On BBC2 last night I caught the last 10 mins of a program called something to the effect of the subject. In the program a woman went to Volvo in Sweden to see a system which uses wireless technology to piggy back the vehicles in front (in this case it was a truck with 3 cars all piggy backing the truck). It was like a cruise control system without the need for the driver. If you saw it then what did you think of it ? They made it sound like this system was ready to go but it was not impossible to notice that the vehicles were the only vehicles on the road. What if the truck overtook a car, the other cars would pull back inline to stay behind the truck and hit the car the truck overtook wouldn’t they ? Also if you had a line of 16 cars all piggy backing a scheduled bus (like the program said) then how would any other cars get off the motorway with a big convoy of vehicles if the convoy was dithering along ? They were suggesting the system was ready to go apart from legislation which would take a minimum of 10 years, i very much beg to differ
I have just got a new 4 X 4 with a cruise control which slows the car down if it gets too near a car in front then it picks up speed again when the car moves over.
I tried it out on a motorway with very little traffic (I am up North) and it scares me half to death. It is now switched off full stop.
I will decide when to slow down and speed up, not some electronic gizmo which may fail at the crucial moment. I may not have a pretty face but I don’t want it splattered all over the windcreen or the back of a big fat lorry.
The brother of my neighbour across the road had just bought a brand new Renault somethng or other and decided to reverse out of their drive without looking…depending on the new fangled rear radar!
All went well for the first few feet, then he ran over my wife’s brand new Bonneville that was parked tail onto the oncoming car…that left him £800 pounds lighter.
So much for “intelligent” technology.
Think you still have to give an eye on this stuff… 
I watched the program and the first episode that was last week.
Some if it was interesting. Some was ■■■■■■■■ though in my opinion.
they have done a full 200km road test on spanish roads in may this year, and that was on open roads found this on youtube
jayseabea:
The brother of my neighbour across the road had just bought a brand new Renault somethng or other and decided to reverse out of their drive without looking…depending on the new fangled rear radar!
All went well for the first few feet, then he ran over my wife’s brand new Bonneville that was parked tail onto the oncoming car…that left him £800 pounds lighter.
So much for “intelligent” technology.
Thats some chocolate bar 
wildfire:
they have done a full 200km road test on spanish roads in may this year, and that was on open roads found this on youtube
Notice the test dummies, they look almost human. Maybe they are fitted with an electronic brain that we are told can never go wrong because it’s electronic… duh. This can never be allowed to happen, there will be humans sitting in the car and humans are prone to getting things wrong, some d***head will think its ok to close their eyes for a while, and Bang.
Ossie
jayseabea:
The brother of my neighbour across the road had just bought a brand new Renault somethng or other and decided to reverse out of their drive without looking…depending on the new fangled rear radar!
All went well for the first few feet, then he ran over my wife’s brand new Bonneville that was parked tail onto the oncoming car…that left him £800 pounds lighter.
So much for “intelligent” technology.
OssieD:
Notice the test dummies, they look almost human. Maybe they are fitted with an electronic brain that we are told can never go wrong because it’s electronic… duh. This can never be allowed to happen, there will be humans sitting in the car and humans are prone to getting things wrong, some d***head will think its ok to close their eyes for a while, and Bang.Ossie
All These modern ‘driver aids’ do not in my view make for safer roads. They make for inattentive drivers who take more risks in the belief the technology will look after them. ‘It doesn’t matter if the car I’m tailgating brakes suddenly. I’ve got ABS.’ ‘It’s ok to throw my car round this blind bend on this wet road. I’ve got traction and stability control to keep things atraight.’ There are people driving about who have no idea how a car will react when asked to do something on the limit of it’s ability, or how to gauge where those limits are. How many people are driving around with their ABS fault light on their cars dash who’ll just stamp on the brake when a situation develops suddenly and not have a clue how to get max braking without locking up?
If you want safer roads first of all teach people how to drive properly, rather than teaching how to trundle from A to B at 30/40 mph without killing anyone. Second make vehicles feel more dangerous to drive. Bring back drum brakes and skinny tyres, bare metal windscreen pillars and fit 10’ spikes in the middle of all steering wheels. Inventions like this latest Volvo creation just mean people are one step closer to being asleep at the wheel.
This reminds me of the totally automatic airliners of the future:
Only a pilot and dog in the cockpit.
Dog is there to bite the pilot if he touches a control
The pilot is there to feed the dog!!
Totally agree with cadwells post!
The problem is a computer will never ever make a single mistake. It will follow its programming 100% accurately every time. It is however programmed by a human. Which is where the problems start.
the problem with computers is that it cant see what is going on. it can send a signal out like radar but it is blind to the bigger picture and environment. as truck drivers we are looking as far as we can see in all directions to assess what is or could happen. second guessing is part of the job but a computer cant do that as has been proven millions of times with an auto box which changes gear when you dont want it to or doesnt change gear when a human would
the problem with the legislation from this system in sweden is a universal legislation that states a motor vehicle MUST be under the control of a human being. this technology conflicts with that legislation hence the major problems with getting it installed
i would ask what provisions have been made for the ingress of water/dirt etc. we all know wires are susceptible to these things and so are sensors which means the system can get a false reading and make the wrong decision 
These systems depend on wireless technology. I think it will be great, fool proof. I mean when was the last time you were using wireless and it just stopped working unexp
hammer:
These systems depend on wireless technology. I think it will be great, fool proof. I mean when was the last time you were using wireless and it just stopped working unexp
pc is back to ethernet cable
technology is never foolproof. all it does is increase convenience and risk of failure at the same time. how many trucks break down due to a computer related fault eg gearbox telematics 
When I first started working where I am now, I had a Volvo FH520 80th anniversary edition with all the boxes ticked.
1 of these boxes was ‘adaptive cruise control’. It only worked if the retarder was on ‘A’, otherwise it just put a light on the dash and bleeped at you.
Anyway, 1st night trunk to Glasgow, leaving Trafford Park at 11pm, you have an idea how much traffic I encountered…
Set of roadworks, brakes came on. Empty motorway, brakes came on. Retarder turned off. 4hrs of lights flashing on the dash and an annoying bleeping. Fuse pulled.
How many cars do you see during ‘daytime’ in poor visiblity (rain, fog etc), yet don’t have any lights on?
Just because it’s daytime - doesn’t mean it’s daylight enough! 
I agree with many of the above posts.
Todays gadgets on cars are just making drivers even more lazy, how long before they go beyond just being ‘steering wheel attendants’?
The UK would never give Sartra the green light. They would lose millions in fines for mobile phones etc… Oh and if the lead vehicle’s driver went into a 50mph zone doing 50, then would they give him the points and fines for all the trailing vehicles as he is technically driving them all.
Kerbdog:
The UK would never give Sartra the green light. They would lose millions in fines for mobile phones etc… Oh and if the lead vehicle’s driver went into a 50mph zone doing 50, then would they give him the points and fines for all the trailing vehicles as he is technically driving them all.
Nobody, 50 in a 50 is fine 
Haha, amazing how a sentence can change when you omit just one word !!! “OVER” !!!
For example : That nice woman just give me a job (spot that missing word competition !!!)
Kerbdog:
Haha, amazing how a sentence can change when you omit just one word !!! “OVER” !!!For example : That nice woman just give me a job (spot that missing word competition !!!)
missing word would be not.
That not nice woman just give me a job…
It’s still terrible grammar
Could be would…
That nice woman would just give me a job - better grammar if the T in That wasn’t capital meaning there’s a word before it