Skillz, use ‘em or lose ‘em.
Humans are lazy, if we get used to cars telling us when it’s safe to change lane, we’ll soon rely on the car and forget to take any personal responsibility.
And it’s amazing how quickly we lose skills.
Agreed. I've worked with people who it seems they can't even go to the bog without using the satnav.
They might be highly trained and on top of their game, but that game is orders of magnitude more complex than driving a car.So they need aids to take care of the more routine tasks, and to watch out for potentially dangerous situations.Similary with driving a car.It's all a matter of degree.Good stuff, but not borne out by the evidence.
I can't see why you think that technology will exacerbate the effects of driver error.On the contrary, it mitigates them.Drivers are not making more errors because they have ACC; but what errors they do make are less likely to lead to accidents.
Why do you think that Volvo is confident that they can make their cars death-proof?Not because they are developing infinitely safe driving courses.It's because they know that they can develop suitable technology.Even without that claim, they are still very safe (if boring).
Roads are getting safer: what does it matter if that extra safety is technology-led?Yes, there will always be examples where it could be claimed that the technology got in the way."I don't wear a seat belt because it's better to be thrown clear in an accident".There have been accidents where that could be said to have worked.But there are far more occasions where it has saved lives.
Anyway, where would you draw the line?Is current technology just about right?Or would you ban seat belts, windscreen wipers, heated rear screens, radial ply tyres, ABS, disc brakes, ....?
One major gripe I have is that anyone buying one of these new cars will be forced to pay for all this 'technology' even if they don't want it. There's no option to not have it any more. You can be sure that all the car manufacturers will be increasing the prices of all the models because of this and in my opinion most new cars are stupidly expensive.
I never got anywhere near saying that. I've had a fair amount of experience in dealing with the aftermath of road traffic collisions. Lack of awareness, complacency, over reliance on technology have all been contributing factors. Safety improvements in cars have evolved greatly during my time in the fire brigade. That also includes the equipment used to actually cut the people out of the vehicles thus giving them a greater chance to survive.
Air bags have undoubtedly saved many lives as have crumple zones on cars. The fire brigades and paramedics now work far closely together as a competent team. Add all these things together and the road death statistics fall.
Let's get back to the speed limiting technology which started all this. Hit an oak tree at 50 mph on a 60 mph road and the oak tree is going to win. Hit a wagon head-on at a closing speed of 90 mph and the wagon is going to win. It's too simplistic and does not address that nut behind the wheel. I'm all in favour of it in 30 or 40 zones for sure now that will undoubtedly save lives, try turning right in the 30 zone in my village on a blind bend as the a***holes fly around it at 50 or so.
Limiting the speed of cars in zones where the national speed limit applies could have a detrimental effect unless driving attitudes and skills massively change. Saying that the technology to limit vehicles speeds has been around for years.
https://www.avforums.com/attachments/car_flag-jpg.1134221/
The manufacturers are developing it anyway, so the development cost is paid from existing car purchases.
The tech implementation will likely (mass produced) cost in a similar order of magnitude to a mobile phone (think how many IBM-PCs would be needed to match the computing power of a modern Samsung or Apple handset, and those are way overpowered for this purpose - indeed IBM-PCs were much more powerful than what NASA used to guide the Apollo missions); it will be circuits and software added to existing car systems like the ECU and Infotainment centre. Much of the required tech is already being fitted, eg. if the car has an emergency call facility it has mobile phone calling, sensors that reliably determine that a breakdown or collision has occurred and the ability to inform the services of the vehicle position.
By the time I can afford a car with all these extra features my license will probably be expired (or I will)
I bought a top of the shop barge, three years old at a fraction of the price it was new. I could not afford the car new.
It depreciated a lot. Think a few years past this and the second hand market will be full of them. PCP or on the never never will see that this happens.
After these changes are implemented, and they will be, you will come back from holiday or even your weekend away or daily commute and you will have half a dozen or more fines, licence points or retracted licence and a summons for driving without one  and those with credit/debit cards will be bankrupted because eye in the sky will be capable of doing it. .avforums.com/styles/avf/smilies/facepalm.gifBut it's all about safety---innit!
What?