Idiots, poor Mercedes :(

[Deleted member 65149]

Yes this one is odd.

From the insurance/legal point if view the red car is clearly at fault.

But the odd bit is that the biker never braked? Not even at the very last minute.

On the plus side, the biker appeared to be wearing protective gear and seems unhurt.

My view on this one was that the biker braked for a couple of seconds as a precaution when he first became aware of the red car in the slip road. But when he saw the red car slowing he assumed (incorrectly) that the car was going to enter after him, so he carried on - seemingly blindly.

 

[E53AMG]

Why are we creating 3 pages of drivel, debating it when its passed, it happened and has been dealt with..it cannot be changed.

P.S Be careful how you answer this.. I am a CPC registered "Driver" with both UK and European licenses for "heavy vehicles" and Tacho.

What does CPC stand for? I am scratching my head but can only come up with Crass Politically Correct, Can't Pass Cars or Charming Polish Carrot? [emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

[DoberMan]

What does CPC stand for?

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Certificate of Professional Competence.

 

[wu56Shoozz]

What does CPC stand for? I am scratching my head but can only come up with Crass Politically Correct, Can't Pass Cars or Charming Polish Carrot? [emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Driver CPC - Wikipedia

 

[Dryce]

Is that a joke? I would hope everyone does!

Sadly not a joke - and hoping is .... well hoping.

How often do you see a situation develop that maybe doesn't actually go completely bad but involves just a lot of red brake lights which could have been avoided if some of the drivers had been a bit better in terms of managing situational awareness.

Most drivers at any time are not too bad. But performance varies - not just by individual bu by an individual at any instant.

(This is one area where self-driving car technology possibly has some distinct benefits if cars are able to share live information in a traffic stream about intent, hazard perception, and hazard reaction).

 

[E55BOF]

At the risk of being accused of racialisticalism, I would suspect that the driver of the red car has never passed a driving test in this country since he seems totally unfamiliar with the basics of entering a dual carriageway from a slip road.

Now that is a word I like a LOT. I've not heard it before, but I'll be using it in future; for a non-PC old git like me, there are so many situations these days where it is EXACTLY what is needed.

 

[Scott_F]

Now that is a word I like a LOT. I've not heard it before, but I'll be using it in future; for a non-PC old git like me, there are so many situations these days where it is EXACTLY what is needed.

I don't think anyone has heard it before as I made it up.

 

[Peter103]

I don't think anyone has heard it before as I made it up.

Good, thatledoforme too!

 

[markjay]

(This is one area where self-driving car technology possibly has some distinct benefits if cars are able to share live information in a traffic stream about intent, hazard perception, and hazard reaction).

I agree, though I would be wary of over-reliance on this technology, since the connected car will still not be able to communicate with cyclists, pedestrians, mobility scooters, and animals....

On the same note, connected vehicles will obviously be able to avoid colliding with each other, and an additional benefit is that with fully computerised traffic grid emergency vehicles could be given priory and will no longer need to struggle in traffic. And the same goes for public transport (buses and licensed taxis), or officials and dignitaries such as the PM or the Royal family thus removing the role of the motorcycle police. But here's the question.... should the government sell traffic priority to ordinary citizens? E.g., similar to how people pay for toll roads that cut their journey time, or the London Congestion Charge in order to avoid travelling around the outer borders of Central London etc - i.e., before you set out in the morning you could decide how quick to you want to get to you destination... if you are in a hurry, you purchase Traffic Priority 3 (out of say 10, where 1 is reserved for emergency vehicles and 2 for public transport). You pay more and get to your destination quicker... the government gets the revenue which can then be invested for the public good (e.g. in maintaining the roads etc). Will this fly?

 

[190]

My view on this one was that the biker braked for a couple of seconds as a precaution when he first became aware of the red car in the slip road. But when he saw the red car slowing he assumed (incorrectly) that the car was going to enter after him, so he carried on - seemingly blindly.

Experienced motor cyclists are usually acutely aware of scenarios like this so very odd that having seen the car the he didn't just move back into the outer lane which was an easy escape route. That's what I would have done.

.....before you set out in the morning you could decide how quick to you want to get to you destination... if you are in a hurry, you purchase Traffic Priority 3 (out of say 10, where 1 is reserved for emergency vehicles and 2 for public transport). You pay more and get to your destination quicker... the government gets the revenue which can then be invested for the public good (e.g. in maintaining the roads etc). Will this fly?

On the basis that the M6 toll road is making a loss I think it might crash and burn.

 

[tbourner]

I agree, though I would be wary of over-reliance on this technology, since the connected car will still not be able to communicate with cyclists, pedestrians, mobility scooters, and animals....

On the same note, connected vehicles will obviously be able to avoid colliding with each other, and an additional benefit is that with fully computerised traffic grid emergency vehicles could be given priory and will no longer need to struggle in traffic. And the same goes for public transport (buses and licensed taxis), or officials and dignitaries such as the PM or the Royal family thus removing the role of the motorcycle police. But here's the question.... should the government sell traffic priority to ordinary citizens? E.g., similar to how people pay for toll roads that cut their journey time, or the London Congestion Charge in order to avoid travelling around the outer borders of Central London etc - i.e., before you set out in the morning you could decide how quick to you want to get to you destination... if you are in a hurry, you purchase Traffic Priority 3 (out of say 10, where 1 is reserved for emergency vehicles and 2 for public transport). You pay more and get to your destination quicker... the government gets the revenue which can then be invested for the public good (e.g. in maintaining the roads etc). Will this fly?

Good idea. One problem is that there will still be regular cars on the road, I would think the full replacement with autonomousses will take maybe 80 years. Because:
The "drivers car" OEMs will not remove the capability for a driver all the time there are people that like driving, and it will take a (guesstimate) 50% or so saturation on the roads before the learners of that time decide it's just better to go fully autonomous. Then it just takes for that generation to grow up and the previous generation to die off before total adoption. So if we have 50% level 5 autonomous capable vehicles on the roads in 20 years, those 20 year olds who still like driving will carry on buying driver cars for another 60 years - so 80 years.

 

[renault12ts]

The Uber taxi that killed someone recently did so because emergency braking was turned off and the driver had to act...but didn't.

The problem with the system is that the machine would apply emergency braking too often to the detriment of the car passengers and other road users.

So, it could have reacted to the Hyundai in the first video because it saw the moving vehicle...but this would happen everytime you approached a side road or other place where vehicles would approach the road where the autonomous vehicle was. Less than ideal.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

If the GLC driver was driving how a good Mercedes does they’d have been long gone into the distance before this accident happened so that the lorry could have moved over in time and wouldn’t have collided with the Hyundai.

So, it was all the GLC drivers fault.

 

[clk320x]

If the GLC driver was driving how a good Mercedes does they’d have been long gone into the distance before this accident happened so that the lorry could have moved over in time and wouldn’t have collided with the Hyundai.

So, it was all the GLC drivers fault.

Speed saves lives!

 

[219]

What does CPC stand for? I am scratching my head but can only come up with Crass Politically Correct, Can't Pass Cars or Charming Polish Carrot? [emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Combined Precision Components , Preston . Part of Farnell Electronic components - been using them for years . You see their trucks on the road all the time

http://cpc.farnell.com

 

[E55BOF]

I don't think anyone has heard it before as I made it up.

You can expect to be often sincerely flattered in future...

 

[tbourner]

So, it could have reacted to the Hyundai in the first video because it saw the moving vehicle...but this would happen everytime you approached a side road or other place where vehicles would approach the road where the autonomous vehicle was. Less than ideal.

It's a bit more sophisticated than that. They use computer learning (dumb AI) to understand and predict likely outcomes, much in the same way a human does. If you approach a roundabout and someone isn't signalling, a driver of a few years can generally guess what they're going to do with pretty amazing accuracy, the AI does the same, it just does it repeatably 100% of the time. It also responds much quicker if the assumption turns out to be incorrect.
So it won't just be slamming the brakes on all the time - until the point where they're very common and pedestrians learn they can just step out whenever and wherever they choose as the robots will save them.

 

[renault12ts]

It's a bit more sophisticated than that. They use computer learning (dumb AI) to understand and predict likely outcomes, much in the same way a human does. If you approach a roundabout and someone isn't signalling, a driver of a few years can generally guess what they're going to do with pretty amazing accuracy, the AI does the same, it just does it repeatably 100% of the time. It also responds much quicker if the assumption turns out to be incorrect.
So it won't just be slamming the brakes on all the time - until the point where they're very common and pedestrians learn they can just step out whenever and wherever they choose as the robots will save them.

OK...ask Uber why the taxi killed the visible pedestrian crossing the road.

 

[Petrol Pete]

Either the bike rider was massively distracted or he fancied a new bike.

I agree. I have been riding motorbikes for more years than I can remember and his total lack of awareness is staggering. Looking at his bike and his riding gear I would not suggest he is a novice but that was a rookie mistake that could have ended really badly for him.

 

[Petrol Pete]

At the risk of being accused of racialisticalism, I would suspect that the driver of the red car has never passed a driving test in this country since he seems totally unfamiliar with the basics of entering a dual carriageway from a slip road.

Not knowing what a slip road is for is reaching epidemic proportions on our roads , on any given day on any given dual carriageway/motorway you will see countless idiots joining the main carriageway simply refusing to match the speed of traffic in lane one , often forcing articulated lorries into lane two THEN speeding up to 69.99 mph while angry trucker moves back into lane 1 and allows all the people who had to slow/move over behind get on with it while they think he is a nob. The real nob has disappeared at 69.99 mph.