2nd Mach-E/Blue Cruise involved crash

[awp0]

Those are excessively conservative numbers. IIHS tested the Mach-E headlights and they go 284’ on low beam. Modern tires and braking systems also have a higher friction coefficient. My calculations come up with 275’ braking distance at 75 MPH. If a computer with almost no lag is in control, that goes down to 230’. So it would be possible to see and avoid an obstacle on the road at 75 MPH if you had good tires, brakes, and good reaction time.

Absolutely possible, and yes it's the driver's fault.

But let's be honest that seeing a pair of tail lights off in the distance, almost a football field away, and recognizing that they're not just another car moving at/around your speed in the distance (like the 10,000 other cars you've seen in similar circumstances), that in fact they're somehow improbably stationary in a high speed lane likely with no other traffic around at 3am......that's not always a straightforward thing for your brain to recognize very quickly.

I'd like to think that Bluecruise is safer than a human in this situation, even though it failed. It's quite possible that this condition results in a 10% failure rate for BC and 15% failure rate for a human.

Anyway, all I mean to say is that I agree this person will probably be thrown in jail (if he/she is one of the survivors), but in considering the situation more closely I'm not ready to conclude that it's the same level of negligence that everyone else here seems to be judging it as.

Sponsored

 

[MacherAWD]

I think in this scenario many folks would like take evasive maneuvers rather than braking. So while yes a piece of road debris/another car it might be too late to slam the brakes and stop, you can safely dodge.

 

[Mach-Lee]

Absolutely possible, and yes it's the driver's fault.

But let's be honest that seeing a pair of tail lights off in the distance, almost a football field away, and recognizing that they're not just another car moving at/around your speed in the distance (like the 10,000 other cars you've seen in similar circumstances), that in fact they're somehow improbably stationary in a high speed lane likely with no other traffic around at 3am......that's not always a straightforward thing for your brain to recognize very quickly.

I'd like to think that Bluecruise is safer than a human in this situation, even though it failed. It's quite possible that this condition results in a 10% failure rate for BC and 15% failure rate for a human.

Anyway, all I mean to say is that I agree this person will probably be thrown in jail (if he/she is one of the survivors), but in considering the situation more closely I'm not ready to conclude that it's the same level of negligence that everyone else here seems to be judging it as.

It will be a 100% failure rate for BlueCruise in this situation because it wasn’t designed to detect stationary objects while traveling 50+ MPH. It ignores them by design (to avoid phantom braking).

 

[superdave80]

Yes it looks like the Mach-E rear ended cars at high speed, so the driver probably wasn't paying attention despite the warnings.

So I'm still unclear on the purpose of 'self-driving' systems if I have to pay even MORE attention to the road/traffic/etc. than if I just drove the vehicle myself.

 

[Mach-Lee]

So I'm still unclear on the purpose of 'self-driving' systems if I have to pay even MORE attention to the road/traffic/etc. than if I just drove the vehicle myself.

BlueCruise is NOT self driving. It is a steering aid only. You pay the same attention as if you were steering yourself.

 

[MacherAWD]

So I'm still unclear on the purpose of 'self-driving' systems if I have to pay even MORE attention to the road/traffic/etc. than if I just drove the vehicle myself.

its very relaxing, especially in stop and go. I only use it on trips over 30min but I end up driving better (slower, less lane changes) and am physically more relaxed. When I enter congested areas, or any situation where I am high alert I take over control, but just chewing up long highway stretches, let Ford handle that.

 

[stlippert]

Absolutely possible, and yes it's the driver's fault.

But let's be honest that seeing a pair of tail lights off in the distance, almost a football field away, and recognizing that they're not just another car moving at/around your speed in the distance (like the 10,000 other cars you've seen in similar circumstances), that in fact they're somehow improbably stationary in a high speed lane likely with no other traffic around at 3am......that's not always a straightforward thing for your brain to recognize very quickly.

I'd like to think that Bluecruise is safer than a human in this situation, even though it failed. It's quite possible that this condition results in a 10% failure rate for BC and 15% failure rate for a human.

Anyway, all I mean to say is that I agree this person will probably be thrown in jail (if he/she is one of the survivors), but in considering the situation more closely I'm not ready to conclude that it's the same level of negligence that everyone else here seems to be judging it as.

Do we even know if there were any operating tail lights, flashers or any visible light from the cars that were hit?

 

[rhfritz]

There are two modes in blue cruise. If you pay for blue cruise you get hands free which requires you are watching the road but not that your hands are on the wheel. This mode works on most highways and some side roads. The blue cruise mode that requires your hands on the wheel exists when hands free cannot work for safety reasons.
I had blue cruise hands free but now I only have the lane keeping mode. I turn on blue cruise and I get dynamic cruise control along with lane keeping, but I must keep my hands on the wheel.
I will never pay for blue cruise, until it becomes a one time payment, and even then, only when it’s priced reasonably. I wonder if you have the mode I have and not the hands free mode?

I've never paid for it and hence have never seen it. Mine version is just like yours.

 

[wrzi]

It will be a 100% failure rate for BlueCruise in this situation because it wasn’t designed to detect stationary objects while traveling 50+ MPH. It ignores them by design (to avoid phantom braking).

Can you tell me where BlueCruise indicate it will "ignore" stationary objects?

Ford states in their advertisement that "on blue cruise" it is considered "hands free" operation.
Going from Hands off to Hands on to swerve around a stopped vehicle?
https://www.ford.com/technology/bluecruise/

Also:

How does BlueCruise adapt based on changes in traffic flow?
BlueCruise enhances your driving experience on motorways, making your journey more comfortable. This is especially true in a traffic jam as BlueCruise supports the driver in all traffic flows, even at a full standstill of vehicles. Depending on how long the vehicle has not been moving, the system will either reengage BlueCruise by itself or you will have to press the resume button on the steering wheel. This applies to cruising at high speeds for long journeys as well.

https://www.ford.ca/support/how-tos...d-bluecruise-frequently-asked-questions-faqs/

 

[rhfritz]

The real solution is for the driver to pay attention to the road and be ready to take over for any ADAS/BlueCruise/FSD.

The real solution is for FSD and the like to be in their own smart lane like HOV. Even if the tech was perfect, we live in a world where people say "hold my beer, point that camera at me, and watch me step off the curb in front of this FSD car and let's see what it does". Recall that guy who had his GF to shoot him while holding a book in front of his chest.

As a software developer, I can tell you that there is no such thing as a system without bugs, only systems with unfathomed edge-cases.

 

[Mach-Lee]

Can you tell me where BlueCruise indicate it will "ignore" stationary objects?

Ford states in their advertisement that "on blue cruise" it is considered "hands free" operation.
Going from Hands off to Hands on to swerve around a stopped vehicle?
https://www.ford.com/technology/bluecruise/

Also:

How does BlueCruise adapt based on changes in traffic flow?
BlueCruise enhances your driving experience on motorways, making your journey more comfortable. This is especially true in a traffic jam as BlueCruise supports the driver in all traffic flows, even at a full standstill of vehicles. Depending on how long the vehicle has not been moving, the system will either reengage BlueCruise by itself or you will have to press the resume button on the steering wheel. This applies to cruising at high speeds for long journeys as well.

https://www.ford.ca/support/how-tos...d-bluecruise-frequently-asked-questions-faqs/

It’s in the owner’s manual if you read all the warnings about adaptive cruise control. I strongly recommend you do that so you understand the limitations.

The radar can only see stationary objects when you’re going slow enough and are close enough. It will work in a traffic jam because you meet those conditions. If you are coming up fast on stopped vehicles (>30 mph) it will not detect them in time to avoid crashing. It’s a physics thing, moving vehicles with Dopper shifts compared to the ground return are much easier to detect.

 

[awp0]

Do we even know if there were any operating tail lights, flashers or any visible light from the cars that were hit?

I don't think we know anything yet, except the MME hit two stationary vehicles at 3am on an interstate, two people are dead, and apparently Bluecruise was involved.

If it's true that Bluecruise is designed to not do anything at all to avoid stationary vehicles in the road, then I'd imagine it'll be a pretty short investigation (at least relative to Bluecruise).

 

[dml105]

Evolution: us homo sapiens did not evolve to hurtle down the road at 70 miles per hour, let alone through the air at 600. Nor to mix pedestrians, cars and bicycles all in the mix. Blaming drivers was popular and wrong for most of the last century. And the death toll was high. Until: they started designing roads, cars, light poles etc not to kill people.

The question is would a driver paying 100% attention really been able to stop in time?

Absolutely! Or you shouldn’t be behind the wheel.

The juxtaposition of these two quotes is everything.

The way I see it, if someone is parked on the interstate at 3am, their brake lights off, even if you identified the car in front of you, you're going to think they're in motion because of the lack of brakes. You're not going to think it's a stopped car because situationally, you are expecting a moving vehicle there. That's not unreasonable. In fact, it's highly reasonable.

 

[electric-in-the-desert]

So I'm still unclear on the purpose of 'self-driving' systems if I have to pay even MORE attention to the road/traffic/etc. than if I just drove the vehicle myself.

Please look up SAE levels of car autonomy. BC is squarely in level 2 which requires driver supervision. The only level 3 “self driving” systems is MBs new software but that is very limited (and expensive).

 

[ArthurDOB]

The question is would a driver paying 100% attention really been able to stop in time?

Most of you are making assumptions with little information.
Open questions: Drivers speed, visibility etc.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), low beam headlights illuminate a distance of about 160 feet.
Source: https://living.geico.com/driving/auto/car-safety-insurance/driving-at-night/#:~:text=5.,for Highway Safety (IIHS).

Virtually all current production vehicles' published road braking performance tests indicate stopping distances from 60 mph that are typically 120 to 140 feet

A car traveling at 55 mph on dry pavement with good brakes can stop after traveling approximately 304 feet before coming to a stop.
A car traveling at 75 mph on dry pavement with good brakes can stop after traveling approximately 433 feet before coming to a stop.
Source: https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/vehicle_stopping_distance_and_time_upenn.pdf


Lets walk this out.
1. Your brain has to recognize that there is a car in front of you. (Hopefully seeing it at the "max" distance of 160 feet) Low beam lights probably in the city. We do not know visibility.
2. You have to realize that there is a stopped car, not just any car. (Most likely you will assume the car is driving if there is no brake light or other light indicating otherwise)
3. Those "valuable" seconds to realize all this could be 80 ft to 160 ft already (55mph is 80ft a second).

I learned pretty fast that my car wasn't going to slow down for stopped traffic in BC. I was paying attention, as I should, and took over to slow the car and stop safely. I'm guessing this driver wasn't paying attention.

Sponsored