Adaptive cruise control is dangerous

[raijinmach]

When you’re saying “a cement block,” do you mean one of these in the road?

If so, I don’t think our system is designed for that.

The system is designed to work WITH the driver, not replace the driver.

It’s basically adaptive cruise plus lane keep assist.

The reason it forces the driver to keep their eyes on the road is for things like the above.

I imagine any system designed to see an object that small in the road would result in tons of phantom braking when it thinks it sees something dangerous…… but it’s just a plastic bag or dip in the road etc.

No, I'm referring to those large cement blocks that serve as dividers between opposing traffic

Sponsored

 

[Mach1E]

No, I'm referring to those large cement blocks that serve as dividers between opposing traffic

Also not what the car is using for lane keep assist. It’s using the lines on the road. If they’re missing or broken up (construction zone, etc), Bluecruise and lane keep will disengage.

It’s up to the driver to to drive at that point.

 

[Jimrpa]

No, I'm referring to those large cement blocks that serve as dividers between opposing traffic

In my area, they’re called “Jersey barriers”. I don’t know why though?

 

[stoopid]

It’s up to the driver to to drive at that point.

The point raijinmach is missing (being obtuse?) is that the driver ALWAYS needs to be driving with the MME, even when Blue Cruise is enabled. Not only are these systems inherently flawed and working with limited data, they can disengage at a moments notice or make panicked decisions that require immediate driver input. If the MME makes a mistake and causes an accident when these systems are engaged, the onus of responsibility STILL FALLS BACK ON THE DRIVER who was by letter of the law and the owner's manuals guidance, supposed to be paying full attention the entire time. There is no getting around this simple, fundamental fact about using the driver safety systems in the MME.

These are not toys to be tinkered with and driving aid tech limits explored by their owners on the roadways. The other humans on the road are not simulations. Mistakes driving are often life and death. Take public transportation if operating a vehicle is too much of a burden.

 

[raijinmach]

Also not what the car is using for lane keep assist. It’s using the lines on the road. If they’re missing or broken up (construction zone, etc), Bluecruise and lane keep will disengage.

It’s up to the driver to to drive at that point.

Sure it's fine if it disengages and warns me but it didn't in this case so I continued to trust it. The lines also curve according to how those cement blocks are oriented and it did not follow them in this case.

 

[Jimrpa]

Sure it's fine if it disengages and warns me but it didn't in this case so I continued to trust it. The lines also curve according to how those cement blocks are oriented and it did not follow them in this case.

There was a very controversial American president a long time ago, who had a saying that’s always stuck with me “trust, but verify”. I’d argue his words apply to our driver assistance systems.

 

[stoopid]

The point raijinmach is missing (being obtuse?) is that the driver ALWAYS needs to be driving with the MME, even when Blue Cruise is enabled. Not only are these systems inherently flawed and working with limited data, they can disengage at a moments notice or make panicked decisions that require immediate driver input. If the MME makes a mistake and causes an accident when these systems are engaged, the onus of responsibility STILL FALLS BACK ON THE DRIVER who was by letter of the law and the owner's manuals guidance, supposed to be paying full attention the entire time. There is no getting around this simple, fundamental fact about using the driver safety systems in the MME.

... Take public transportation if operating a vehicle is too much of a burden.

And still missing.

 

[raijinmach]

There was a very controversial American president a long time ago, who had a saying that’s always stuck with me “trust, but verify”. I’d argue his words apply to our driver assistance systems.

I did, that's why I'm still alive. I just thought it would be better than the experience I had and not miss a giant block of cement but I guess it's not the case.

 

[raijinmach]

The point raijinmach is missing (being obtuse?) is that the driver ALWAYS needs to be driving with the MME, even when Blue Cruise is enabled. Not only are these systems inherently flawed and working with limited data, they can disengage at a moments notice or make panicked decisions that require immediate driver input. If the MME makes a mistake and causes an accident when these systems are engaged, the onus of responsibility STILL FALLS BACK ON THE DRIVER who was by letter of the law and the owner's manuals guidance, supposed to be paying full attention the entire time. There is no getting around this simple, fundamental fact about using the driver safety systems in the MME.

These are not toys to be tinkered with and driving aid tech limits explored by their owners on the roadways. The other humans on the road are not simulations. Mistakes driving are often life and death. Take public transportation if operating a vehicle is too much of a burden.

lol I don't know why some of you are taking offense to this and trying to be subtle about being offensive. It's just a car, relax. All I'm saying is my expectations for ACC was not met. I wasn't expecting to be able to fall asleep at the wheel but I was expecting the car to warn me when it was no longer capable of driving itself, especially when it was about to collide with a cement barrier. But if your answer is, "it only keeps track of the lanes, not giant objects that could kill you" then I now understand what ACC is and is not capable of.

Oh and before anyone accuses me of being a Tesla spy again (which is a very strange delusion on this forum), I will never ever get a Tesla unless their current CEO steps down.

 

[Mache_Nor]

People are way too defensive here. Is the driver responsible at all time - yes!
Is the acc dogsh*t sometimes - yes!!

To elaborate: if you use speed sign recognition and / or predictive speed assist, the acc is downright extreme stupid. It cannot read signs reliably, it has outdated map data (which can send your car into a crawl or autobahn speeds for no reasons), it tries to take roundabouts at 100 kmh, it brakes to a crawl before turns just to accelerate like a lunatic as the turn starts (meaning the whole braking thing was wasted energy) and so on.

Now, disable those options and it is better, yet has its problems:
Drive downhill? Yoyo between hard braking and acceleration several times at the same downhill. Car enters or leaves in front of you? Wait a second and then either panic brake or accelerate like a lunatic. Steering? What about trying to correct into one of the sides of the lane, only to panic, throw car in opposite direction and disengage while keeping the speed?
Activate acc in low speeds by accident? Most of the times it won’t work, but if you are in a parking lot - then maybe sometimes it decides that it will activate regardless of speeds, and sometimes it’s 20 kmh, other times 32 kmh, there is no rime and reason to it. I’ve attached a video to show the buggy behavior of it activating from a stand still and accelerate by itself:


Again, the driver is always responsible, but this silly high horse attitude from some of you is tiresome.

 

[stoopid]

My posts have nothing to do with defending the MME, I have no special attachment to a car that is a leased appliance. I'm defending the truth and not trying to place blame on a system that was never going to be or sold as something that would ever be a driver replacement. None of the autonmous-like systems I've experience or watched reviews were reliable enough, consistently, I would trust mine and others life to them. I drive my car. The manual for the MME, effectively, says to drive the car. The nanny's are a convenience at best, hazard at worse. The fantasy we are all going to run cab companies out of our garage someday is still just a fantasy.

 

[raijinmach]

My posts have nothing to do with defending the MME, I have no special attachment to a car that is a leased appliance. I'm defending the truth and not trying to place blame on a system that was never going to be or sold as something that would ever be a driver replacement. None of the autonmous-like systems I've experience or watched reviews were reliable enough, consistently, I would trust mine and others life to them. I drive my car. The manual for the MME, effectively, says to drive the car. The nanny's are a convenience at best, hazard at worse. The fantasy we are all going to run cab companies out of our garage someday is still just a fantasy.

Calling someone obtuse, which is just a fancy way of calling someone slow, seems like you have emotional investment in this car, but maybe that's just "user error" on my part again lol

And yes, I know the driver is ultimately responsible, but when you only have a reaction time of milliseconds, these errors on the system is worth criticizing. If there is no criticism, how will they know what to improve?

 

[stoopid]

Calling someone obtuse, which is just a fancy way of calling someone slow, seems like you have emotional investment in this car, but maybe that's just "user error" on my part again lol

And yes, I know the driver is ultimately responsible, but when you only have a reaction time of milliseconds, these errors on the system is worth criticizing. If there is no criticism, how will they know what to improve?

That was criticism direct AT YOU, for the manner in which you have been handling your criticism/posts. Your replies are evolving, whether you realize it or not. This one, for example, was reasoned but many of the others were simply repeating the same gripe without also acknowledging the responsbility of your role in the process.

I am 100% about voicing criticism, I am not a car forum gatekeeper. If I have a problem with something, like you, it's vocied. But then it's time to leave it. I have an ongoing issue with my MME, but you wouldn't know it. It's between me and Ford, was voiced here (and on reddit), and it's not deal breaker level that I need to go after Ford's reputation either.

Objectively, your issue is the same. If anything, even less deal breaker since it's just one of many quirks of a common knowledge quirky feature that isn't even critical to using the car (it will safely get you from A-->B without a single one of these features enabled... it may even do it SAFER with them off/you not relying so much on them). My issue can leave me stranded if the right combination of very specific events occur. The odds are exceedingly low that would happen, but not zero. Which is why it's still being addressed by Ford but not a dealbreaker. Having to drive a vehicle you are already expected to drive is also, not a deal breaker.

 

[Jimrpa]

I did, that's why I'm still alive. I just thought it would be better than the experience I had and not miss a giant block of cement but I guess it's not the case.

Sadly, the radars aren’t very good at detecting stationary objects, as others have explained. I’m surprised and don’t understand why this is, but vision isn’t any better - just watch some Tesla crash videos. Perhaps LIDAR is better at detecting stationary objects?

 

[raijinmach]

That was criticism direct AT YOU, for the manner in which you have been handling your criticism/posts. Your replies are evolving, whether you realize it or not. This one, for example, was reasoned but many of the others were simply repeating the same gripe without also acknowledging the responsbility of your role in the process.

I am 100% about voicing criticism, I am not a car forum gatekeeper. If I have a problem with something, like you, it's vocied. But then it's time to leave it. I have an ongoing issue with my MME, but you wouldn't know it. It's between me and Ford, was vocied here (and on reddit), and it's not deal breaker level that I need to go after Ford's reputation either.

Objectively, your issue is the same. If anything, even less deal breaker since it's just one of many quirks of a common knowledge quirky feature that isn't even critical to using the car (it will safely get you from A-->B without a single one of these features enabled... it may even do it SAFER with them off/you not relying so much on them). My issue can leave me stranded if the right combination of very specific events occur. The odds are exceedingly low that would happen, but not zero. Which is why it's still being addressed by Ford but not a dealbreaker. Having to drive a vehicle you are already expected to drive is also, not a deal breaker.

Yes I am criticizing your critique of me by unnecessarily calling me obtuse. I'm not slow, I'm resistant to accept that it's ok for ACC to miss detecting a cement barrier, not even warning me it can't handle it, which is dangerous. There's a difference between slow and intolerant. My posts have essentially been the same from the start, I remain critical of these flaws in the car's system and stand by it.

Sponsored