Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EU Approves Anti-Collision Automobile Radar

Posted by timothy on from the flying-is-next-year dept.

Oscar writes "The European Union has approved frequencies for short-range radars that can detect collision dangers and automatically apply cars brakes. The technology should be available by mid-2005. 'Short-range radar can save lives,' said Viviane Reding, the EU commissioner responsible for the decision, which opens radio bands while preventing radio interference to other essential users of these frequencies. Full text of the legislation is available in English, French, and German in PDF format."

4 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. This is how it starts by samael · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There isn't going to be a sudden switchover from person-driven cars to AI driven ones. Instead you'll see the steady accretion of functionality that covers one situation after another, until there's nothing left for the 'driver' to do.

    --
    My Journal
  2. Warning: I brake for BSODs! by nekoniku · · Score: 4, Funny

    Golly, I can't wait for my Windows OS car to slam on the brakes for no reason whatsoever while I'm in the passing lane on the Interstate!

    --
    "It's a wonderful idea. But it doesn't work." -- Tad Danielewski
  3. That's all well and good by bairy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But what happens to the car behind you who's too close and doesn't have this system and your car brakes sharply. There's a reason rear view mirrors exist and there's a reason humans drive cars.. because we know what's happening all around, computers don't

    --


    Get paid to search..It's geniune and
  4. Not so fun... by stienman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Think of the cheap availability of radar jammers.

    Apply copiously to a stream of traffic to find the few cars that automatically brake.

    Watch the cars behind them plow into them.

    Profit! (If you're a body shop or tow truck)

    Of course, the signalling is going to be sufficiently difficult that you have to aim it at the car you intend to fool and send a special signal specifically designed to affect just the one car. If the system sees a car 50 feet ahead, then one a few inches ahead it'll probably ignore it is a spurious signal if the changre happens 'instantaneously'. If it sees a car move into its lane from the side the signal would be different, and if the car in front slowed quickly the signal would also be different.

    Still, I can't wait for people to start complaining about accidents that happened because they thought the car would stop, or rear end collision because the car did stop. There's so much liability that car makers are about 15 years behind where we could be.

    -Adam