Intelligent Speed Adaptation...coming to a car near you...

[martine]

Ford is to launch a version of its S-Max model that can read road signs and adjust the
vehicle’s speed to ensure it stays either within, or close to, the speed limit when it launches
the second generation of its S-Max cars in August this year after which is plans to extended
the new technology to other models. Drivers will be able to set the new system to let them
travel at up to 5mph beyond the speed limit. The system, Intelligent Speed Limiter,
combines two existing technologies: adjustable speed limiters and traffic sign recognition.
Ford points out that in 2013 more than 15,000 UK drivers received speeding fines costing
£100 or more. The company hopes that this will encourage motorists to pay extra for the technology, which will
not be included as standard on the basic S-Max model.

[akirk]

As the concept of an intelligent cruise control - it makes a lot of sense... however there are flaws in the concept:
- how will it work in roadworks where sometimes (though incorrect) there can be more than one speed sign showing - with one in temporary force
- how will it work in NSL zones where the speed is based on factors beyond just road signs
- how will it detect 30mph based on street-lamp distances?

it also worryingly promotes the concept of speed limits as a target - who takes responsibility in an accident when the car chooses to change speed / increase speed because it has read a new sign - not noticing the child crossing the road ahead...

personally not in favour of anything which moves responsibility from driver to car... I appreciate that some people are so focused on the 'excitement' of driverless cars that this is seen as a step on that journey, but when you analyse where we are with that technology (car stops if unsure etc.) we are a way off that really working - yes some cars have done thousands of miles, but we haven't had thousands of cars together being tested - it is opening a window onto where sadly I thikn cars will go, but I am not sure it is positive

Alasdair

[kfae8959]

Martin,

What's the source of your quotation? More to the point, when was it published?

Although come to think of it, if it is an April Fool, the acronym should be sillier.

David

[martine]

Martin,

What's the source of your quotation? More to the point, when was it published?

Although come to think of it, if it is an April Fool, the acronym should be sillier.

David

I actually read it in the AIRSO (www.airso.org.uk) newsletter today but a quick search shows it's also on the BBC website...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-32049350

[akirk]

The 'Front Assist' system in the new Skoda Octavia will read traffic signs - it is their version of adaptive cruise control...

I chose not to include it on the octavia I have just ordered

So, not hugely new technology per se...

Alasdair

[trashbat]

JLR have had sign recognition for a while.

As the concept of an intelligent cruise control - it makes a lot of sense... however there are flaws in the concept:
- how will it work in roadworks where sometimes (though incorrect) there can be more than one speed sign showing - with one in temporary force
- how will it work in NSL zones where the speed is based on factors beyond just road signs
- how will it detect 30mph based on street-lamp distances?

it also worryingly promotes the concept of speed limits as a target <snip>

None of this matters if you bound the system responsibilities appropriately.

So, for a start, it's not going to accelerate up to the limit. You as the driver are. The system responsibility will be to stop you gently accelerating past a known limit.

And, when it doesn't know the speed limit, it won't do anything. Therefore the only dangers are driver over-reliance and potential inconvenience.

As for, "personally not in favour of anything which moves responsibility from driver to car", from a blank canvas perspective I might agree, but the fact is you have a load of drivers who already have a significant lack of attention, aren't going to change, and unless you can come up with a better way of resolving that, perhaps it would be better in those cases if the car intervened.

[martine]

JLR have had sign recognition for a while.

And it's an option on new Focus and some Mercs

The Focus system falsely recognises the small roundels on the back of some foreign HGVs - '130' anyone?

[akirk]

good points Rob - but combine with Martin's comments and you could have a situation where:

- in a 70 zone (scottish motorways might have 70 signs)
- come down to a 30 zone as you come off the motorway, the car reduces speed appropriately
- the car spots 70 on the back of a lorry and takes your speed back up - it isn't increasing speed, it is returning it to where it was already set - as adaptive cruise control already allows...

appreciate that the driver should control it, but in reality...

Alasdair

[trashbat]

Well, potentially - but adaptive cruise control has a much tighter context to operate in. It asks the question: "is there enough space in front of the car?", and then it performs its behaviour.

It also has, in most cases anyway, explicit driver opt-in.

The changing speed limits are a far weaker context - even as a human, you can't use that alone to do very much, except maybe slow down. I suspect that in reality it will be even softer, probably just displaying a warning.

[akirk]

I can see the warning being very useful - much as you have already with satnav...
I think though from memory that the skoda one can / does use the camera and sign recognition with the adaptive cruise control...

appreciate that lots of safety boundaries will be in place - just fail to see it has any positive value. if you consider the post on here recently regarding training - surely this has the same potential issue... "I thought the car was dealing with that aspect of the driving..." i.e. where it might be sold as a tool which offers benefits it will lead to a change in habit / expectation, and that is likely to cause issues...

Alasdair

[trashbat]

Yes, but it's easy to come at it from an AD perspective and underestimate the benefit/overestimate the risk to the average person.

Think of the things you notice on the road, or when a passenger.

Whenever anyone asks, "err, what's the speed limit here?", well they would benefit.

Anyone that catches themselves driving over the limit and corrects, them too.

What about when anyone brakes for a speed camera? Even if they were already going at the right speed? Them as well.

Now hopefully none of those things happen to you or I that often, but they happen regularly to everyone else I know, and IMO nothing else is going to help or change them - at least, nothing we will like, such as an increase in speed camera enforcement.

Now the habitual reliance on the car doing something, I agree with, like lane assist and similar enabling poor & lazy behaviours, but again if the underlying truth is that the system actively prevents more mistakes than it passively encourages, and there's nothing else that can be reasonably done, then do you want to see it implemented?

[TripleS]

JLR have had sign recognition for a while.

And it's an option on new Focus and some Mercs

The Focus system falsely recognises the small roundels on the back of some foreign HGVs - '130' anyone?

kph, presumably; i.e. a bit over 80 mph.

[akirk]

if it saves more issues than it causes then I can understand why it would be promoted, however I am not sure that at the moment we can know that - I think it is clear that to add value to current ability levels will improve a situation - but if it leads to ability levels dropping because a driver feels less need to be involved, then it might not be so positive...

Alasdair

[trashbat]

I don't necessarily agree with the premise "there's nothing else that can be reasonably done", so my answer would be no. I would much prefer that resources were put into bringing standards up than indirectly driving them down.

OK, so what can be done to meaningfully raise the general driving standard?

AD and driver training beyond the DSA-mandated standard is not only incredibly niche, but individually-led, thus basically irrelevant in the general population. A shame, but true, and I don't see it changing.

Then it would appear that there is no money or appetite for the stick, the punitive measures, at least the ones that we want to see, human enforcement of driving standards.

So what is it you see as feasible?

Ultimately I very much expect that within my lifetime, manually-driven cars will be phased out, and most people seem to agree, thus to some degree we are kind of on the tail end of doing anything with human driving standards. It will be the death of much of what we do here, but probably do much for road safety, which is the ostensible aim of all this, if not always the motivating one. I don't personally have a huge problem with this since my AD efforts concentrate on improving my own standards whilst it remains relevant.

If you want to see actual 'driving standards' raised, where that is measured on the outputs, not necessarily human behaviours, then you need to consider the possibility that automation is the answer.

[akirk]

you are right - automation (fully deployed) should raise standards - and seeing driving simply as a means of A to B progress then it makes sense to have full automation, but if enjoyment is allowed as a part of driving then automation will not be a good thing...

and no doubt wont help the car manufacturing industry - once you have no enjoyment in driving and you have a driverless car, then there is little point in changing cars... it becomes a tool not a hobby / passion.

alternatives for AD - difficult, the big block is perception of driving standards, when a driver feels that they are good at driving where is the reason to improve? however there are possibly ways forward - if we analyse reasons for accidents and injuries, there are some common causes - speed / alcohol / etc. perhaps some of those can be tackled with carrots as well as sticks?

e.g. - wacky idea:
pass an AD exam (appropriately crafted) and get permission / the ability to drive faster, so allow AD drivers to legally drive at up to 90 on a motorway... tie in responsibility with that, so any accident / bad driving is more stringently penalised... would that incentivise people to do the AD?

random thoughts

Alasdair