How many more studies, analyzes or research still need to come to make drivers understand that they should not trust fallacious semi-autonomous driving systems? We are now full of dossiers of this kind but – despite everything – the trust of a large part of motorists (those who want them on their cars) is total. Technology is fascinating, sure, but these are driving aid systems, not devices that replace human control. Yet those who travel with these Adas inserted entrust everything to them. To the point of proliferating (it's full on Amazon) the market of dangerous accessories to attach to the steering wheel to make the computer believe that the driver has his hands on the steering wheel rim.
Idiotic behavior, obviously, which we don't want to justify in any way. However, these are behaviors “pushed” by the same car manufacturers that advertise these Adas as infallible systems. The accusation comes from the authoritative Insurance Institute for Highway Safety according to which manufacturers must do more to ensure that drivers continue to pay attention while the semi-autonomous driving assistance systems are in action. The message from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is supported by a new Adas classification program to evaluate the safety of these systems and their ability to prevent improper use.
Well, of the 14 systems tested, only one obtained an acceptable rating, for the others a disaster because these systems behave in such a way as to divert attention and make the pilot believe he can do without his intervention.
The evaluation criteria include several points for driving monitoring. The IIHS tests evaluate the system's ability to monitor driver attention and hand position, warn drivers to comply, and not discourage corrective action by the driver. In short, according to the president of the American organization, David Harkey, semi-autonomous driving may not be the safety boon that some were hoping for. “Some drivers may think that partial automation makes long journeys easier, but that's not the case. As many serious accidents have demonstrated, automation can introduce new road safety risks.”
The most critical point of all this – according to the IIHS – is the forced marketing messages with which many automakers obscure the fact that self-driving vehicles do not exist. And that the driver must always maintain control of the car. As always, a cultural question. The self-driving car has a lot to do on the road. We always say it. But perhaps this “road” does not only concern the technology aspect.
Here is the ranking from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
2022-2024 Lexus LS: Good for Advanced Driving System
2023-2024 GMC Sierra: Fair
2023-2024 Nissan Ariya: Decent for ProPilot with Navi-link
2023-2024 BMW X1: Poor
2021-2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E: Poor Scores for Both BlueCruise and Adaptive Cruise
2023-2024 Genesis G90: Poor on both HDA 2 and adaptive cruise
2023-2024 Lexus LS: Poor for adaptive cruise control
2022-2023 Mercedes-Benz C-Class: Poor
2023-2024 Nissan Ariya: Poor for ProPilot 2.0
2021-2023 Tesla Model 3: Poor for Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Beta
2022-2024 Volvo S90: Poor
#Semiautonomous #driving #trust #FormulaPassion.it
