters does it use to determine when there is actually a threat of collision before it tries to control what you are doing?

Sorry, but I hate systems like this.

 

i agree, running up and down I-4 you will never be out of the 300 ft. limit, besides, i like having full control of my vehicle.

 

On the surface this sounds stupid but knowing Honda they've put a ton of research into it and it probably works fairly well. At least that's what I'd like to hope.

My fundamental problem with the system is that it brakes for you when it detects an impending collision. I can think of several times where my only option to avoid an accident was to swerve. I can think of several more hypothetical situations where an automatic braking system could cause an accident but I'll reserve judgment until it is independtly reviewed. Here's a quote from slashdot that I thought was funny:

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I saw the title, Honda Crash Detection System and I'm thinking, "Gee, that's retarded", while picturing in my head a horrid rollover accident with flying airbags and broken glass and bodies in the street...
...and this little red beeping "Crash" light flashing on the dashboard.

Real helpful, Honda. Thanks.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

Or, pulling out and accelerating.. now there's a red light up ahead and a stopped car and the damn pos honda slams on the brakes for you so you can get rear ended by someone. Sounds like a winner to me

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dawhiteboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Or, pulling out and accelerating.. now there's a red light up ahead and a stopped car and the damn pos honda slams on the brakes for you so you can get rear ended by someone. Sounds like a winner to me </TD></TR></TABLE>

That same argument was made when M-B introduced its "Brake Assist" feature a few years back. If certain braking thresholds were met, the computer would immediately brake the car as hard as it could and maintain control. Now, suppose you take a sudden jab at the pedal, only to realize that only 50% braking was needed. Too late, your brakes are on full.

And again, the *** end of your car has just been smashed by a '74 Pinto with lesser brakes

Need to research that some and see if there were complaints about Brake Assist.

 

I have a better idea, how about people just learn how to pay attention to the road and get off the dam phone while driving? That would save alot more lives then a car that brakes for you wouldn't you think?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Splat &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

That same argument was made when M-B introduced its "Brake Assist" feature a few years back. If certain braking thresholds were met, the computer would immediately brake the car as hard as it could and maintain control. Now, suppose you take a sudden jab at the pedal, only to realize that only 50% braking was needed. Too late, your brakes are on full.

And again, the *** end of your car has just been smashed by a '74 Pinto with lesser brakes

Need to research that some and see if there were complaints about Brake Assist.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yep, but even that is different. I dislike their system as well, but here's the part that kills me.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If the driver fails to respond, the system kicks in and brakes more while also tightening the seat belt</TD></TR></TABLE>

In the situation I posted above, I would not have hit the brakes, but the car will for me, even though it's the last thing that needs to be done.

I agree with eluder, people just need to pay attention when they drive.

 

Agreed. Not enough driver involvement

While trying to find problems/concerns with Brake Assist, I found a couple of interesting articles about the rise of accidents involving ABS-equipped cars. Most due to driver error (not braking hard enough, "pumping" the brakes in an ABS car, etc).

The more intrusive accident avoidance systems become, the worse the average driver gets.

 

There was an article I read on one of the news sites saying that the NHTSA was considering making traction control mandatory on new cars. But as Splat said, the more you do for the average driver, the worse of a driver they become.

Honestly, I think a lot more accidents can be avoided with better driver education and more stringent requirements for driver licensing. Rather than using technology to allow everyone to be even lazier we should use technology and training to make everyone better at what they're doing. Sure, technology can save people from danger but people should be better able to save themselves. Sure, training is not going to save everyone, the same way ECDS, ABS, or TCS is not going to save everyone. But, every bit helps.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JMU R1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">There was an article I read on one of the news sites saying that the NHTSA was considering making traction control mandatory on new cars. -</TD></TR></TABLE>

Fantastic. Its not like our goverment doesnt coddle its society enough already. We shouldnt need to protect people from themselves - thats what natural selection is for. Darwin is calling!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JMU R1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Honestly, I think a lot more accidents can be avoided with better driver education and more stringent requirements for driver licensing.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Good point. My dad was fond of the expression "Where did you get your driver's license, a farking Cracker Jack box?!?"

Sounds like we'd be better off if getting a basic license was more like obtaining a racing license - hours of classroom training followed by hours upon hours of practice in a "controlled" environment followed by stringent observation. Failure at any stage sends you back to Day One.

But that will never happen

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Splat &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Good point. My dad was fond of the expression "Where did you get your driver's license, a farking Cracker Jack box?!?"

Sounds like we'd be better off if getting a basic license was more like obtaining a racing license - hours of classroom training followed by hours upon hours of practice in a "controlled" environment followed by stringent observation. Failure at any stage sends you back to Day One.

But that will never happen </TD></TR></TABLE>

In Europe they have a good licensing system. So you just never know. All it takes is a state to start it up and hope it spreads

 

I don't really like where this is going...

I'll control the braking and accelleration, thank you very much

 

it was once pointed out to me that a lot of these systems will not see use in america. or if they do they won't for long....the reason why? liability. who do you sue when the cars system fubar and someone gets killed? all it takes is one person to get whiped out by one of these braking or roll-over prevention (or what have you) once one of these systems fugs up there will be a mass stink, followed by lawsuits etc. and the damn things will dissapear....at least that's what i expect to happen

 

i bet that **** weighs a lot too. DC8R="crash detect removal, 5whp!"


rob- ui

 

well i guess the only good thing posibly about this is it might be easier to do a burn out........just get a friend or someone to stand in front of the car and floor it.......the sensor will lock the brakes and the wheels will spin..........although i think you would probly just run over your friend........bummer