"Open the pod bay doors, HAL."
"I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that."
That type of belligerence might be coming to your car under the guise of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems. Many cars can already be had with the necessary hardware like GPS navigation systems that help a vehicle determine its position, and stability control that can already fire individual brakes to effect course corrections. Is the next step writing the software to interconnect those systems into an active safety net? This would effectively enable the car to steer you out of trouble if it compares your trajectory with the nav system and determines you're off-course.
Passive safety systems have seemingly hit a wall, and the mass that all that crash safety adds must be either offset through the use of more exotic and expensive materials, or the result is a stupendously heavy vehicle. The next step will be active safety, a baby-step that has already been made with stability control and active cruise control. Current maps in navigation systems aren't adequate for driver aids, as they're mainly bird's-eye-view positional representations. Once maps with more data become available, the possibility of your car bringing all its situational awareness equipment to bear so that it can execute lane changes and warn you about a blind hairpin curve coming up might not be such fantasy.
[Source: Automotive Design Line]
Audi A3 TDI Clubsport Quattro concept
Spy Shots: Production Audi TT Clubsport Quattro
Chevy Camaro getting early unveil at Indy in September
James Garner recovering from mild stroke
VIDEO: God's ringtone is a V10-powered Audi R8
First Drive: 2009 Ford Escapes, more of almost everything
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Ford Shelby GT500 Mustang
Future Classic: 1984 Chrysler Minivans
_thumbnail.jpg "Lamborghini Reventon unboxed in Las Vegas")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
James T @ Mar 28th 2008 8:18PM
Systems like this will be great for everyone else to use.
Ethan @ Mar 28th 2008 9:23PM
I'm all for it. As long as it comes with an off switch.
easyrider425 @ Mar 28th 2008 9:32PM
Personally the only electrical systems I really want are electric start, ignition, and maybe headlight/taillights.
Shadyman @ Mar 29th 2008 12:15AM
So, standard candle-light head and tail lights, but optional electric?
Derek @ Mar 29th 2008 12:54AM
I like electronic tachs and fuel gauges as well.
What do you do for cabin ventilation?
cowbell @ Mar 28th 2008 9:48PM
On August 29th, 1997 CarNET became sentient
LoneWolf @ Mar 28th 2008 10:18PM
easyrider425, I agree!
Derek @ Mar 29th 2008 12:54AM
"This would effectively enable the car to steer you out of trouble if it compares your trajectory with the nav system and determines you're off-course."
Or it steers you down the wrong course.
Great, anything that will let drivers pay LESS attention to the road...
mk @ Mar 29th 2008 1:36AM
Yeah, and GIS/GPS systems are never wrong, and are so great at improvisation when something unexpected happens.
I am in the technology tools business, but I am not on board with this.
I am all for technology that knows and does not question it's master, namely ME.
The minute it has divided loyalties, or supercedes my control, I am done with it.
No black boxes that record data for insurance lawyers. No On-Star that interfaces the on-board systems and has a cellphone without any reporting interface. (without activating the speakers for hands-free calling, you have NO IDEA what that phone is transmitting to whom.)
I don't even want an integrated phone, integrated GPS, or anything else permanently built in. It only gets obsolete without being replaceable, and I want to choose what phone and/or GPS unit that I use, based on it's merits.
Automation, no thanks. If cars get automated, I go classic. hell, I'll go air-cooled and pre-electronic. A 60's Porsche 911 sounds good, or a classic Jag sedan for a bigger car. Nice and low-tech.
I do have the Hal9000 eye as the wallpaper on my iPhone, but it has yet to tell me "No", or sing "Daisy" to me. That might be a neat trick, though.
ATLien @ Mar 29th 2008 1:39AM
Call me Old-Fashioned, but wouldn't it be better to actually, you know, teach people how to drive and make sure they know how to drive, before actually allowing them to drive?
MoonRover @ Mar 29th 2008 6:47AM
My On-Star sure was great Easter Sunday when I couldn't find an open service station while runing low on gas. On-Star found one open in the area and directed me the shortest route for fuel. Who would guess all the stations would be closed on Easter in some areas, I think it's called Old Time rural religion.
Derek @ Mar 29th 2008 10:15AM
And it is reasons like this why people will continue to ignore the blatant big-brother implications of this system. If I got a new GM car, I would rip that system out ASAP.
mk @ Mar 29th 2008 7:32PM
@MoonRover...
Glad it helped you, but have you ever heard of Pay-At-The-Pump?
When a Gas Station is closed, it isn't exactly closed anymore.
That certainly doesn't outweigh the implications of an un-monitored cell-modem connected to nearly every system in your car, possibly reporting to people you don't know.
Thanks. I'll pay at the pump, and find my own way, and use my own phone.
Mani @ Mar 30th 2008 3:09PM
This reminds me of a video I just saw online of a new navigation system that would use real photographic images in place of a drawn map on the nav screen.
In essence it would be like a real video game (in the 3D sense) combined with actual photos (like Google's streetview). Did look pretty nice.