6 ms·

For several years now, in the EU at least, all new cars need to have automatic emergency breaks. It's basically impossible to run into something, run someone ov

For several years now, in the EU at least, all new cars need to have automatic emergency breaks. It's basically impossible to run into something, run someone over, etc. This kind of system reduces stress and gives at least me a certain peace of mind. In this regard Tesla self driving is a step backwards.

simondotau 5y ago
You seem to be confused about what AEB is and what it does. It is generally effective at braking for static or rapidly slowing vehicles ahead. Most AEB systems are not effective "safeguards against driving into oncoming traffic and parked cars". These would involve a steering intervention, not a braking intervention.
- mavhc 5y ago
  I assume AEB ignores a lot of stuff on purpose, otherwise it'd be braking due to things on the side of the road, and cars in the other lane on a curve that are heading straight towards you
  - simondotau 5y ago
    Correct. Most AEB systems use a forward facing radar, which often receive spurious reflections from various street elements overhead bridges, overhead signage and manhole covers. As a result, most radar-based implementations will actively ignore completely stationary objects while driving at high speed.
    - mavhc 5y ago
      https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-features-automatic-braking-system-tested-explained/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-featu... has some more info, they will stop for things stopped in front of them, but only at city speeds, I assume because randomly braking at 60mph is bad
      - simondotau 5y ago
        That is a good article which summarises the state of AEB and its general capability. It's worth noting that the most effective system they tested doesn't use radar at all, it was an entirely vision-based system: Subaru Eyesight. Worth remembering this when people agonise over Tesla ditching radar sensors on the Model 3. I chose my parents' most recent new car precisely because of this—a 2019 model year Subaru Forester. Not only was the active safety top notch, its chassis tuning means that it's more capable of remaining composed after swerving to avoid an obstacle. (It was also one of the few vehicles which ticked every box for them.) Here is the comparison I relied upon for that decision. (Yes, I am Australian.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs7PSpIMJYk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs7PSpIMJYk
        avereveard 5y ago
        eyesight has stereoscopic vision, so can compute actual distances from obstacles from the input feed instead of faking it all with machine learning.
        mavhc 5y ago
        Well,the rest have radar, so that's not a problem. "Stereoscopic vision works most effectively for distances up to 18 feet. Beyond this distance, your brain starts using relative size and motion to determine depth."
        avereveard 5y ago
        What has brain performance anything to do with the discussion at hand? Eyesight eyes are further apart than humans anyway.
        mavhc 5y ago
        That humans use size to determine distance when driving
        simondotau 5y ago

simondotau 5y ago

You seem to be confused about what AEB is and what it does. It is generally effective at braking for static or rapidly slowing vehicles ahead. Most AEB systems are not effective "safeguards against driving into oncoming traffic and parked cars". These would involve a steering intervention, not a braking intervention.

mavhc 5y ago
I assume AEB ignores a lot of stuff on purpose, otherwise it'd be braking due to things on the side of the road, and cars in the other lane on a curve that are heading straight towards you
- simondotau 5y ago
  Correct. Most AEB systems use a forward facing radar, which often receive spurious reflections from various street elements overhead bridges, overhead signage and manhole covers. As a result, most radar-based implementations will actively ignore completely stationary objects while driving at high speed.
  - mavhc 5y ago
    https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-features-automatic-braking-system-tested-explained/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-featu... has some more info, they will stop for things stopped in front of them, but only at city speeds, I assume because randomly braking at 60mph is bad
    - simondotau 5y ago
      That is a good article which summarises the state of AEB and its general capability. It's worth noting that the most effective system they tested doesn't use radar at all, it was an entirely vision-based system: Subaru Eyesight. Worth remembering this when people agonise over Tesla ditching radar sensors on the Model 3. I chose my parents' most recent new car precisely because of this—a 2019 model year Subaru Forester. Not only was the active safety top notch, its chassis tuning means that it's more capable of remaining composed after swerving to avoid an obstacle. (It was also one of the few vehicles which ticked every box for them.) Here is the comparison I relied upon for that decision. (Yes, I am Australian.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs7PSpIMJYk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs7PSpIMJYk
      - avereveard 5y ago
        eyesight has stereoscopic vision, so can compute actual distances from obstacles from the input feed instead of faking it all with machine learning.
        mavhc 5y ago
        Well,the rest have radar, so that's not a problem. "Stereoscopic vision works most effectively for distances up to 18 feet. Beyond this distance, your brain starts using relative size and motion to determine depth."
        avereveard 5y ago
        What has brain performance anything to do with the discussion at hand? Eyesight eyes are further apart than humans anyway.
        mavhc 5y ago
        That humans use size to determine distance when driving
        simondotau 5y ago