Drivers who speed will be slowed down by EU car tech

[Mjolinor]

My Smart car beeps if I go over the  limit. I assume it is the GPS but never really looked for what is doing it. It is unbelievably stupid, when I am on the motorway it beeps if I go under or over a 30 or 40 MPH road and tells me of the speed cameras on that road. Infuriating on urban motorways.

 

[jordieDAFC]

Technology like this is starting to become a bit too invasive on the driving experience. I think the more technology we have in cars to make them safe, perhaps the more the driver disengages and loses focus from actually driving the car

[Cyker]

4 hours ago, Haliotis said:

Just one more confirmation that, from Transport Minister to next Transport Minister, and down to the road planners, these so-called “experts” have no idea as to what a sensibly safe road should look like.

Whilst the low on averages says we must have some idiots on our roads, I believe the vast majority of drivers are capable in handling their vehicles, and most know an unsafe traffic measure when they see it.  But the stubborn “experts” will not listen to the opinions of that majority, and will continue to come up with ideas that make things worse.

The obvious example is smart motorways.  Despite significant deaths as a result of these smart motorways, the government has only slowed down their development, and refused to reinstate the hard shoulder to replace the existing ones.

They claim that UK motorways are the safest in the world - whilst presumably quietly excepting the “smart” ones (?) But, even if this claim is true, does that mean we have to accept the backward step of smart motorways, just because the government do not have the guts to admit that they are wrong?  Do they not feel any guilt for their complicity in causing deaths due to their authorisation of smart motorways, and for not taking positive action to reverse the situation?

This is a thing that really annoys me - They clearly have no idea how many near-misses regularly happen on their 'Smart motorways'; I think the only reason the death rate hasn't been much higher is because a lot of drivers are ****-scared on those sections and are at a higher state of alertness to try and avoid death.

I sometimes wonder if that's why Lane 1 is usually so clear, as other drivers are worried about crashing into a suddenly broken-down car.

They really don't care - They won't even reinstate the hard shoulder, which is really the only thing they'd need to do, claiming that it would cost too much, when that's clearly a load of BS since all they'd need to do is paint a solid line and put up signage on the gantrys which are *literally* there for this exact purpose - Basically would cost them them next to nothing, but oh noo would cost too muuuuch lalala need money for my new duck pond house and Range Rover Raptor Super Turbo Sport SVR.

  

50 minutes ago, jordieDAFC said:

Technology like this is starting to become a bit too invasive on the driving experience. I think the more technology we have in cars to make them safe, perhaps the more the driver disengages and loses focus from actually driving the car

 

That's been my opinion - They should be working to make drivers better, not making technology to fight and overrule them.

At this rate, we'll be wondering what the point of having to take driving lessons or get a license is, when the car tries to do everything for you and takes away any agency from the driver whenever it feels like.

 

[Haliotis]

Cyker, your mention of avoiding Lane1 has made me think about the ruling regarding middle lane hoggers.  The rule to move back into Lane1 after passing slower traffic in that lane causes a dilemma - what is the maximum allowed distance before the next slower vehicle in Lane 1?  I think many drivers stay in Lane2 because they feel vulnerable when pulling out again and having to speed up to at least match the speed of vehicles in Lane2 approaching from the rear.  I wonder how a driver can be a middle lane hogger if he/she is travelling at a full 70 mph, because nobody should be overtaking at the maximum permitted speed.

[Cyker]

This is why there have been nearly zero 'lane hogging' prosecutions despite it becoming a law some years ago - It's too subjective.

Most of the time it's a judgement call, as adhering to the keep-to-the-left rule too much can actually get you done for weaving and dangerous driving as you keep switching between the 2 lanes.

But this is what I mean about making drivers better - A computer will be hard pressed to make such judgement calls.

Personally, as I tend to RadarCC at 59mph, if I estimate the gap is 10s or more to the next vehicle to overtake and my closing speed at 59mph isn't high, I'll go back into the left lane, otherwise I'll stay at 70mph in lane 2.

It's gotten trickier as there are a lot more vehicles going at 50mph in lane 1 for some reason, whereas before you'd always rely on a truck to be the slowest thing at ~56mph.

[Haliotis]

Cyker, perhaps the slower speed in Lane1 is due to the development of potholes, usually caused in that lane by heavy lorries.

You mention getting “done” for weaving!   Well, the M69 which I use regularly has begun to show potholes in lanes 1&2.  Having got familiar with where these potholes are, I tend to weave to miss them.  I do not accept that I have to risk damage to my car if it can be avoided by careful manoeuvring.  If the police don’t want me to weave then they should pester the council to fix the potholes.

[Roy124]

I tend to drive in lane 1 with ACC set at 64 which should avoid me being squash bait for following lorries.  As my overtake on the lorry ahead is minimal,  I am content to sit with 3 bar spacing until higher speed traffic has gone.

Usually,  in busy conditions,  lane 2 traffic often slows down and bunches up. 

The problem with 3 bar spacing as I follow a line of lorries it the lorry behind me sees my gap as an opportunity. 

 

[jordieDAFC]

20 hours ago, Cyker said:

That's been my opinion - They should be working to make drivers better, not making technology to fight and overrule them.

At this rate, we'll be wondering what the point of having to take driving lessons or get a license is, when the car tries to do everything for you and takes away any agency from the driver whenever it feels like.

 

I guess the thinking is that the more things they can control through technology, then the less opportunity there is for a human to crash (Not that tech is faultless either!) 

It is good I think to have technology in cars, Just it shouldn't be technology that is actively doing the driving part for you. Stuff like the radar in the front bumper for detecting surprise obstacles i'm a fan of 

[Cyker]

8 hours ago, Haliotis said:

Cyker, perhaps the slower speed in Lane1 is due to the development of potholes, usually caused in that lane by heavy lorries.

You mention getting “done” for weaving!   Well, the M69 which I use regularly has begun to show potholes in lanes 1&2.  Having got familiar with where these potholes are, I tend to weave to miss them.  I do not accept that I have to risk damage to my car if it can be avoided by careful manoeuvring.  If the police don’t want me to weave then they should pester the council to fix the potholes.

Note it was just an extreme example - In reality the Police don't seem to give a flying one about how people drive unless it's actually visibly and undeniably dangerous. You'd have to be weaving a lot for them to even notice!  

They don't even obey the 20mph limits themselves half the time, and even when I've had people jump red lights at roadworks where there's a police car on the other side they've never batted an eyelid. They do seem very good at spotting people on their phone or not wearing a seatbelt somehow though! Saw someone get pulled over today for doing both as I was going to the shops to get some lunch!  

 

2 hours ago, jordieDAFC said:

I guess the thinking is that the more things they can control through technology, then the less opportunity there is for a human to crash (Not that tech is faultless either!) 

It is good I think to have technology in cars, Just it shouldn't be technology that is actively doing the driving part for you. Stuff like the radar in the front bumper for detecting surprise obstacles i'm a fan of 

This is a good point - Where these things are there to ASSIST - It is called Advanced Driver ASSISTANCE Systems after all, I'm fine with it:

Give me the information so I can act on it. One thing I'd love to see in the future is a full-screen HUD which highlights potential hazards and gives some Augmented Reality overlays for e.g. street names, navigation directions, speed of other cars, edge-warnings for bikes and stuff in the blind-spots etc.

What I don't like is where it goes beyond being an Advanced Driver Assistance System and becomes a Unilaterally Taking Control Away From The Driver With No Warning System.

One particularly big bugbear I have with the system in my Mk4, which has given me a few brown trouser moments, is when trying to turn right across a junction - If I try to cross *after* a car has passed in front of me, it will sometimes randomly cut power to the accelerator, thinking for some unfathomable reason that I'm going to crash into the car which has *already passed*, and left me stranded in the middle of the junction for 2 seconds before giving me control back, and turned what would have been a perfectly safe manoeuvre into a dangerous one.

 

[forkingabout]

Technology like this creeps in to annoy everyone due to a minority causing problems & accidents by ignoring the rules / laws they think just don't apply to them.  

EU does like to use technology to solve the problem by taking certain decisions away from the human.

 

 

 

[Rhymes with Paris]

56 minutes ago, Cyker said:

One particularly big bugbear I have with the system in my Mk4, which has given me a few brown trouser moments, is when trying to turn right across a junction - If I try to cross *after* a car has passed in front of me, it will sometimes randomly cut power to the accelerator, thinking for some unfathomable reason that I'm going to crash into the car which has *already passed*, and left me stranded in the middle of the junction for 2 seconds before giving me control back, and turned what would have been a perfectly safe manoeuvre into a dangerous one.

That sounds particularly dangerous Cyker, but I suppose as long as you remember "it's for your own safety" .

If I drive long enough to have one of those cars, that alone would be a deal breaker for me,is this on all newish Toyotas?

[Cyker]

Anything with the automatic emergency braking system I assume - I'm surprised nobody else seems to have encountered this as IIRC only one other person has mentioned it.

I'd be interested to see if the newer models are any better as Toyota usually refine these systems over time, and I complain to them about it every time it happens to me  

[Haliotis]

On my C-HR, if I pull out late to pass a parked vehicle the car will beep at me and the MFD turn red with the word “BRAKE” displayed.  Got used to ignoring it now, but in the beginning I found it distracting. It causes you to wonder if you are on a collision course which you have not noticed.