akirk wrote:I would expect the manufacturer to detail in the manual how their systems work
Is that expect in the literal sense of the word, or in what would happen in a fantasy utopian world? Manuals dont normally explain fairly simple systems on cars, let alone the complex algorithms at play in autonomous driving.
I think it should be okay to explain the basic outline:
- you have automated braking
- it activates up to this speed
- it chooses to come on when it spots an obstacle in this area (with pretty diagram)
- you can turn it on and off here...
now as a driver you know that if something comes into that range when you are doing less than that speed the car will brake...
the reality is that for most cars the autonomous systems are no more complex than e.g. auto wipers / cruise control - both of which are arguably semi-autonomous systems, you would expect those to be explained in the manual...
Matt1962 wrote: akirk wrote: Strangely Brown wrote:
akirk wrote:you as driver are responsible for how the car behaves under your control, your job to know how the system will operate, and to anticipate etc.
Really? How much control do you think you'll have over a [semi-]autonomous car that is "under your control"? Do you really expect manufacturers to provide details of their algorithms so that it would be possible for you to "know how the system operates"?
I think that is rather the point of this discussion. Manufacturers are taking more and more decisions away from the driver so at what point does the liability fall to the manufacturer of the "safety" system rather than the driver?
I would expect the manufacturer to detail in the manual how their systems work - and for the driver to read the manual!
(not likely I know!!!)
At this stage with cars they are not really autonomous it is a set of very simple logic systems and it is up tot the driver to understand them and drive accordingly - or turn them off, or choose to buy a car without them...
we do live in a society where people love to find someone else responsible for their mistakes, but I think that a part of AD is the notion that we drive in a more aware / more deliberate / more controlled fashion, so if that is a car with systems like this, then I think that we do need to understand them and drive accordingly...
I don't agree with some of that.....
'Driving accordingly' in the real example here would mean making sure that your speed was always either above 28mph (45Km/h is the point at which the unwarned autonomous braking switches off) OR low enough to mean that no one is EVER going to drive into the back of you if you come to an abrupt halt for no reason. I don't think this is possible (and there would always be a transition period anyway).
The incident I mentioned originally, happened at around 20mph and was violent enough for the drawers to shoot out from under the front seats etc. I would hope that as an 'advanced driver' I would not have run into the back of a car that did the same thing, but I am not completely convinced
. Turning the system off might seem like the correct AD solution, but I suspect this might have its own unwelcome implications with regard to insurance etc. (maybe another topic?).
I'm with Strangely Brown on this one. If the incident I described had led to a rear end collision, the major fault would have been with my car. As the driver I would have been blameless and the driver of the car behind would have been maybe 25% responsible. Is this different from the car having been supplied with a mechanical fault that causes an accident?
We might have to disagree
but if (as per my answer to Waremark above) the driver reads the manual, and knows that under 28mph within a certain zone an obstruction / moving target / etc. will cause it to activate, then you would have known that a person moving into that zone might trigger braking, so if you are happy with the system, you adjust your driving and perhaps pausing / lifting off may have stopped it triggering (we don't know how close you were), if you are not happy with the system interfering as your ability to analyse the situation is better than the car's ability, then turn the system off...
the Kodiaq manual is here: https://ws.skoda-auto.com/OwnersManualS ... Manual.pdf
The section on Assist systems (pg 213) starts with:
The assistance systems only serve to support the driver and do not relieve the driver of the responsibility for driving the vehicle
so that is the manufacturer liability removed
Page 248 explains that a pedestrian crossing will trigger the system... also that Front Assist will intervene up to 130mph
Page 247 explains how to set the distance at which it triggers (though the manual is not clear whether that is also for pedestrians)
Page 249 tells you how to turn it off...
So, I am not clear why you think that as the driver you will be blameless - the machinery you are in charge of behaved as the manual said it would - and you had the choice to turn that system on or off - why is that therefore not the driver's responsibility?
I do believe that as new systems come in we need to find better ways for drivers to understand the implications and a diagram showing scope and explaining how it works would be better than text...
This is also why my newest car is 2003 and has none of this - auto lights / auto windscreen wipers / cruise control are as automated as I get and even then I keep an eye on them! I have no doubt that there will be drivers in the future who will get into a car like mine - set cruise control and let it drive into the back of another car and then blame the machinery because they were used to front assist or equivalent and expected the car to back off - maybe I am old-fashioned, but the driver holds responsibility for what the car does - the manufacturer only holds responsibility for communicating to the driver what it will do, and then making sure that the system behaves as expected...