Volvo did it again following its epic fail in another public demo of its automatic braking feature not too long ago.

(Sorry if this is a repost.)

Fail #1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcJ9xgBZJdI

Fail #2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eQ1_svzrHc

Fail #3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGPFCqYk1JQ

http://newslite.tv/2010/09/28/volvo-...dance-sys.html

Volvo pedestrian avoidance system demo fails

Bosses at car manufacturer Volvo were left red-faced when a demo of their new pedestrian avoidance system didn't exactly go as planned.

Journalists had been gathered in Verona, Italy, to see the technology which Volvo claim could save the lives of hundreds of pedestrians each year.

The system is supposed to detect pedestrians in the direct path of the vehicle and automatically apply the brakes to avoid a collision.

But in several of the tests the test dummies were knocked flying when the automatic breaks were applied too late. Bosses say this was because the test dummy was not recognised as human.

We're just glad Volvo didn't decide to show off their system by driving AT the journalists… not all of who would have been easily recognisable as human either.

Dan Johnston of Volvo said: "The test went as would happen in a real world environment, it did not recognise the dummy as being human. To say the test was a failure is inaccurate, in a sense, it worked as designed, just that our test dummy needed to be more human."

He added that in over 5,000 media tests there have only been a small number of test dummies getting hit.

Apparently the car constantly scans for an object and is one is found it's compared against on-board database of about 10,000 real world human pictures.

When an object is 'human', it determines intended path with imminent hit and brakes. Matching against a dummy it takes positive action to pre-charge the brake system and wait for driver input. Failing driver input, it brakes.

--
The fail last time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jClxcSBNwcw

 

That is so embarassing they need to just pony up and license the techonolgy from Mercedes. Too add insult the wiper came on as well.

 

Lolz

I think this is just a test version........but I do hope the final version is fixed.....

But in reality though, aren't drivers supposed to brake or decelerate the car by themselves? As if they need to resort to computer systems just to do all the braking for them...........

I guess more drivers are lacking or not using basic common sense if they would just rely on safety nannies all the time and not exercise your own responsibilities as a driver.

It's like people who think that they don't need seatbelts because they have airbags lol.

Simply put, these systems are mostly for ASSIST purposes. Don't expect them to do everything for you or be the one to always save your *** if you always drive recklessly.

Two cents......

 

hey, good news is, seems like on tryout #3, the pedestrian was able to stand back up in the end!

 

LOLvo. maybe they should just spend the money teaching pedestrians to jump up in the air like Kobe and dodge cars.

 

i hate tech like this, its just another freaking moral hazard. Like that one Benz commercial where the lady is like "the car braked for me because I was falling asleep" WTF are you doing driving drowsy, dont get me killed you moron. GTFO of the road.

God forbid people have situational awareness while driving.

 

Solution: Volvo should offer a line of heavily-weighted athletic shoes that will automatically stand a victim back on his feet when struck by one of their "collision avoidance" equipped cars.

Should be a market . . . . .

Sweden, known for being the ultimate nanny state, is in the process of removing responsibiltiy from the driver altogether and mandating it be placed in the hands of the manufacturers of their cars . . . where it is available for lawsuit.

Oh, that should work well . . . .

 

Saw an accident at the same speed in DC, the pedestrian in that case had his face plastered on the hood so hard it made me turn around from across the street.

Needless to say he was okay but did not get up for a while and caused an entire street block closed off by the FBI building

 

These systems are idiotic. Its one thing when they fail to brake for a pedestrian - the driver can always apply brakes like its been done for as long as cars existed.

I'll be more concerned with that system deciding to brake out of a blue sky when the car is doing 65mph on the highway. A guaranteed pile up.

My other big concern are the pedestrian safety hoods on all new cars. Sure, they might help in a collision with a pedestrian, but such accidents are not very common. However, the way these hoods are shaped, when a car collides with a deer or other large animal, the animal ends up inside the cabin smashing its occupants. I'd say accidents with deers are a lot more common than pedestrians and these hoods probably caused more lives to be lost than saved.