Rear-end collision avoidance technology from Nissan

[AZhitman]

Nissan announced its "Forward Collision Avoidance Assist Concept," a new technology designed to address both sides of potential rear end collisions: helping a driver avoid hitting the vehicle ahead in a lane of travel, while also helping reduce the potential risk of sudden braking - being rear-ended by a vehicle approaching from behind. The new system has the capability of avoiding possible collisions at forward speeds of up to approximately 60kph, the highest speed ever for forward collision avoidance systems.

The concept utilizes a highly sensitive radar sensor to monitor the distance from the vehicle in front and its relative speed.

When the system judges that deceleration is required, it alerts the driver using both a screen display and sound, then generates a force that pushes the accelerator pedal up and smoothly applies partial braking to assist the driver in slowing the vehicle down.

If the system judges that there is the possibility of a collision, it will automatically apply harder braking and tighten the driver's seatbelt.



The new "Forward Collision Avoidance Assist Concept" detects the vehicle in front at an earlier stage and generates warnings so that the driver can take action to keep away from a high risk situation. Because the system is designed to help the driver decelerate smoothly, it is also expected to help reduce the risk of the vehicle being rear-ended by another vehicle approaching from behind.

Nissan is promoting the development of safety technologies as part of its "Safety Shield" concept, based on the idea that "vehicles help to protect people." From the viewpoint that the driver is always the main subject of driving, Nissan places emphasis on assisting the driver intuitively through means such as visual and audio notifications.

[PyR0NiAk]

I like it..

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

Yeah...here's an idea...PAY ATTENTION. My collision avoidance system is free.
I thought all these gizmos were really cool at first until I sat back and thought about why we have them in the first place... Dumbass drivers with poorly maintained cars.

[PyR0NiAk]

Pretty much, but if this means those stupid drivers have less of a chance of smashing me and my family in the rear-end, the happier I will be.

[infinitgkid]

Yeah...here's an idea...PAY ATTENTION. My collision avoidance system is free.

Truth!

Nothin' like some good ol' fashioned rear-view mirrors and a good pair of eyes!

[PyR0NiAk]

Not really much you can do to keep someone from rear-ending you. It doesn't matter if you see them or not.

[nissangirl74]

I like the idea of another layer of protection between me and the idiots on the road. I'd rather not have to depend on the chick in the car behind me (texting her boyfriend while eating her lunch) to make a quick maneuver if necessary.

[MinisterofDOOM]

DO NOT WANT.

This crap, like Ford's existing "auto-brake" collision prevention system, scares the HELL out of me.

I'm still not even sold on the necessity of ABS. Anything more controlling than that is definitely not okay in my book. Computers can only judge by the data they are provided. They can't know outside details. They can't judge the "lesser evil" of a collision. They can't tell how YOU the driver might try to react, how their own reaction might interfere with that, or how--Heaven forbid!!!!--the driver might ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THE s*** HE'S DOING AND BE FINE WITHOUT ELECTRONIC INTERFERENCE!

Scenario:
Coming around a blind corner, you encounter a stopped car in your lane. Reason doesn't matter*. Behind you is a semi, also unprepared to stop. IF you stop (or the car stops FOR YOU ARRGHGHGHGHG) you're going to be a dead sandwich. But if you SWERVE...you might just make it. At the very least you'll turn a horrible triple-pileup into a clipped corner. Oh, but guess what...the car has assumed it knows better than you and you're already stopping. Congrats, you're dead. Too bad.

Sorry. It doesn't matter how bad a driver a person is, they will still ALWAYS have a better set of data by which to make reaction decisions than any collision prevention system.

Keep this s*** OUTTA MY CARS. I've gotten by for years without electronic nannies and I intend to keep on that way. When s*** goes wrong I have MYSELF and ONLY MYSELF to contend with. I'm not fighting TCS trying to belatedly contradict me. I'm not fighting ABS thinking it knows how to brake better than I do. I'm not fighting radar s*** thinking it knows how to avoid a crash better than me. When I don't have to think/worry/fight with that garbage, MY OWN reaction ability is improved.

I feel the same way about this crap as I do about Infiniti's "lane departure prevention."
The more we take responsibility for MAINTAINING control of the car away from the driver, the worse off we will all be. In 25 years when no one knows how to drive anymore because the car does it all for you based on assumptions from narrow datasets, the roads are going to be one scary f*** place.

And I haven't even gotten into the INCREASED potential for things that can go wrong when you start handing over complete braking control to the car.

I also dislike the idea of anything that "pre-loads" the brakes. That just means you now have no idea how much brake pressure is necessary to stop. Unless your brakes are utterly useless, you don't need "pre-loaded" brakes, you just need to press the effing pedal harder! But when the car changes brake response at panic moments, your ability to respond is--YET AGAIN--impaired.

*I had this happen to me a few months ago. Early morning, very little traffic, all of it clumped together. Coming down a curving overpass, I find a woman in a Corolla STOPPED in the middle lane of a 65mph highway because there is an accident ON THE SHOULDER--no one in front of her. I moved around her, but she very nearly caused a multi-car accident with her stupid.

[mmkeller]

This would be good to put in 100 cars/trucks to test first. Over a time period Nissan could evaluate the data and determine if it is worth the cost. Can we override the car's decision making? I'm on the fence with this because if we are in an accident and then we could say it was the car's fault? WTF, how does insurance deal with a smart car, lower rates? My dad when teaching me to drive kept on repeating this, "Driving a motor vehicle is a full time job." I'm all for making cars safer but it starts with the driver.

[Bubba1]

I agree with MoD. Do not want. Manufacturers keep adding complexity to literally dumb down driving in order to compensate for a terrible lack of driver training.

[ADDirishboy]

Not really much you can do to keep someone from rear-ending you. It doesn't matter if you see them or not.

We could stop handing out driver's licenses to every idiot on the road who doesn't know how to drive.

[snwbrdr435]

^ I wish that would work.

Can you turn this system off?

[ADDirishboy]

^ I wish that would work.

I don't get why that can't work. Driving is a privilege, not a right. If you don't know how to drive, you shouldn't be able to get a license.

The only problem is that retards who have no brain would argue that anyone who speeds doesn't know how to drive and shouldn't have a license.

[snwbrdr435]

Don't get me started on that bs when i went to "driving school" we watched fast and furious facepalm.

[snwbrdr435]

Not to mention on all the driving tests etc there are more drug related questions then questions about driving. While doing my on road driving test a girl before me couldn't do a three point turn on her 5th attempt she did it and the state trooper passed her wtf is that s***.

[PyR0NiAk]

Rear-end collisions aren't even usually based on bad driving abilities, but on bad driving habits. (fixing make-up, eating, playing with the radio, staring at the scenery)

[ADDirishboy]

Rear-end collisions aren't even usually based on bad driving abilities, but on bad driving habits. (fixing make-up, eating, playing with the radio, staring at the scenery)

Not being able to pay attention while driving equals bad driving ability in my book. It's not that difficult to change the radio station while driving, you need your eyes glued to the faceplate. Fixing make-up shouldn't be done while driving anyway. I only eat burgers and fries in while driving, and it's no challenge to drive with one hand and pop in a few fries every once in a while. Staring at the scenery? Brief glances are fine. But if you actually get into an accident while "staring" at the scenery, you're an idiot and don't deserve a license, like most people on the road.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

What if this crap "Pulls a Toyota" and activates hard braking in the middle of the highway for no reason? (Like the radar sensor goes bad... which DOES happen, and detects that there's a wall in front of you when there really isn't).

Hopefully it uses multiple sensors which all have to agree before taking any action.

[PyR0NiAk]

Agreed, but how in the hell do you expect anyone to actually test for this?? Start taking 2 hour road trips for driving tests?

[ADDirishboy]

What if this crap "Pulls a Toyota" and activates hard braking in the middle of the highway for no reason? (Like the radar sensor goes bad... which DOES happen, and detects that there's a wall in front of you when there really isn't).

Hopefully it uses multiple sensors which all have to agree before taking any action.

Didn't even think about that. It's bound to mess up at some point and think something is in front of you when there isn't.

[BusyBadger]

I agree with MoD. Do not want. Manufacturers keep adding complexity to literally dumb down driving in order to compensate for a terrible lack of driver training.

THIS.

Plus it's just another false source for radar detectors. I've already had it with the Infiniti brake lights (laser false), and Audi lane assist (radar false). And then there's the laser lane assist...people just need to learn how to drive.

[troskinatior]

I think this will make people worse drivers because people will start relying on all this technolgy then when it fails the wont know what to do. I also picture people sueing nissan because it says it will stop you from rear ending people so they will think "hey i dont need to press the brakes cool" then they accually rear end someone. Its like that lady that put on cruise control and started making a sandwich then when see crashed she thought the car drove it self

[ADDirishboy]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZx8mwW_M24[/youtube]

I just see that happening a lot.

[Dattebayo]

I'm all for the car that drives you home, but this is just kind of ridiculous. The people who need this kind of stuff shouldn't be driving.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

when it fails the wont know what to do.

Case in point- automatic transmissions. "You put the lever here and then press this pedal to go... and that's it".

Who knew that when your toyota floors itself that you could just shift into neutral? I'll tell you who: Everyone that has ever driven a car with a manual transmission... ever.
The things this country does in reaction to accidents and the lengths it goes to to try and make sure it never happens again, and yet it never addresses the simple root cause- education.

Now, I'm not saying we should really do this, but hear me out. Do you think we'd have near as many problems with drivers if we mandated that everyone needs to learn how to drive a manual transmission before they can earn their license?

[ADDirishboy]

I'd be onboard for requiring everyone to learn how to drive stick.

You're exactly right. People who know how to drive stick couldn't believe that people actually crashed from a stuck throttle. We all said, in unison, "why the hell didn't they just pop it into neutral?". Problem is for those people who have never driven a stick, they have no idea really what neutral does, thus it never even crosses their mind that they can use it when a situation like that occurs.

[AZhitman]

Now, I'm not saying we should really do this, but hear me out. Do you think we'd have near as many problems with drivers if we mandated that everyone needs to learn how to drive a manual transmission before they can earn their license?

Absolutely.

Mt Dad wouldn't let me drive the family cars (all automatics) until I had mastered shifting a manual. His reasoning? If I were ever in a situation where I had to drive someone else's car, he didn't want me to be stuck, helpless, unable to pilot any vehicle I might find myself having to drive.

[AppleBonker]

Agreed, but how in the hell do you expect anyone to actually test for this?? Start taking 2 hour road trips for driving tests?

If it were up to me, everyone would have to pass a one-week driving course. It would test driving at speeds exceeding the speed limit, poor weather/mechanical conditions and also force you to do other tasks while driving (such as eating, texting, talking on the phone, etc). While I don't think those extra tasks are a good idea whilst driving, the vast majority of people on the road WILL do them while driving. At least have them prove they are capable of doing so first. I know this would never fly, but I'd gladly give up a week of my life (and even vacation time from work) to ensure that I would be safer on the roads.

If I were ever in a situation where I had to drive someone else's car, he didn't want me to be stuck, helpless, unable to pilot any vehicle I might find myself having to drive.

This. I have no problem teaching people to drive stick in my car (assuming I know them well enough to be comfortable that they wont destroy it. You never know when you might need this skill, and when that time comes you don't want to be lost.

[nissangirl74]

I have taught several of my friends to drive a manual shift car. All of our kids will learn how to drive one too. I also agree it should be mandatory in order to get your driver's license. I know plenty of people who can't drive one but I think it is more of a laziness issue than a capability situation.

[szh]

If it were up to me, everyone would have to pass a one-week driving course.

I agree entirely! In many other countries, getting a license involves going through a formal driver education class ... not the high-school version, but a properly done training course.

But, I don't believe that teaching them how to text while driving is a good thing. Make it a "don't do it" kind of lesson, then it would be good!

Z