LKA useful or a hindrance

Rolfe said:
I do not require that any car of mine interferes with my steering. I can see and it can't.

Anybody who needs that, whose driving would be improved by it, shouldn't be behind the wheel in the first place. (The couple of occasions in the past when I could have done with something like that, I freely admit I should not have been behind the wheel.)
Click to expand...
Yep agree 100%.it a pain in the arse
 
Here's the future vision for Euro NCAP (which drives these things).


Note these are some of the strong themes coming in the next few years:
  • More intrusive driver monitoring, including facial monitoring, noise monitoring and seating position monitoring, plus phone holding detection.
  • Mandatory impairment testing (eg breathalyse to drive).
  • More intelligent speed limit detection and introducing speed limit enforcement (my guess is at lower urban speeds initially).
  • Intervention to maintain safe following distances.

Changes will be "progressive" and based around "driver acceptance", but it is clear that safety scores will depend more and more on having more intrusive systems that are harder to disable.
 
Last edited:
tsedge said:
You are still liable; the safety systems are considered assistance only, if you crash the car doesn't receive any blame unless there's a provable technical fault. You can't invoke LKA as a defence and nor can you use evidence of safety systems being off as a case for the prosecution. They will only look at the actions of the two drivers and whether they were within the law or created unnecessary risk. Only in the case of a directly provable fault will a safety system have any relevance to blame.
Click to expand...
My tongue in cheek post was never meant to invoke a legal debate , more of , there could be a bright side to a miserable system if you take a sideways look at it. From the legal aspect I agree with everything you say.
 
tsedge said:
Here's the future vision for Euro NCAP (which drives these things).


Note these are some of the strong themes coming in the next few years:
  • More intrusive driver monitoring, including facial monitoring, noise monitoring and seating position monitoring, plus phone holding detection.
  • Mandatory impairment testing (eg breathalyse to drive).
  • More intelligent speed limit detection and introducing speed limit enforcement (my guess is at lower urban speeds initially).
  • Intervention to maintain safe following distances.

Changes will be "progressive" and based around "driver acceptance", but it is clear that safety scores will depend more and more on having more intrusive systems that are harder to disable.
Click to expand...
I thought George Orwell died some time back. I think the most disappointing comment there is "driver acceptance " as though we will be given a choice! How would any one find it unacceptable, in advance, and what could they do. We complain on these forums in retrospect. It will be like the Vogans and Arthur Dent, "the plans have been in your local council offices on Rigel 5 for many years.
 
OriginalBigAl said:
I thought George Orwell died some time back. I think the most disappointing comment there is "driver acceptance " as though we will be given a choice! How would any one find it unacceptable, in advance, and what could they do. We complain on these forums in retrospect. It will be like the Vogans and Arthur Dent, "the plans have been in your local council offices on Rigel 5 for many years.
Click to expand...
Indeed. They justify it by pointing to safety statistics but the relationship between a lot of these systems and safety is not well established (except for anti-lock brakes and traction control). It isn't clear whether LKA (for example) reduces accidents or causes them through surprising inattentive drivers.

All such systems distract and deskill drivers and become crutches people depend on, further deskilling them, which increases the case for more safety systems with the ultimate goal of self-driving cars and manual driving becoming illegal on the public road.
 
AndyL61 said:
Never used it on any car I've owned with it on. If you can't keep a car in a lane then you shouldn't be driving. Steering is not something that should be aided. Braking and traction control yes , steering no.
Click to expand...
Yes but rather than increase driving standards they seem to want to add safety systems instead - there's a fair bit in there about more advanced steering interventions.
 
I'
tsedge said:
Indeed. They justify it by pointing to safety statistics but the relationship between a lot of these systems and safety is not well established (except for anti-lock brakes and traction control). It isn't clear whether LKA (for example) reduces accidents or causes them through surprising inattentive drivers.

All such systems distract and deskill drivers and become crutches people depend on, further deskilling them, which increases the case for more safety systems with the ultimate goal of self-driving cars and manual driving becoming illegal on the public road.
Click to expand...
I'll be dead before that happens I hope. 😄
 
AndyL61 said:
Steering is not something that should be aided. Braking and traction control yes , steering no.
Click to expand...
Well I wish a few trucks that have nearly side swiped me on the motorways because the drivers are buying something on Amazon had it turned on!

I think it has its place, it's a shame the MG implementation is so tragically poor.
 
LKA and other "safety " systems are in place because the powers that be want to save us from the lowest common denominator along with themselves . These are the people who still drink and drive, are drugged up or fall asleep at the wheel or are just so wrapped up in their selves that the common decencies of driving go out the window. Its easier to legislate on mass rather than to revoke their licences or freedoms or to re-educate the idiotic minorities, so we all have to suffer and be tarred and treated with the same brush .
 
Rolfe said:
I remember the first. The early seat belts didn't have a tension spool that wound them up when not in use - they sort of hung in loops from the side of the car. Not long after we got our first car with seat belts fitted, I was scrambling out of the back of the car, caught my foot in the loop, and fell face down on to the tarmac drive. Some safety feature.
Click to expand...
Oh such sweet memories of getting tangled in ‘loose’ seatbelts. Friend of mine, back in the day, got his foot tangled, was drunk and didn’t notice until his mates mum drove off with him hanging onto the car screaming like a girl. He lost some skin off his back and bum, bless him. Mates mum was mortified!

Emgie 4 said:
Great stuff👍, that protocol's exactly what I was looking for - but failed to find🙄
So good and bad I take from it, I was fortunately not right, Ncap don't just tick a box they do some level of detailed testing to prove system functionality, but unfortunately (and I have to accept practically) their testing has limitations that won't cover a lot of real world conditions most if us meet on our daily journeys
I guess it's just a pity some manufacturers have managed to engineer these driving/safety aids almost seamlessly into their cars so they sit quietly in the background until really needed, while others - not so much, and more of a crude feature needing refinement.
But perhaps that's inevitable that car makers who've been perfecting it longer and maybe with bigger R&D budgets will have better systems until the others catch up.


Good point, one reason that pops into my mind, whether we like to agree with it or not LKA is considered a safety system (tho many would just say a driver's aid) and any tinkering with a safety system opens a hornets nest of issues, warranty invalidated for starters.
God forbid an accident happens and the change is found in the investigation (regardless if LKA related to crash) I think any judge would throw the book at u - and then throw the key away.
Most lads tinkering via OBD/software are doing it mostly for power gains (that also may have consequences but I'd suspect on a lesser scale)
Also I suspect a lot of that group aren't embracing the EV transition yet, and for now are sticking with ICE cars
Lastly EV makers are much more likely to monitor their cars, often remotely OTA, some even with ability to remotely disable and leave you stranded (Tesla)
Click to expand...
Is LKA a safety system? Are you sure it isn’t driver assist? I’m asking because my mate is a cop and he says no. Driver assist, not safety. If it is safety, you should not be able to turn it off.
 
siteguru said:
Either way, Euro NCAP requires it to default to On in order for a 5-star rating to be achieved (on any vehicle tested since about April '22).
Click to expand...
That being the case, MG need to make it work properly, mine is in tomorrow for an ‘update’ whatever that means. If they are talking about a software update, why not just do an OTA update? My garage at home has its own secure Wi-Fi. I’m self employed and anytime off to get my car to work as intended costs me real money. Of NCAP requires it to be on, that’s fine but give us a physical button for single press ‘TURN LKA OFF’ button. None of this, press the brake pedal, go to ‘Vehicle’, second tab. Turn off all these stupid settings before I can drive. Do an update to enable one of the star buttons as ‘turn off all the carp’ I have no use for. Until we have fully autonomous driving where I can go to sleep, I don’t want any help, thank you very much.
 
AdeSc said:
That being the case, MG need to make it work properly, mine is in tomorrow for an ‘update’ whatever that means. If they are talking about a software update, why not just do an OTA update? My garage at home has its own secure Wi-Fi. I’m self employed and anytime off to get my car to work as intended costs me real money. Of NCAP requires it to be on, that’s fine but give us a physical button for single press ‘TURN LKA OFF’ button. None of this, press the brake pedal, go to ‘Vehicle’, second tab. Turn off all these stupid settings before I can drive. Do an update to enable one of the star buttons as ‘turn off all the carp’ I have no use for. Until we have fully autonomous driving where I can go to sleep, I don’t want any help, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
You are in good company thinking like this. Many have said the same.

OTA updates are not possible with the MG4, in future it may become possible to update the infotainment this way, but not the car modules, they will always require a dealer visit. The system isn't designed to support a Tesla-style update system.

Also, dealer updates are fiddly and error-prone, so if they did enable OTA it might brick your car anyway.

This is where we are with MG and a lot of young Chinese makes, they are learning quickly but not there yet on the software front.
 
tsedge said:
You are in good company thinking like this. Many have said the same.

OTA updates are not possible with the MG4, in future it may become possible to update the infotainment this way, but not the car modules, they will always require a dealer visit. The system isn't designed to support a Tesla-style update system.

Also, dealer updates are fiddly and error-prone, so if they did enable OTA it might brick your car anyway.

This is where we are with MG and a lot of young Chinese makes, they are learning quickly but not there yet on the software front.
Click to expand...
Oooh! Thank you for the update, you have more knowledge that my dealer. They are very ‘unforthcoming’ with any useful information. Much appreciated.
 

Are you enjoying your MG4?

  • Yes

    Votes: 505 79.2%

  • I'm in the middle

    Votes: 86 13.5%

  • No

    Votes: 47 7.4%
See comments…
Support us by becoming a Premium Member

Latest MG EVs video

MG3 Hybrid+ & Cyberster Configurator News + hot topics from the MG EVs forums
Published
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom