All Cars Sold in the US Will Soon Have to Be Able to Automatically Avoid a Crash

[tryptophan]

Laws to make cars smaller and drive slower will do 100x more to make crashes less deadly than fancy electronic gizmos.

Not to mention all these electronics make the car much more expensive and harder to repair.

[m463]

People don't want that. Butts are getting bigger and people don't want to drive slow.

As a matter of fact I think forcing people to drive slower seems to cause more accidents. I mean moving away from 85th percentile engineering criteria - I mean laws making people drive slower ignoring engineering design.

That said, I'll bet even if emergency braking fails to prevent a collision, even slowing down a modest amount will pay off with significant crash energy reduction.

(energy goes up with square of velocity, so e = 1/2mv^2)

[seoulmetro]

Cars smaller: Good

Cars slower: Not Good

You don't need slower cars. Just efficient at X, Y, Z average speeds.

Cars are mostly getting bigger due to safety regulations though. The interiors are smaller than ever but the exteriors get bigger and bigger. The gap is being filled with crumple zones and airbags.

[coryrc]

We need laws for all road-going vehicles to protect pedestrians and strict liability for anyone driving a pedestrian-hostile vehicle.

You want a drive a big lifted truck? You need to be on the hook for the deaths and damages from those monstrosities.

[parl_match]

A law that prevents any FWD vehicle from going over 90 MPH, or offering significant insurance discounts, would go a long way towards reducing fatalities.

There is no reason for any casual motorist to be going 91+MPH on surface streets or highways.

[matthewfelgate]

If people moan about something as basic as AEB, how would you implement automatic speed limit enforcing in cars.

[dabbledash]

But they would also decrease the utility of the cars.

[Petersipoi]

"Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" applies here. Good luck convincing people to give up their big cars. Or to double their trip length by driving half the speed.

This is something that law makers can actually achieve.

[hammock]

The reason cars are so large today is because of safety laws

[josefresco]

I posted this same comment on the other thread, but it's worth noting here too.

Headline: Most Small SUVs Are Bad at Automatic Emergency Braking, IIHS Says

https://www.thedrive.com/news/most-small-suvs-are-bad-at-aut...

"The SUVs that participated in the test were the Subaru Forester, Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4, Ford Escape, Mazda CX-5, Hyundai Tucson, Jeep Compass, Mitsubishi Outlander, Chevy Equinox, and the Volkswagen Taos. Of those ten SUVs only one (!) received the IIHS' "Good" rating—the Subaru Forester. After that, only two were rated as "Acceptable," the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4. The Ford, Hyundai, and Jeep were rated "Marginal," while the rest were sent home with "Poor" ratings and their heads hanging low."

[gscott]

My wife has a 2022 Chevy Equinox. It has engaged the automatic breaking on me several times unnecessarily but mostly it likes to use the flashing red dash light most often. We have this street with a half circle that cars park on and as you traverse the half circle it sees those cars and starts blinking like mad afraid you are going to hit them. I fear future cars will be much worse. They might force you to self driving if they make it impossible to drive the car yourself.

[swalling]

Subaru has had its EyeSight collision avoidance system in production vehicles since 2010. That's a long time to refine things.

[germinalphrase]

I’m not surprised about the Cx-5. Plenty to like about the vehicle, but the driver assist features are clearly an afterthought.

[renewiltord]

Oh I was quite surprised. I drive a Subaru Forester myself and thought it does quite well.

[post_break]

My 2021 Honda Accord was so aggressive. I had times where I literally had my foot to the floor to GO but the car said no, when there was nothing in front of me. Luckily my miata isn't as aggressive.

[gnabgib]

Ongoing discussion [0] (28 points, 14 hours ago, 79 comments)

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40207981

[oblib]

Learning "how to drive like everyone is trying to smash into you" has worked for me.

Basically you always keep enough distance between you and the car in front of you to be able to avoid rear ending them, keep an eye on what's behind you, and resist the urge to road rage. For example, when someone cuts you off you put distance between you, "You're still moving forward".

I was offered that advice by a California Hwy Patrolmen when I was just 16 years old shortly after I got my driver's license. It's worked for me. I'm 65 now and I've never been in an accident or crashed a car, and I've never gotten a ticket. So it's really worked pretty well for me.

I'm personally not ready to want a car that drives for me, but I would like others to have one that would put on the brakes when they get too close behind me.

[averageRoyalty]

I can't speak for your country, but in mine it's the law to ensure a safe distance is between you and the car in front of you.

[kccqzy]

Article says,

> Unsurprisingly, automakers are unsure whether this is possible

I'm in the same camp. I don't think technology will become mature enough in the stated timeline to make sure this is actually possible without creating a huge ton of false positive triggers (phantom braking).

[aetherspawn]

Our Toyota Corolla hybrid has successfully done this and mitigated a collision at 100 km/hr (60 mi/hr) once or twice with only a handful of non serious false positives (i.e. when turning a corner that has cars parked on it or people crossing the road nearby) in the 4 years we've owned it.

We live in Australia so we regularly do a cross country 1800km+ trip to travel between the cities, and there are hundreds of overpasses. I don't recall ever getting phantom braking during one of these trips.

I would highly rate Toyota safety sense as one of the best ADAS on the market despite being not very sophisticated in comparison to i.e. Tesla.

[anon373839]

I have no idea why you’re being downvoted; this is a legitimate concern. If these systems have the capability to apply full braking force at 90 mph, there will be instances when they get confused by a shadow and cause the very type of collision they’re intended to prevent.

[matthewfelgate]

Except it's already been the law in Europe since 2022.

Automakers can and will make AEB.

[notfed]

FYI: they mean "up to 62mph"

Anyway, placing the dividing line at 62mph is interesting because many areas (in the US) fluctuate between 55mph and 65mph speed limits. What was once a seemingly arbitrary difference in speed will now carry more implications.

[nomel]

Since this means the system isn't required at freeway speeds, I'm curious if it's from some understanding that the possibility of phantom braking could cause more harm/pileups on the freeway?

[Brian_K_White]

The problem is it requires a computer, and no one but no one will sell you a car where you get to control the computer, and without a net connection back to servers you also don't get to control or opt out of or even audit.

[matthewfelgate]

That's largely true already.

[postmeta]

Recent Tesla AEB (Auto-Emergency-Braking) is pretty good, the Euro NCAP tests show: https://twitter.com/AIDRIVR/status/1782155551948058755

I wish NHTSA published videos like the Euro NCAP.

[simonblack]

And all eggs will have to be unbreakable, and be unlocked with a key.

[ChrisArchitect]

[dupe]

More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40207981

[jurschreuder]

Because people are on their phone while driving

[karaterobot]

Needless to say, but unclear from the headline: this refers to all new cars sold.

[doublerabbit]

May have the ability too, but doesn't mean will.

[underseacables]

What happens if you cover the sensors?

[matthewfelgate]

Great idea. e/acc.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

This should work out well </s>

I applaud the idea, but I'm quite skeptical that it will actually work, given the nature of most drivers.

> At speeds of up to 62 mph, these next-generation automatic emergency braking systems must avoid a collision with a vehicle stopped on the roadway ahead. Sounds great, but it’s worth keeping in mind that braking distance is proportional to the square of the initial speed.

It won't work, unless it also forces you to keep an appropriate braking distance from the vehicle ahead. That distance would be substantially larger, if it was raining or snowing.

Not sure if anyone that came up with this idea has actually had to drive on a highway around a major metropolitan area, but that ain't happening.