[quickshoe]

The government's message is clear: politicians and bureaucrats know more about how to live your life, manage your health, raise your kids, and they also know that you can't drive as good as them, so they mandate an ever-increasing array of "safety" measures and equipment to make up for people's jackassery driving.

That's about it.

I am sure insurance companies are behind it as well.

Manufacturers also jump in as a marketing feel good ploy preying on the "somebody better protect me from me crowd".

 

[shamrockshooter]

I do think some of these Electronic Nanny features should always be "optional", but the part I am most disappointed with Honda is the Gen 2 only has these safety "options" on the top trim level which I have no desire to purchase really. It makes no sense to offer life saving technology (my opinion that the tech is a good thing) only to rich people that can afford a $43,000 truck. I think in the Pilot they offer the Electronic Nanny on lower trims as an option. Maybe the 2018 ridgeline will do the same.

But back to my original point, any of you guys out there that need to convince your wife that you need to buy a Gen2, pull out the safety card and buy the top trim because it is "Safer" for your kids in tow.

 

[TommyDeVito]

So you are saying this is a vast conspiracy?

No, I'm saying anyone that thinks any of this crap should be mandatory is an idiot. I'm saying it adds much complexity to the vehicle, and that complexity comes with a major increase in cost. It's a great idea for bad drivers but it's not necessary for everyone and I believe what is driving a lot of it is mouth breathers who like to smart phone it while they drive. Take it a step further. How about the government mandates that all motor vehicles be self driving, nobody can drive or ride anything any longer. It must be done by the computer only. That's where you are headed. How about, instead of making such systems mandatory and banning driving by humans we look at the core problem instead? Make using a phone other than hands free a federal crime enforced in all 50 states. Get caught with a phone in your hand while driving and go to jail. Overnight you'd see a big change in driving habits and a massive decrease in wrecks, injuries, and fatalities. I'm friends with some local LEO's, and shoot with them regularly. Every day one of them is called out to work a wreck from an inattentive cellphone driver.

And going by your judgement, or opinion, the motorcycles in my garage wouldn't exist as they wouldn't be allowed to be sold to the consumer. My Sportbikes don't have any electronic nannies on them, none. No lane departure, collision mitigation, rear blind spot monitor, no traction control, no anti-spin, no wheelie control, yet I'm still here. It's a miracle! :grin: Only one has ABS and if I could rip it off easily I would.

I think these systems are great, as options or add-ons. Mandatory for everyone? Not a chance in hell. We should look at the core problem itself. Driving while using your phone, in studies, is the same or worse than driving drunk, depending on the study. Start locking people up for it. It would change quick. The mfr's love these systems because they are great marketing tools for them to sell you a product. The mfr's would love for these systems to become standard because they make a profit off them. It's another thing additional they can make $ off. They, like Honda with the Ridgeline, are rolling them into premium trims to subsidize their R&D cost so in the end the consumer pays. Want a moonroof or sliding rear glass? Then you'll have to pay Honda a subsidized electronic nanny fee to get them.

Just another nanny or forced thing in Murica. Government healthcare, government everything. I'm all for it if it doesn't cost me money out of my bank account to subsidize others, but that isn't reality. Just like government healthcare, my income subsidizes others. Thank goodness it isn't mandatory with this truck, and we can buy a lower trim. Just have to give up things we want, like a moonroof, that we were willing to pay for.

 

[Carsmak]

Well then, Better hurry up and buy all the vehicles you want now before 2022....

U.S. DOT And IIHS Announce Commitment To Automatic Emergency Braking

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety announced a commitment by 20 automakers representing more than 99% of the U.S. auto market to make automatic emergency braking a standard feature on virtually all new cars no later than NHTSA’s 2022 reporting year, which begins Sept. 1, 2022.

Automakers making the commitment are Audi, BMW, FCA US LLC, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Jaguar Land Rover, Kia, Maserati, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi Motors, Nissan, Porsche, Subaru, Tesla Motors Inc., Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo Car USA. (Full Article Link Below)

U.S. DOT And IIHS Announce Commitment To Automatic Emergency Braking - Auto Service World

 

[larryr]

I am sure insurance companies are behind it as well. .

In 1969 Allstate started TV ads with a Ford Model T and a 1969 Ford. They ran the Model T into a brick wall at 5 and the new Ford at the same 5 MPH. The Model T had $5 damage (paint scuffs) the new Ford almost $1200 damages.

That got Congress to mandate 5 MPH bumpers on all cars by 1974.

In 1979 many insurance companies asked Congress to repeal the 5 MPH law as the more rigid cars from the 5 MPH bumpers were causing 2 new problems - people were getting worse trauma in accidents and the repair costs for minor crashes were 4 times the cost of non 5 MPH vehicles.

It got repealed.

Many safety features made great sense - dual redundant braking paths is one.

I have seen what these so-called smart car systems are doing and failing. They do no properly see in curved roads - Adaptive cruise control accelerates out of control toward the vehicle in front of you in a curve and slams on the brakes to keep from hitting it when is sees it again. Autonomous braking systems panic stop when a large insect slams the windshield where the sensor is. Image going down the interstate at 70 MPH in heavy traffic and your car panic brakes, yes, it has happened to 2 people in Honda's that I know of.

Until there are multiple redundant forward looking systems, they should be outlawed as unsafe for the driver and other cars on the road. I for one do not want to slam into the rear of a Autonomous Braking vehicle on the interstate at 70 MPH.

The space shuttle had 5 redundant computers to guide it. They were basically special IBM 1130/1800 computers. They also had almost 10 years of debugging the code and still had sync problems at launch time.

I can see someone plugging into an OBDII port and reprogramming the steering and braking to kill someone. If your dealer can update the software, anyone else can too.

Technology can help kill you, I worked with someone that installed an 8 track player in this 1975 Grand Prix, got distracted looking for a tape and lost control and flipped it a few times killing his wife and breaking his arms, legs and back. The told the Officers that he had dropped an 8 track tape and was reaching to get it when he ran off the road and flipped a few time. He was seat belted in because the car required the driver to buckle up to start, his wife was not and was thrown from the car and crushed by it. He killed himself a year later.

 

[quickshoe]

Ferrari, Lamborghini, Lotus, McClaren, Bentley, Aston-Martin are off that list....interesting.

Big gubment is concerned about our safety, but heavier trucks don't have to have the technology until 2025 and no mention of tractor-trailers.

 

[quickshoe]

I can see someone plugging into an OBDII port and reprogramming the steering and braking to kill someone. If your dealer can update the software, anyone else can too.

Don't kid yourself. They don't need access to your OBDII port. That newfangled car with all the tech has wi-fi. That's all they need.

 

[TommyDeVito]

Good post larryr. Excellent reasoning. These mfr's want us to be the beta-test crash dummies for their R&D, no thanks. Don't like the price, and certainly do not like the risk. I cited one of my motorcycles previously, where an autonomous system, abs, is rudimentary and nearly caused me to crash (high side) because it isn't as effective as I am. I consider it a hindrance to my safety, the opposite effect it is supposed to have. Like the examples you mentioned, I don't want my vehicle doing things that I don't want it to do.

 

[shamrockshooter]

I am replying to this on my phone while driving my Subaru on the highway with Adaptive cruise and lane keep steering set. You guys don't know what you are missing.

 

[speedlever]

I am replying to this on my phone while driving my Subaru on the highway with Adaptive cruise and lane keep steering set. You guys don't know what you are missing.

Lol! Good one.

 

[Earl E. Bird]

I am replying to this on my phone while driving my Subaru on the highway with Adaptive cruise and lane keep steering set. You guys don't know what you are missing.

Lol! Good one.

Great, hopefully you won't be lulled into a sense that the vehicle cannot make a mistake. In the 1980s when I was stationed at a military base out west, a Saudi Arabian Officer was getting some training from us. He purchased a RV and took it on I-10 towards Vegas. He "thought" the cruise control would steer (lane keep), and hold speed. Went to the back of the RV to have some food...... you guessed it...... thinking that nothing could go wrong.

I know what I'm missing, and I like it.

 

[TommyDeVito]

I am replying to this on my phone while driving my Subaru on the highway with Adaptive cruise and lane keep steering set. You guys don't know what you are missing.

Are you breathing through your mouf too? :grin:

 

[1154]

I am replying to this on my phone while driving my Subaru on the highway with Adaptive cruise and lane keep steering set. You guys don't know what you are missing.

Agreed. I have this on my Mercedes and would never buy another vehicle without it.

 

[speedlever]

After a long night of flying freight, a friend of mine told me a story about climbing in his car to go home, turning on the radio, and wondering why the autopilot wasn't keeping the car in the road!

 

[BrandoRex]

We have the electronic nanny in our 2016 Subaru. I was not a fan at first, but after seeing it in action for a few months I am convinced that it has saved us from at least two car wrecks. I am seriously considering upgrading to a higher level package Gen 2 Ridge just to get the fancy Honda sensing suite.

So..To Electronic Nanny or not to Electronic Nanny? That is the question. Is the safety of your family worth the extra cash?

Just think guys, if you are trying to convince the wife (you know you will have to) of a valid reason to trade in your perfectly good Gen1, putting away your "Man Card" and pulling out the "Safety Card" might be your best chance of bringing home a new loaded Gen2.

Not much I can add to the long list of comments here but I do have one thought. I want these features for the same reason I have firearms, it's there in case I need it.

I've never had to pull a firearm in self defense, let alone shoot one. However, the one time I have to? It'll have been the most valuable thing I've ever purchased.

So what if it doesn't equate to direct insurance savings financially? If it saves my life or my family's lives, it's worth it.

Interesting note: I was watching a Camp Ridgeline based video on YouTube from a Canadian vlogger and apparently these saftey features are standard on all level trims (as well as AWD).

 

[Earl E. Bird]

Electronic Nanny - Overreliance Dulls Situational Awareness

For those with some time on their hands, the below study reveals much information regarding drivers’ reliance on lane keeping assistance systems.

Some findings:

"Overreliance on automation and/or complacency is the primary cause for vigilance-related impairments in situational awareness."

"It is suggested that the occurrence and size of possible problematic adaptation effects is related to the degree the operator is taken “out-of-the-loop” from the controlled processes."

"There was a surprising finding in that unassisted drivers (meaning they had NO lane keep assist) performed better than those drivers with lane keep assist in terms of response accuracy. This difference was also obvious in critical driving situations."

http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data...ata/DISS_POPKEN_FINAL_v3Online_geschuetzt.pdf

 

[TommyDeVito]

Re: Electronic Nanny - Overreliance Dulls Situational Awareness

For those with some time on their hands, the below study reveals much information regarding drivers’ reliance on lane keeping assistance systems.

Some findings:

"Overreliance on automation and/or complacency is the primary cause for vigilance-related impairments in situational awareness."

"It is suggested that the occurrence and size of possible problematic adaptation effects is related to the degree the operator is taken “out-of-the-loop” from the controlled processes."

"There was a surprising finding in that unassisted drivers (meaning they had NO lane keep assist) performed better than those drivers with lane keep assist in terms of response accuracy. This difference was also obvious in critical driving situations."

http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data...ata/DISS_POPKEN_FINAL_v3Online_geschuetzt.pdf

Now Earl, don't go posting facts in an argument. They want to sip on their big gulp, play on their phone, and the nannies will save their lives!!!!!!!!

 

[quickshoe]

I've never had to pull a firearm in self defense, let alone shoot one. However, the one time I have to? It'll have been the most valuable thing I've ever purchased.

Interesting analogy.

Is your chosen firearm a "smartgun"? If not, why not? What if it had some technology such that it wouldn't fire if whatever it was aimed at was not identified as an imminent threat, despite you squeezing the trigger? Better yet, how about if it fired even if you didn't squeeze the trigger because it thought you were too busy texting?

We are talking life and death here. Why isn't it absolutely crucial that the computer decide for you instead of relying on human intelligence and the associated errors in judgement?

 

[old blue]

Big Emotions about Electronic Nannies

I was amazed at the emotional reaction on this OPTION that no-one has to buy on the Ridgeline. [Well, actually not that
surprised, given the reactions that we see on forums, often about petty issues.]

There are some folks who will benefit from these "nannies", and heaven knows, they might prevent somebody from rear ending
me, or pulling out in front of me without looking, or backing
into me. Someone who is distracted, eating, texting or what-not.

Frankly, I'm happy to be the beneficiary of these developments.
I'm happy to have more protection against folks that I have no
control over.


I've done my track time, honed my skills, and out-rode and
out-drove my buddies.

BUT - my reactions are not as good as they used to be, and my
control is not as pin point as it used to be. So I drive more cautiously,
though I still enjoy a set of double "S'es", off camber and with elevation changes.

Frankly, it's not worth it to me to argue over these things. i don't
have any more control over the companies and governments
putting them into place than I do over the distracted driver that
could take me out.

I took up motorcycle riding in my 40's, and it taught me to anticipate and and imagine where someone could take me out, and fortunately that has kept me safe, for the past 25 years plus.

I think that we would be much better off with additional car control, road and accident avoidance training.

I remember well my first night working in the ER as an intern and
the carnage that came in the doors on that hot Friday evening in July.
One sailor was deep into multiple surgeries and took over 50 units
of blood before he died.

Too bad he didn't have more training, more sense, and that more
wasn't able to be done to protect him from others.

Mike

 

[larryr]

Don't get me wrong, it is nice to have safety overwatch, but the stuff on the cars do not have decades of debugging, most likely it is like Microsoft and every software company out there( think Ford's entertainment system is Microsoft) as soon as the software works 90% of the time it ships. As a software developer since the 1960's and having worked at IBM, Univac, Raytheon, NCR and HP, my job was to go out and fix systems that were not doing the job - few if any were hardware issues - almost all were software issues. I was finding bugs in systems that had been in place for many years, only a new condition triggered a failure or a limitation not planned for correctly happened.

Your average FAA certified flying device has minimum 2 of everything sometime 3 or 4 redundant systems. You car rarely has redundancy. the dual diagonal brakes are the only thing that comes to mind as redundant in you car.

Any system that makes a decision in you car to steer or brake or accelerate has to be dual redundant or triple redundant, Period or it should not be allowed on the road. Ideally it will be triple redundant with at least two systems wanting to do the unexpected action like braking or steering before do such a action. That too will make it harder to remotely control unless the idiots decide to put those devices on a shared buss with everything else and then we have access to remote control it. Security should not be taken lightly in you car.

P.S. My car does not have WiFi nor will I buy one that does. Neither should you for the reasons shown in the video above. I worry that the limited distance bluetooth might be controlled the same way - right now only the radio has bluetooth but the radio does talk to the car for connecting the backup camera and other information and that could be used to hack across. So far bluetooth requires you to pair so I am not too worried about that, but I could monitor the bluetooth connection and spoof your device connected to the radio and make the radio think it is talking to your device. The good news is most of the folks with that kind of knowledge rather do useful things but I can see Law Enforcement using such a device to kill you vehicle on the highway to get you to stop. So the way to keep that from happening is never pair a bluetooth device to your car radio. Not paired means no way to take over.