Lane keeping assist

[DaevM]

Well if you leave the wiper stalk at any setting than Off then obviously when the system powers up the wipers will sweep. But then again - who intentionally leaves and locks their car with the wipers still activated?

Yup, that'll be me then - not so much intentionally as got no idea what I'm doing - same with the lights. Used to be on/off,/flash, now it's 20 options and would you like us to do it for you ? The only way I know I haven't turned the lights off when I get out of the car and lock it is seeing them reflecting off the garage door!!

 

[MarcS]

All problems solved >> sticker
No roadsign recognition
No Lane keep problems
No Front collision warning
Trophy 2023

 

[DaevM]

Only concern I'd have is insurance companies taking any opportunity to get out of payouts ( and I know the assists aren't legal requirements) , they may claim the spec of the way the vehicle has been designed has been interfered with, with who knows what consequences, i.e. untested.
Would there be any conflict of system with radar not detecting anything with resultant input effectively telling the car it's stationary.... ?

And you need a warning sticker to warn potential crims there's an unleashed watch-chimp in the vehicle

 

[Koops]

Only concern I'd have is insurance companies taking any opportunity to get out of payouts ( and I know the assists aren't legal requirements) , they may claim the spec of the way the vehicle has been designed has been interfered with, with who knows what consequences, i.e. untested.
Would there be any conflict of system with radar not detecting anything with resultant input effectively telling the car it's stationary.... ?

And you need a warning sticker to warn potential crims there's an unleashed watch-chimp in the vehicle

And the collision sensing is a good thing imo

 

[siteguru]

Doesn't the sticker also disable ACC/TJA?

 

[DaevM]

And the collision sensing is a good thing imo

I don't use the assists ( haven't for 40+ years ) but use the provided system to circumvent.

 

[Koops]

Doesn't the sticker also disable ACC/TJA?

Interesting question…I thought that LIDAR (rather than a simple camera which is at top of windscreen?) is used for this function, and if so then probably also for the front collision alert/emergency braking function?

 

[MAJ]

Interesting question…I thought that LIDAR (rather than a simple camera which is at top of windscreen?) is used for this function, and if so then probably also for the front collision alert/emergency braking function?

When my camera failed to calibrate after windscreen replacement, all functions of the camera were disabled. This included ACC/ TJA, Traffic sign Recognition, Front Colision warning, emergency braking,Etc.

 

[JanB]

Would you mind send me pic of this?

 

[GameZone]

Why do you think they need to go to court?
The manual clearly states you are always responsible for using lka, the manual describes situations when and where it will not work properly and you "MUST" take control, or disable it. They have given you the option to disable it in the menu. Whether the latter fits the term "immediately" may be debatable one. But the systems have been "approved".

I do not post this to disagree with your interpretation that MG is at fault in case the system fails. I do agree. But this applies to more or less all car manufacturers. Even the latest very expensive Merc got slammed for the poorly working LKA..
My point is: they all know. That is why MG uses 3 pages to explain Lane assist, and half of them are filled to cover them in case things may go wrong.
And they all do it.

The LKA have already thrown one car off the road in Norway. Driver went to the hospital. Car wrecked

 

[NLMGSAN]

The LKA have already thrown one car off the road in Norway. Driver went to the hospital. Car wrecked

Yeah. Because he forgot to disable it as he usually did. It is still bad,of course. But MG will not freak out from this one...

 

[GameZone]

Yeah. Because he forgot to disable it as he usually did. It is still bad,of course. But MG will not freak out from this one...

My wife doesn't drive our MG much. She will 100% forget the LKA. And because of that I'm worried about the safety of her and my children whenever this stupid LKA is on.

 

[NLMGSAN]

I fully agree this is annoying. The fact that it is defaulted is the result of the law. MG just has to comply.
These system will remain error prone, and therefore remain an intrinsic risk factor to a certain degree. Our objections against the defaulting should be oriented at Brussels (UK follows the EU law I presume).
Unfortunately, Brussels only eats statistics.... There is no data showing it enhances any risk. Neither is there currently any solid proof that it prevents casualties.

 

[DaevM]

I fully agree this is annoying. The fact that it is defaulted is the result of the law. MG just has to comply.
These system will remain error prone, and therefore remain an intrinsic risk factor to a certain degree. Our objections against the defaulting should be oriented at Brussels (UK follows the EU law I presume).
Unfortunately, Brussels only eats statistics.... There is no data showing it enhances any risk. Neither is there currently any solid proof that it prevents casualties.

Doesn't bode well for autonomous vehicles on the road - no doubt the system will be geared up to "computers don't make mistakes so it must have been your fault" . Guilty until proven innocent. Wonder what they'll do when two autonomous vehicles crash ?

 

[fnegroni]

Since the upgrade the LKA on mine has been fine. Could do with being a little easier to override it with pressure on the wheel but so far no one who drove my car has complained.
In fact today I was even wondering whether it was even activated it was ever so subtle.

 

[NLMGSAN]

Doesn't bode well for autonomous vehicles on the road - no doubt the system will be geared up to "computers don't make mistakes so it must have been your fault" . Guilty until proven innocent. Wonder what they'll do when two autonomous vehicles crash ?

Both drivers are at fault then. Unless there was nobody in them...

I'm not an expert in law. But there is something fishy about my rights as an individual and the forced use of a faulty system. If this system is at fault, according to MG (and all other brands) I should not have used it and all responsibilities are on the driver side.

First, MG never asked me if I accepted the use of these systems under these conditions. I think they should, and they should allow us to change our minds too. If I would not accept these terms, MG should shut down these systems.

Second, Brussels comes in, introducing laws causing cars to be delivered with mandatory safety systems. On top of that, they add conditions stating how these systems operate. One of them is that it should not be possible to easily disable a system, nor should it be possible to permanently disable it (the tow mode is a loop hole because it influences sensors used in the systems). So, MG cannot ask us for permission because the law forbids to act accordingly.

If law backs up the we should first agree the terms of use (as a personal right), than the law on these systems denies us this right. That could be a way out.

 

[OriginalBigAl]

Both drivers are at fault then. Unless there was nobody in them...
I'm not an expert in law. But there is something fishy about my rights as an individual and the forced use of a faulty system. If this system is at fault, according to MG (and all other brands) I should not have used it and all responsibilities are on the driver side.

First, MG never asked me if I accepted the use of these systems under these conditions. I think they should, and they should allow us to change our minds too. If I would not accept these terms, MG should shut down these systems.

Second, Brussels comes in, introducing laws causing cars to be delivered with mandatory safety systems. On top of that, they add conditions stating how these systems operate. One of them is that it should not be possible to easily disable a system, nor should it be possible to permanently disable it (the tow mode is a loop hole because it influences sensors used in the systems). So, MG cannot ask us for permission because the law forbids to act accordingly.

If law backs up the we should first agree the terms of use (as a personal right), than the law on these systems denies us this right. That could be a way out.

I am not defending these systems but as a (personal right) can I expect other road users to have these systems enabled to protect me and mine? It won't be too far in the future when these will be permanently on, on new cars, so be thankful you have the ability to disable them. As a personal right, as a motorcyclist can I stop wearing a helmet, the lack of which only affects my safety and not other road users? In the near future there is going to be a mix of cars on the road, older ones without these systems, current ones with faulty but switchable, and new ones with, who knows what. Because of this will the legistrators be able to determine whether or not the effectiveness of these systems is viable, the spin doctors and statisticians will take centre spot in dissecting the accident data, which will not be available to the likes of you and me. Besides technology is perfect and faultless, ask any Postmistress or Postmaster.

 

[NLMGSAN]

As a personal right, as a motorcyclist can I stop wearing a helmet, the lack of which only affects my safety and not other road users?

Your helmet has a proven effect on your safety without enhancing the risk of others.

I checked the literature last week again to find any data that backs up the mandatory character of LKA. There is some indirect sugestive 'evidence' but articles showing the negative side of them are also there (similarly poorly backed up with real data).

There is one article where two systems were studied in a simulator, however mimicking real road conditions. One system was simply warning you (LDW), the other actually helped steering the car(LKA). They were compared with using no system:
"RESULTS Comparison of lane-keeping across lateral support conditions found that drivers in the LDW condition (you are steering yourself) tended to have better lane-keeping than those in the LKA or manual conditions."

With LKA the % of distance spent in the wrong lane doubled compared to LDW. This distance when using LKA was compatible with using no system at all.

When systems fail, the following was reported: "Lane-keeping and speed were also measured when the lateral support system unexpectedly failed. Participants who used LDW or LKA during the first section of the drive had similar lane-keeping performance when those systems were disabled compared to participants who drove manually."

Based on this study, there is no reason to enforce lane assist steering systems when you threaten to cross the markers. Yet they do.

 

[OriginalBigAl]

Most of this forum, and I, would most likely agree with you. The UK contingent would have to contact their MPs or Dept of Transport to alter the perceptions of the high and mighty. We on the other hand could hassle our MEPs with our concerns . How do you see that going?
The only thing that will change this is, if there is a rash of high profile (footballers, actors ,royalty, politicians) who end their days in a direct, well publicised, proven accident case. Mere mortals will just be a statistic!

 

[NLMGSAN]

Most of this forum, and I, would most likely agree with you. The UK contingent would have to contact their MPs or Dept of Transport to alter the perceptions of the high and mighty. We on the other hand could hassle our MEPs with our concerns . How do you see that going?
The only thing that will change this is, if there is a rash of high profile (footballers, actors ,royalty, politicians) who end their days in a direct, well publicised, proven accident case. Mere mortals will just be a statistic!

You need one loud voice. Loud enough to shake things up.

I do want to make clear that I am not against safety systems. I'm all in for good ones. Less so for bad ones..