Automatic Braking - Where is Nissan?

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Stoaty

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 18, 2010
Messages
4,490
Location
West Los Angeles
There are 10 auto manufacturers who have agreed to make automatic braking standard on their vehicles. I don't see Nissan listed among them:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-iihs-nhtsa-automatic-braking-20150911-story.html
 
All I can say is GOOD, sick of being treated like a moron, I know how to open a window! (I despise that damned garbage function of "auto windows" )

at least you can turn off the auto traction controll.

The best system for auto breaking is between the ears! By paying attention to your suroundings and driving you can do a great job of not even needing the breaks for the most part and use regen.

planed turns and a light foot, all is great!

Such systems are only required by peoples failurs to pay attention to what they are doing on the road.

I am all for natural selection, we need to encurage it, not retard it imo. Less automated stuff in a vehicle the better it is for those of us who chose to use our heads.

I fully suport Nissan to continue to respect their users as inteligent drivers on this end! (But they lost the point on giving us honest data for soc and such of the battery on the dash)

What we really need is better enforcement and harsher penalties to those who fail in their duties opperating a motorized vehicle!
 
XeonPony said:
I am all for natural selection, we need to encurage it, not retard it imo. Less automated stuff in a vehicle the better it is for those of us who chose to use our heads.

I suspect you have never been rear ended.

It is a sick feeling to look into the rear view mirror and watch a car knowing they are going to hit you. I know this feeling.
 
When someone slams into a loved one in a moment of inattention, you may think differently about automatic braking on cars. Kind of like insurance, you might not cause an accident but when an uninsured driver crashed into you and totals your car, you will be glad you if you have coverage.
 
I have been rear ended before (minor, no one hurt in this instance), but it still costs time and money. Note that the article reports the IHSS reported a 35% reduction in payouts for injuries when this technology was in use. If every driver was perfect and never suffered a lapse of attention from the radio, cell phone, children in car, drinking, drug use, illness, heart attack, etc. we wouldn't need this technology... but that ain't gonna happen.

PS To XeonPony: were you against air bags when they came out?
 
in far as they inhibit natural selection, but they do not interfere with the vehicles operation! So I am indifferent to their presence.

The cavat there is they do save those whom are victims of another failure to operate their vehicle properly, or the rar true accident where there was simply no way to predict that there was even a potential.

It is like speeding, so long as they only take them selfs out go what ever speed you please, problem is they often take out others just trying to get home.
 
Firetruck41 said:
When someone slams into a loved one in a moment of inattention, you may think differently about automatic braking on cars. Kind of like insurance, you might not cause an accident but when an uninsured driver crashed into you and totals your car, you will be glad you if you have coverage.


You'd be grossly mistaken in your assumption. (My opinion does not change no matter whom gets rear ended, I'd call that emotional pleading, we're not on a religion debate forum so lets do away with such empty hog wash please) FYI Plenty of my family have been rear ended!

Insurance does not override your operation of the vehicle. I am against nannism, punish those who do not follow the rules (One of them is being an attentive driver!)
 
Additionally, when a car is rear-ended, the driver's foot often slips off the brake pedal, causing them to hit the next car in front. If cars can detect & maintain brake pressure in this scenario, it would help prevent additional secondary damage.
 
garsh said:
Additionally, when a car is rear-ended, the driver's foot often slips off the brake pedal, causing them to hit the next car in front. If cars can detect & maintain brake pressure in this scenario, it would help prevent additional secondary damage.

That would be a good thing to have, but have it activated by g force as a fail safe. Having some thing that can take over control can do more damage by removing your ability to maneuver in an emergency.
 
XeonPony said:
I am against nannism, punish those who do not follow the rules (One of them is being an attentive driver!)

You are arguing from the perspective that we are capable of infallibility. But the reality of human physiology is not that simple. What if you suffer a lapse of concentration or even consciousness, from an un-diagnosed medical condition? Should you be "punished"? How about the occupants in front of you? Even something as simple as dehydration can cause this. Or a random sneeze.

The idea that we are all completely in control of our destinies is an illusion. And faced with real-world injury statistics, fail-safe mechanisms can be far more effective than arguments about personal responsibility. Innocent human lives are at stake. Imho, I'm ok with Darwin sitting this one out.
 
XeonPony said:
Firetruck41 said:
When someone slams into a loved one in a moment of inattention, you may think differently about automatic braking on cars. Kind of like insurance, you might not cause an accident but when an uninsured driver crashed into you and totals your car, you will be glad you if you have coverage.


You'd be grossly mistaken in your assumption. (My opinion does not change no matter whom gets rear ended, I'd call that emotional pleading, we're not on a religion debate forum so lets do away with such empty hog wash please) FYI Plenty of my family have been rear ended!

Insurance does not override your operation of the vehicle. I am against nannism, punish those who do not follow the rules (One of them is being an attentive driver!)

Knowing that the injury of a family member does not inform your opinion, is invaluable in calculating the worth of your opinion. Now we know it is an infinitesimal fraction of $0.02.
 
Firetruck41 said:
XeonPony said:
You'd be grossly mistaken in your assumption. (My opinion does not change no matter whom gets rear ended, I'd call that emotional pleading, we're not on a religion debate forum so lets do away with such empty hog wash please) FYI Plenty of my family have been rear ended!
Knowing that the injury of a family member does not inform your opinion, is invaluable in calculating the worth of your opinion. Now we know it is an infinitesimal fraction of $0.02.
Sounds like "ideology overrides compassion". Not a world I want to live in.
 
I have looked in the mirror and thought, "Sh*t that guy's going to hit me" (and he did, at full highway speed, pushing me into the car in front of mine).

That said, some a$$holes just shouldn't be driving. Take that Fiat commercial touting the benefits of forward facing collision warning while the driver avoids a slow moving tractor backing out of a field. If you're driving with such complete inattention that you can't see and avoid a tractor moving at under 5 mph, you simply do not belong behind the wheel of a motor vehicle (IMHO) and, yes, you probably deserve to loose your life rather than having a car's automated systems baby you. This is just ripe for making of worse drivers, not better ones.
 
Firetruck41 said:
XeonPony said:
Firetruck41 said:
When someone slams into a loved one in a moment of inattention, you may think differently about automatic braking on cars. Kind of like insurance, you might not cause an accident but when an uninsured driver crashed into you and totals your car, you will be glad you if you have coverage.


You'd be grossly mistaken in your assumption. (My opinion does not change no matter whom gets rear ended, I'd call that emotional pleading, we're not on a religion debate forum so lets do away with such empty hog wash please) FYI Plenty of my family have been rear ended!

Insurance does not override your operation of the vehicle. I am against nannism, punish those who do not follow the rules (One of them is being an attentive driver!)

Knowing that the injury of a family member does not inform your opinion, is invaluable in calculating the worth of your opinion. Now we know it is an infinitesimal fraction of $0.02.

And knowing you use emotion rather then logic is as equally useful in knowing it is as equally worthless.
 
mwalsh said:
I have looked in the mirror and thought, "Sh*t that guy's going to hit me" (and he did, at full highway speed, pushing me into the car in front of mine).

That said, some a$$holes just shouldn't be driving. Take that Fiat commercial touting the benefits of forward facing collision warning while the driver avoids a slow moving tractor backing out of a field. If you're driving with such complete inattention that you can't see and avoid a tractor moving at under 5 mph, you simply do not belong behind the wheel of a motor vehicle (IMHO) and, yes, you probably deserve to loose your life rather than having a car's automated systems baby you. This is just ripe for making of worse drivers, not better ones.


Thank you, my point exactly, if people know they can be that much more mentally lazy they often will!

We need stronger laws on who gets a licence in the first place and the punishments harsher for those who fail to follow the rules!

Stop trying to punish every one ells for the idiots!
 
Stoaty said:
Firetruck41 said:
XeonPony said:
You'd be grossly mistaken in your assumption. (My opinion does not change no matter whom gets rear ended, I'd call that emotional pleading, we're not on a religion debate forum so lets do away with such empty hog wash please) FYI Plenty of my family have been rear ended!
Knowing that the injury of a family member does not inform your opinion, is invaluable in calculating the worth of your opinion. Now we know it is an infinitesimal fraction of $0.02.
Sounds like "ideology overrides compassion". Not a world I want to live in.


Using logic, evidence, and situational awareness is the only important thing, compassion does nothing but waste time in such a discussion, "Compassion" and emotional pleading belong in religion debates (It is all they have) Not in talking about further automation of a vehicle system that will over ride a drivers control.
 
XeonPony said:
All I can say is GOOD, sick of being treated like a moron, I know how to open a window! ...

I'm willing to bet that you, just like EVERYONE else on the road, follow much to closely most of the time. I don't care how awesome you are between the ears, no one can react quickly enough when we're all following one car length at 80+ MPH. We can either fight human nature of speeding and following too closely, or we can design to accommodate it. I'm pretty sure I know which one is easier!
 
Being honest with myself, I know I have had moments of inattention, and have made mistakes. And that is despite some pretty good training on situational awareness and human factors, an understanding of the physics involved, etc.... At least enough to have earned a pilot's license with an instrument rating. Not to brag, but it is rather more difficult to earn that rating than it is to earn a drivers' license. And I'm still not perfect in the left seat of an aircraft or an automobile.

Did I "deserve" to lose my life due to those mistakes? Well, I guess there are different philosophical answers. I would assert that anyone reading this has also had moments of inattention and has made mistakes behind the wheel. And the difference between us and someone who has paid the full price, is often one of chance. "There but for the grace of God..."

Whenever I hear people suggest that they are capable of complete control, and that accidents only happen to people of lesser ability and virtue, I see the Dunning-Kruger effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
 
pkulak said:
XeonPony said:
All I can say is GOOD, sick of being treated like a moron, I know how to open a window! ...

I'm willing to bet that you, just like EVERYONE else on the road, follow much to closely most of the time. I don't care how awesome you are between the ears, no one can react quickly enough when we're all following one car length at 80+ MPH. We can either fight human nature of speeding and following too closely, or we can design to accommodate it. I'm pretty sure I know which one is easier!


I do not drive closely to others just for that reason, I'm used to driving big heavy trucks where under best case stoping distance would be 500 feet n more!, but I have allot of idiots who think I leave all that space just for them! (Can we say dash cam)

And for the car I do not follow closely as for one it is in the rules and 2 reactions take time, it is so simple to leave space to react! I all so never go faster then the speed limit, it is a waste of gas and it rarely if ever gets you to where you are going any faster in the end.

Please do not project ones lack of self controll on others. And those who do those things need to be the ones geting the harsh penalties dealt on them.
 
Nubo said:
Being honest with myself, I know I have had moments of inattention, and have made mistakes. And that is despite some pretty good training on situational awareness and human factors, an understanding of the physics involved, etc.... At least enough to have earned a pilot's license with an instrument rating. Not to brag, but it is rather more difficult to earn that rating than it is to earn a drivers' license. And I'm still not perfect in the left seat of an aircraft or an automobile.

Did I "deserve" to lose my life due to those mistakes? Well, I guess there are different philosophical answers. I would assert that anyone reading this has also had moments of inattention and has made mistakes behind the wheel. And the difference between us and someone who has paid the full price, is often one of chance. "There but for the grace of God..."

Whenever I hear people suggest that they are capable of complete control, and that accidents only happen to people of lesser ability and virtue, I see the Dunning-Kruger effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

I never claimed to be perfect, but I follow the concept of self responsibility, hence why I pay attention to what I do, as if I screw up and die then it is purely on me. I have no one ells to blame for my mistakes but my self, and thus have really good motivation to do the best I can to never get in those situations.

This is a simple concept that most ignore, they like to blame every one but them selfs. We need to start punishing those who do not take their responsibility serious behind the wheel! rather then trying to take all control of the vehicle systems over to a computer.

That is a big part of the reason I will not buy any truck newer then 1992 there is no other garbage in the vehicle, it does what I want how I want it!
 
Back
Top