Volvo Promises 'Death-Proof' Cars By 2020 (extremetech.com)

mrspoonsi sends news that Swedish automaker Volvo has issued a bold promise: by 2020, there will be no serious injuries or fatalities in new Volvo cars. Volvo already has various smart features in its cars, but by combining them all, it becomes much harder to end up in a serious accident. Adaptive cruise control for example, is already available on many cars. It allows you to set a maximum speed, but uses radar to maintain a safe distance from the car in front of you. It can even apply the brakes if need be. This can be taken a step further with full collision avoidance. When a crash is likely, the driver will be warned. If action isn't taken, the car can begin braking to avoid, or at least minimize the impact. ... Cameras will also be used to watch for pedestrians in the vicinity of the vehicle. This is similar to the technology that is used in self-driving cars to identify potential obstacles on the road.

Comments

Challenge accepted.

[jeffb (2.718)]

"Hey, y'all, watch this!"

Unless the cars are entirely autonomous, AND automatically sedate the driver upon entry, I think they'll have a hard time achieving this goal.

I'm sure they did not claim this...

[Bearhouse]

After all, what can they do about a semi "driven" by a drunk or exhausted guy ploughing into you at speed?

Re:I'm sure they did not claim this...

[daq man]

I was tempted to agree with you because I am a very attentive driver and have managed to survive by keeping an eye on everything that's happening and anticipating events but... you knew there was going to be a but... In thirty years of driving I have been in two accidents, both times my car was completely stationary. In the first one I was in stopped traffic when someone four or five cars back hit the queue of stopped cars at 60 mph. The front and back of my car were smashed but I was OK inside but things got progressively worse as you worked backwards towards the rear of the line. In the second occasion I stopped at a traffic light and the car behind me didn't, I had been stopped for a while when I was hit so it wasn't as though I braked hard or something. The other driver claimed to have not seen me, despite being in a bright red car stopped at a red traffic light in broad daylight. There were cars crossing the junction in front of me a stopped car to my left and right so nowhere to go.

Then again, you did write "it's very, very rare that an accident 100% absolutely can't be avoided", maybe twice in thirty years of driving almost every day counts as very, very rare.

Death Proof

[sanf780]

I think I have heard that before from Stuntman Mike.

Have they found a fix for physics?

[NotDrWho]

I'm pretty sure if you're ever hit head-on by a full-loaded semi at 70mph, all the safety features in the world won't help much. And the automatic swerve feature will only work if there happens to be somewhere to swerve *to*.

If Volvo could just improve their handling...

[Theovon]

One of the reasons they need all that safety equipment is that the suspension system sucks. In many other cars, if you’re going down the road and start turning the steering wheel like you’re on a slalom, the car stay stable and steer and maybe rock a bit. In a Volvo, it will suffer massive body roll and basically go out of control. So they make up for it with electronics. Electronics are good, but why not fix the underlying problems first?

Subaru already has this in my car

[jameson.burt2404]

The 2016 Subaru Outback calls this EyeSight, with stereo cameras near the rear view mirror. The Outback decelerates and eventually brakes to keep a fixed distance (I choose about 160 feet, but it's selectable) from any car ahead. When no car is ahead, the Outback accelerates back to the set speed; eg, 60 mph. If I stray off road lines, the car will beep and tug back some. I presume other manufacturers do similarly -- the technology has arrived, not Volvo has arrived.

Proof against a Hellfire missile?

[rossdee]

Leaders of ISIL and Al-Qaeda would be interested

The most recycled story of the past 7 years

[Lucas123]

I think CNN or some news site picked the story up yet again after an interview at CES. This is ooooold news. Every year or so, Volvo makes their "no deaths or injuries" car pledge to stir up interest. Here's a 2008 story in Wired about it. Here's one in 2012. Here's one in 2013. I'm sure there's more.

Volvo AREN'T autonomous

[DrYak]

Please don't put people in it if autonomous.

The Volvo aren't autonomous in the sense that they don't handle the actual route.

Volvo mainly use their sensors (though it's camera + lidar + radar, just like on autonomous cars)
to detect possible objects that could collide with the car and break and/or sound an alarm.

Note that the driver can still override by slamming the gas pedal. (People want to be able to have the last say).
But if the driver doesn't do anything, the car will automatically slow down and stop before hitting the car/pedestrian/whatever in front.
(And also, resume driving if the car in front starts moving again. That's a very useful feature in a traffic jam. Though if the Volvo has stopped for a longer period of time, it asks a confirmation from the driver (button or gas pedal) just to be sure to have the drivers' attention.
After all, its NOT an autonomous car, and the driver is still responsible, so it would be better if the driver hasn't dozed off during the stop).

Ok Volvo, see if your car can drive this

Some of the feature of Volvo car are already useful in these situations.

Again, Volvos aren't autonomous, it's NOT their job to actually drive though this kind of hell.

BUT...

The lidar and radar will correctly whatch for anything the car might crash into.
The volvo will correctly stop before crashing into incomin vehicles or against the mountain (due to too narrow space for crossing).

The camera tracks the road and can sound an alarm if the driver risks quitting the path.
(Though unlike other brands like BMW, the Volvo won't correct the course by itself. It just sounds an alarm when detecting that the driver was swerving away of the path and either:
- hopes that the driver will wake-up correct and course
- of the driver will turn on the turn signal, because the driver was actually swerving away from the current lane on purpose - he/she wanted to change lane, but without the turn signal, the car couldn't know it and sounded an alarm anyway. Of course that last one applies to changing lane on a multi-lane highway.
Not trying to stay in path in the kind of hell like this mountain "goat-path-except-there-are-truck-on-it" from your terrifying example).

I can see the advertising featuring Kurt Russell

[imatter]

Hey, Pam, remember when I said this car was death proof? Well, that wasn't a lie. This car is a hundred percent death proof. Only to get the benefit of it, honey, you REALLY need to be sitting in my seat.

- Stuntman Mike