Bradam
Novice Member
I recently acquired a new MG HS PHEV. I've thoroughly researched the car (including the owner's manual and YouTube videos) and personally tested the safety systems installed in the car.
Well, I thought (hoped) that the Chinese, as bold technological innovators, wouldn't replicate the illogical (idiotic) setup of the ACC-LKE and PDC systems. They're just as poorly configured as those in most German cars (e.g., Mercedes, the Volkswagen Group, perhaps with the exception of the slightly better BMW). I've noticed that the setup of these systems lacks logic, and here's how:
1. Most modern PDC (Park Distance Control) parking systems resemble an "audio-visual Christmas tree," which only confuses and distracts the driver. This happens when the PDC system lacks the ability to automatically brake the car when approaching an obstacle too close (e.g., <10-20 cm). Well, the software developers of these systems seem to believe that a car in a parking lot or garage should behave like a tank, crash into a wall, or run over a stroller with a child in it while reversing. All of this can happen so easily when an inattentive driver, watching the rearview mirrors, camera images, and listening to the ubiquitous wailing warnings, fails to press the brake pedal in time. Why would they need information about how many centimeters separate them from an obstacle? The PDC setting in BMW's brilliant car, called "active PDC with braking intervention" or "Active PDC Emergency Braking," proves otherwise (see the video starting at around 2:20: ). Programming such a permanently enabled feature doesn't require a skilled (even less than brilliant) automtive programmer, perhaps even a day's work. It's worth noting that at low speeds, such as when parking, the AEB system also doesn't work.
2. Why does the ACC+LKA (Adaptive Cruise Control + Lane Keeping Aid) system completely deactivate when the brake pedal is pressed? Logically, for safety reasons, pressing the brake should only deactivate the cruise control system (Cruise Control). However, the distance control system (here referred to as Adaptive) and the entire LKA system could (or should) remain active. This prevents potential accidents when a driver with cruise control engaged, for example, when approaching a traffic jam or a pile-up, briefly touches the brake pedal and carelessly deactivates the automatic braking of the distance control system. To brake effectively, for example, in front of a slowing vehicle in front, the driver must press the brake again firmly or irrationally reactivate the ACC using the joystick. I should add that I see no logical reason why ordinary road cars equipped with distance control radar should not have it permanently engaged. Although most modern cars also have an AEB (Automated Emergency Braking) system, its action, primarily through sudden braking directly in front of an obstacle, usually occurs much later than the ACC system's deceleration.
It's to be hoped that at least these two issues described above will see some progress, even if foolish laws and standards (European or otherwise) fail to keep pace with the improvements.
Well, I thought (hoped) that the Chinese, as bold technological innovators, wouldn't replicate the illogical (idiotic) setup of the ACC-LKE and PDC systems. They're just as poorly configured as those in most German cars (e.g., Mercedes, the Volkswagen Group, perhaps with the exception of the slightly better BMW). I've noticed that the setup of these systems lacks logic, and here's how:
1. Most modern PDC (Park Distance Control) parking systems resemble an "audio-visual Christmas tree," which only confuses and distracts the driver. This happens when the PDC system lacks the ability to automatically brake the car when approaching an obstacle too close (e.g., <10-20 cm). Well, the software developers of these systems seem to believe that a car in a parking lot or garage should behave like a tank, crash into a wall, or run over a stroller with a child in it while reversing. All of this can happen so easily when an inattentive driver, watching the rearview mirrors, camera images, and listening to the ubiquitous wailing warnings, fails to press the brake pedal in time. Why would they need information about how many centimeters separate them from an obstacle? The PDC setting in BMW's brilliant car, called "active PDC with braking intervention" or "Active PDC Emergency Braking," proves otherwise (see the video starting at around 2:20: ). Programming such a permanently enabled feature doesn't require a skilled (even less than brilliant) automtive programmer, perhaps even a day's work. It's worth noting that at low speeds, such as when parking, the AEB system also doesn't work.
2. Why does the ACC+LKA (Adaptive Cruise Control + Lane Keeping Aid) system completely deactivate when the brake pedal is pressed? Logically, for safety reasons, pressing the brake should only deactivate the cruise control system (Cruise Control). However, the distance control system (here referred to as Adaptive) and the entire LKA system could (or should) remain active. This prevents potential accidents when a driver with cruise control engaged, for example, when approaching a traffic jam or a pile-up, briefly touches the brake pedal and carelessly deactivates the automatic braking of the distance control system. To brake effectively, for example, in front of a slowing vehicle in front, the driver must press the brake again firmly or irrationally reactivate the ACC using the joystick. I should add that I see no logical reason why ordinary road cars equipped with distance control radar should not have it permanently engaged. Although most modern cars also have an AEB (Automated Emergency Braking) system, its action, primarily through sudden braking directly in front of an obstacle, usually occurs much later than the ACC system's deceleration.
It's to be hoped that at least these two issues described above will see some progress, even if foolish laws and standards (European or otherwise) fail to keep pace with the improvements.
