open topic, for anything cycling related.
Worth noting RonK's post. There is about 1/4 of the space on a touring bike compared to even the smallest cars. If they can fit this kind of technology on board then it is as easy as pie to put it into a car. Not to mention what they can do on the F1 and MotoGP platforms, where every millimetre, watt and gram is measured.
They are taking away control of the vehicle from the world's best vehicle handlers - what makes anyone think that it's a bad idea taking it away from the most incompetent? I'm not antihuman or antidriver, but technology evolves and driving will go with it. If you can't service your own car then a few old hands will tell you that you shouldn't be driving...
Actually, Ford America and Micro$oft are in bed together for all that advanced tech in recent models that monitors tyre pressures, reads your phone's text messages aloud to you so you don't have to take your eyes off the road, etc.
Shows how quickly things can change.
Ford were the one who didn't need to be bailed out by Obama, under a new tech aware engineer turned CEO who came from Boeing.
Last edited by clackers on Fri Aug 30, 2013 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm a family man, wife drives the standard toorak tractor... BMW X5 with all the sensors, trimmings, beepers, and technology in the world and I drive a older manual rav4.
See the thing is I don't actually feel anywhere near as safe driving the BMW x5. We both feel all it does is give us a false sense of "safety". This becomes more evident when either my wife and I go back and drive the standard manual Rav4. It becomes even more evident again to me, when I jump in the 1960s classic with no technological trimmings and give that a go. Simply here is my true experience. One that is shared by other impartial unbiased participants (not just wifey).
I challenge you to take this test on and do so without bias.
I guess what I'm saying is, I kind of understand why those driving toorak tractors are over represented in the "cut me off" or "cause me grief" category when I'm out riding my bicycle.
I agree take control away from those who don't have control.
As for taking control away from f1 drivers... Well they just ain't true... There's no computer picking the driving line and steering. Technology is used to simply make things happen quicker.
^^^ I totally agree that the bigger cars give you a sense of invulnerability. It is totally in your head, but it is real, and can't be ignored. The penny finally dropped taking a late model Hilux 4WD for a spin. Alloy long tray. Other vehicles will not mess with you because they can't see around you, and they will suffer almost all the consequences of contact. Plus you drive up the gutter without having to even think about it. That thing was diabolical because it allows the driver to drive without fear of consequence. This is a recipe for disaster. I didn't quite understand your point about the different cars, care to elaborate?
All sensors and garbage doesn't improve safety unless it forces compliance. ABS is a nonnegotiable for example. SRS airbags is another good one. The human brain is incapable of truly appreciating physics. I've been over the bonnet twice and while it was quite unpleasant both times (I wouldn't recommend it as a hobby) it hasn't been that bad. But a couple of minor car accidents - yikes! The same speeds in a car are awful to experience.
Regarding F1, the drivers pick the steering line because they aren't driving if they do not. The race is about the drivers - but the steering is the only thing that the pits can't control. Senna died because of a suspected suspension tweak from the pits. Everything except the steering can be done remotely already, and if it is not done remotely it is purely because the FIA has banned it from happening. Traction control was only the beginning for removal of driver acceleration control.
I would have thought an advantage of a lot of this stuff is to protect us from ordinary drivers who mistakenly think they're blessed with Vettel's skills.
But every driver posting on forums already has that! We know 'cos they told us so
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
My point is the BMW comes equipped with rear vision cameras, parking sensors, abs, blah, blah, etc etc... We become so reliant on it that we don't/can't actually pay as much attention as we should. Now, we are mindful and responsible people and parents (most would believe about themselves, so I don't expect you to buy it), but my point is we self reflect and critique each other and ourselves in the constant pursuit of improvement, and to lead by example for our children. Eg: phones dont come out in the car. Period! We don't even pull them out to check the time, for fear of instilling a bad habit to our children.
We turn to driving the older cars w/o the technology, to reinforce the required habits that we otherwise lose driving with the aid of technology. The technology dumbs us down, breads complacency and creates problems that should never exist.
The safest car we own, ironically is a 1960s 600hp convertible, w/o traction control, without abs or airbags, etc... Why?
Cos like cycling (or when riding my motorbike), when you drive it you "tune in" and pay attention!!!
No blind spots, no sound insulation, no distractions!
I can't tell you how easy it is to miss an ambulance with sirens ablaze in the BMW... It's truly frightening, and should be illegal! But instead because it has bells that annoyingly goes "bing, bing, bing" when you don't immediately put your seatbelt on, it ironically has a 5star ancap safety rating. Go figure.
I'm sure everyone's seen the story of the guy who drove his car into the dam, because he was following his GPS.
Who do you blame there? Man or machine?
As for saving us against those who think they are junior Vettles or Brocky's brother... Rules and Laws already exist for this. No new ones need to be made, simply enforcement of current ones
Eg: How many drunk or drugged drivers are still out on the roads?
I don't feel any amount of technology can prevent outright poor behaviour.
Ok, Rant over. I'm off my soap box. ...and putting the flame suit on, but I honestly think by implementing certain technologies, all we are doing is outsmarting ourselves and going backwards.
Enjoy, stay safe and happy cycling.
Cheers for the explanation. I 100% agree regarding the old school car. I used to be a mechanic, and have driven a lot of cars; the older stuff does cause you to switch on and pay attention. Sadly, it is FASHION that causes your BMW to be a (*&#(*$U((AT)#*&%$ stupid idea on the road, IMHO it's not the technology. Blind spots weren't a huge problem for most vehicles but if you are running an X5 you aren't driving a 1970 Escort. Pillars are dumb, high boots - poor visibility all around. You need those sensors to cope with the stupid designs made to fuel ego rather than safety. Kudos to you for having the self awareness to sit back... although a small part of me wants to criticise you for keeping the X5 POS despite recognising it's inferiority as a vehicle.
You mention the drunks and junior Vettels... driverless cars will essentially be taxis with a computer instead of a "insert racist comment about taxi drivers". You wouldn't need to be sober, awake or even interested at the highest level. I don't think we'll be putting kids in cars without a driver without human supervision just yet, but it would be silly to say it couldn't happen. The issues we have with licencing stem from human limitations, not technological ones. Young people can't appreciate the gravity of their actions. They also aren't legally responsible for themselves.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: SLH