

Toyota automatically stops car before it can hit pedestrian - buzzblog
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/toyota-system-automatically-stops-car-it-hits
Toyota automatically stops the car before it can hit a pedestrian
======
encoderer
Volvo has this feature -- dubbed City Safety -- already on the road.

It may seem snobbish to some, but I'd never let myself, my wife, and my future
children drive anything but a Mercedes or Volvo.

Between the two of them, they've been behind nearly every safety system
developed in the last 40 years.

I feel good about knowing that our hard work has let us put my wife in a car,
for her 30 minute commute, that has 12 airbags, that monitors her blindspot
and will prevent her from changing lanes when it's occupied, that monitors her
alertness and sounds alarms if she begins to fall asleep at the wheel, that
vibrates the steering wheel if she accidentally begins to drift out of her
lane, that watches for stopped traffic or obstacles in her path and will apply
full force braking in microseconds in a way that her human reflexes just
cannot, that has seats designed to prevent whiplash, and seatbelt
pretensioners, and an extra firewall in the engine compartment to prevent
intrusion.

Not to mention, compared to the often under-engineered competition, it has
handling and performance capabilities that can plausibly prevent accidents
where any of those things would be necessary in the first place.

Neither of us has ever yet, to our knowledge, counted on these things to save
our lives. But knowing they're there, makes me feel much more comfortable when
she leaves home.

~~~
mostapha
That's interesting, because Mercedes's Traction Control system almost killed
me one night. Apparently it's possible to accidentally induce a very slight
but controllable oversteer slide by overshooting the exit to a fast curve and
touching a rumble strip with the outside tires. No surprise there.

In a normal car, you keep your front wheels on the line you want to follow,
release power, then smoothly add power to "shift weight" to the rear wheels
and increase traction (acceleration causes the rear suspension to compress,
making the rear tires push harder on the ground, increasing the normal force
and increasing rear wheel traction). Doing that stops the oversteer (rear
wheel skid).

In a Mercedes, the car assumes that you're an idiot for doing that, cuts
engine power to the drive (rear) wheels, and applies breaks to the OUTSIDE
REAR WHEEL. That procedure has the effect of decompressing the rear suspension
and decreasing traction to the rear wheels, which are already skidding. The
slide that resulted was unrecoverable. Yank the parking break and shift into
neutral while in a hard corner at 40mph if you want to know what it felt like.
For a few seconds, my instincts and the car's Traction Control fought each
other as I tried to correct for the skids that improperly braking the rear
wheels was causing.

Finally, I came to rest having skid across the double yellow…and then somehow
the automatic transmission stalled.

It was a "mistake" that could have been fixed in less than a second driving a
1908 Model T. After a hundred years of innovations, Mercedes has completely
removed the driver from direct control of the vehicle, WITHOUT an option to
turn off those so-called "features."

I spent the next several months talking to people who did tuning for Daimler-
Chrysler for a shop in Montana, cracking ECU encryption to reprogram the fuel
injectors and intake system to perform well at high altitudes. And apparently
there's no good way to turn off that Traction Control system except removing
large chunks of code from the ECU, which voids the warranty and might have
serious side effects. When I learned more about how the Traction Control
system actually works, I sold the car.

I will never own another Mercedes. They breed laziness and irresponsibility
without giving competent drivers the control they need to drive safely.

I'm currently an avid BMW fan because of two major factors: first, it's
possible to buy manual transmissions without special ordering a new car from
Germany; second, it is possible–by holding a button on the console for a few
seconds–to COMPLETELY disable traction control. I have driven in snow and ice,
torrential downpours, and heavy traffic in the last year. I haven't driven
with Traction Control on since Mercedes almost killed me in 2006.

Frankly, I think EVERY SINGLE ONE of the safety features you suggested is a
horrible idea. Pay attention to what you're doing, and don't drive if you're
not physically and mentally capable of driving. I don't want my car to wake me
up if I fall asleep driving…I want to be smart enough to not drive that night.

Frankly, the more I hear about Mercedes safety features, the more distance I
like to keep between me and them on the highway.

~~~
enjalot
I think you should keep in mind that you appear to be an intelligent, skilled
and avid driver. For you driving is an experience you take seriously and also
seem to enjoy. I'm not worried about what you do on the road, but I am worried
about the millions of less intelligent and skilled drivers that are pushing
3000lbs of metal around at lethal speeds.

I think you are justified in wanting and buying a machine that suits your
needs, but please don't assume that everyone is or even should be as adamant
about driving as you are. I for one will happily let the computer take the
wheel and allow me to focus on things I care about like conversation or
coding. If I want a joy ride hopefully I'll be successful enough to own a
classic gasoline powered driving machine ;)

~~~
mostapha
Driving at a high level is one thing. It requires a lot of skill and
concentration.

Not killing people is completely different: it requires basic skills and some
small measure of multi-taking ability. Which is more important, reacting to
the car changing lanes without a signal in front of you or finishing your
sentence _RIGHT NOW_?

The problem isn't even skill level. Driving normally at city and highway
speeds is easy. The vast majority of 1st world residents know how to do it,
and very very few of them make mistakes severe enough to affect anyone else's
lives. The average driver is nowhere near as bad at it as most people seem to
think.

But taking the driver's commitment to and awareness of the risks inherent in
driving away and placing that burden on active "safety features" is a bad
thing. I know their hearts are in the right place and that I'm not the person
these systems are designed for. But they're going to get people killed.

My issue with Mercedes's Traction Control in particular isn't even that it
makes drivers lazy. It's that in at least that situation, it can't tell the
difference between power-induced oversteer and breaking-induced oversteer. In
that situation, it reacted EXACTLY WRONG. It doesn't matter whether the driver
is competent or not if the system makes the opposite changes that it should.

~~~
bradleyland
I'm not sure I'll be able to change your mind about this, but I'd like to
express my opinion on your sentiment and leave it at that.

I think that maybe you're wrong about a few things here. First and foremost,
that your slide was recoverable.

I'm a car guy myself. Like you, I insist on manual transmissions with rear
wheel drive. I've been to driving schools, read extensively about how
suspension affects handling dynamics, and turned a few wrenches in my time.
Even with all that, I try to remain humble about my own driving abilities and
the fact that while I enjoy it, I don't drive professionally, so I shouldn't
expect professional results.

Your comments about skid recovery apply to the input controls that are
available to you as the driver. They don't apply to the input controls
available to the traction control systems in your car. For every subtle detail
that you learned about handling using the steering wheel, brake, and clutch,
there are equivalents for the systems available to the traction control
system, such as individual wheel braking.

Stopping a slide is about controlling rotation. You cannot use the brake to
directly rotate the vehicle because you only get one brake pedal. The best use
of that brake pedal, as a driver, is in controlling the speed and weight
distribution of the automobile. That is the most you can hope for.

"My issue with Mercedes's Traction Control in particular isn't even that it
makes drivers lazy. It's that in at least that situation, it can't tell the
difference between power-induced oversteer and breaking-induced oversteer. In
that situation, it reacted EXACTLY WRONG. It doesn't matter whether the driver
is competent or not if the system makes the opposite changes that it should."

The stability program in a Mercedes absolutely knows the difference between
power-induced oversteer and braking-induced oversteer. It uses accelerometers,
yaw sensors, throttle position sensors, and individual wheel speed sensors to
infer your intended direction of travel. Braking the outside rear wheel does
transfer weight forward, but it has a far more significant positive effect on
correcting rotation because of the asymmetrical application of braking force.
Your slide was simply unrecoverable. You _think_ that it was recoverable, but
you'll never know for sure. Based on the physics involved, I think you're
wrong.

I've tested the limits of these systems myself. My 2006 GTI had ESP. I took it
out to a dirt road and explored the limits under slalom conditions and hard
turns. These systems are amazing at recovering slides that can be recovered.
If I pushed hard enough, I could "break through" to an uncontrollable slide,
however. When you "overshoot" your mark, brake, turn, then hit a rumble strip
(which _significantly_ reduces available traction) you end up in an
unrecoverable slide.

The irony here is that your Mercedes' ESP system didn't almost kill you, you
did.

~~~
encoderer
Thanks for offering your opinion. While I want to respect the GP's personal
experience, your comments echo my feelings. My favorite part of a Mercedes
(and this is surely true for other premier makes) is that _everything_ seems
to have been thought out and _engineered_ ^1. And with my own personal
experience of the cars TCS, I felt it very hard to believe that the Mercedes
TCS would be so simplistic.

^1 Not to say I don't have my issues with the cars -- stuff like a crappy
Chinese made iPod interface.

Edit: That video is stunning. Thanks for the share.

~~~
bradleyland
I'd strongly encourage you to take advantage of any driving school that
Mercedes offers. I've read countless messages from individuals who insist that
these safety systems (ABS, TCS, and ESP) are a detriment to their ability to
drive the car, but I've experienced them in two makes of automobile (VW and
BWM) now, and I now know from first-hand experience that they work fantastic.
There is no replacement for testing them out for yourself.

------
mdasen
Volvo has similarly come out with a pedestrian detection/braking system
([http://www.boston.com/cars/newsandreviews/overdrive/2010/07/...](http://www.boston.com/cars/newsandreviews/overdrive/2010/07/volvo_s60_pedestrian_detection.html))
and Volkswagen has been showing off a self-driving car
([http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1062073_volkswagen-
shows-...](http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1062073_volkswagen-shows-off-
self-driving-auto-pilot-technology-for-cars)) in addition to the Google Car.
Cars are going toward driving themselves. The Google car is impressive, but it
will likely be a while before people become comfortable with the concept and
for the cost to come down. Mainstream auto manufacturers are inching their way
toward these features (mostly on their more expensive models), but I keep
hearing people say, "well, what if it stops me when I can go forward."

I think manufacturers are trying to get consumers used to the idea that
technology might be the way to go for a lot of driving systems. People need to
get the idea that self-driving technologies enhance safety. I think that's why
they're starting with braking. As people become comfortable with and grateful
for their car taking control in emergency-ish situations like that, they'll
similarly become comfortable with the car taking control during normal
driving. At least that's the thought.

------
athst
Whenever I almost get hit by a car while I'm walking around San Francisco, I'd
say that 8 times out of 10 it's a Prius... so this is definitely welcome.

~~~
gte910h
I've had like 4 cyclists ride into my Prius. It's like a magnet for the
unaware.

~~~
ristretto
Wow that sounds scary. Does the prius have some noise generator you can turn
on?

~~~
epochwolf
Perhaps install some big subwoofers in the trunk and play the music a little
louder than is polite? (semi-serious here)

~~~
pavel_lishin
May I suggest whichever rap song has the chorus "Move, bitch, get out the
way"?

------
Julie188
Yikes. I like safety features like airbags and strong cages that won't
collapse on the driver in a crash. I don't want my car making driving
decisions for me. It may be done in the name of safety but until they invent a
car that can't break, I don't trust it not to cause more problems than it
helps.

~~~
drcube
Luddite. :P Seriously, would you prefer a car that was built by a robot or a
human?

Personally, while I see where you are coming from and share your reservations
about unproven technologies, I also foresee a time - within our lifetimes and
hopefully sooner than later - where cars are 100% computer controlled and
roads are at least an order of magnitude safer.

Imagine if every drunk at the bar could just press "home" on the dashboard of
their car and then sleep it off during the trip?

------
galenward
Toyota has clearly never considered the parable where one is required to run
over 1 pedestrian in order to stop another car that is about to take the lives
of 5 other pedestrians.

~~~
moheeb
Yeah this would have definitely been the least popular vehicle in Carmageddon.

------
alexitosrv
Does anybody else remember this demostration of a Volvo featuring a similar
characteristic and utterly failing?

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNi17YLnZpg>

These technologies need to gain the trust of the drivers before they can
become mainstream.

------
seles
Alerting driver of potential pedestrian = good

Automatically making a decision (that the human is better at making) and
potentially causing an accident due to a random sudden stop = bad

~~~
lutorm
Are you saying it's worse to _potentially_ cause an accident due to the sudden
stop than to _certainly_ have an accident as you run someone/thing over? I'm
not sure I agree with you there.

~~~
fr0sty
This line of argument hinges on the assumption that braking input is the only
means by which to avoid an accident. Cars have steering wheels and swerving is
often an effective maneuver when attempting to avoid an accident.

Incidentally, heavy breaking reduces a car's ability to corner which may end
up causing accidents which could otherwise be avoided.

~~~
lutorm
At below 22mph or whatever they said, and at the distances they show in the
movie, I'm almost positive that braking is the correct action. In that
situation, stop distance is short and it's too late to swerve. (It's true that
swerving becomes a progressively better option as speed increases.)

------
joejohnson
Hmmm, but is there a way to override this? What if I'm trying to run my car
into mannequins?

~~~
mashmac2
That could be a really fun trend... start attaching mannequins and cardboard
cutouts to random street signs and light poles as close to the road as
possible and see when the Toyota reacts.

~~~
gmac
... except that if it scuppers a life-saving innovation, it will thereby cost
lives.

------
mhb
But what does it do if five pedestrians jump in front of the car and it has to
turn and kill a different one in order to save the five?

~~~
jrockway
It explodes, killing only the environment-ruining automobile driver.

(Please note: tongue-in-cheek.)

~~~
epochwolf
Only on the electric models, the gas ones will fly over the pedestrians using
a rocket booster.

------
bh42222
This is great! But why does this (as well as Volvo's) car AI require no
special permission from the law, but Google's car AI did?

Is it because we welcome an AI which breaks, but not one which drives? Why?

Because passive AIs are less scary than active ones? And active breaking is
still perceived as a passive action?

------
tinman
I don't get it. Why is there a giant "Lexus" on the side of the car if Toyota
is making this technology?

~~~
bradleyland
Toyota owns Lexus.

------
orijing
Will insurance companies adjust rates in response to this, as it will likely
lower expected costs?

