Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by downandout 3995 days ago
While most human drivers have a hard time avoiding rear-end collisions in which they are the victim, it would save a fair number of people from gruesome deaths if they would build some sort of rear collision avoidance logic for situations where it may be possible for the system to get the car out of harm's way. There seem to be hundreds of accidents like this [1] annually where large trucks smash into cars stopped at red lights or that have slowed down during traffic jams.

Perhaps the cars should constantly be planning escape routes while slowing down and stopping with appropriate distance from those in front of it to allow for escape should it detect an inevitable collision from behind. Even where the only possible escape route involves hitting another car, it should be able to make the decision that a light collision with a vehicle in another lane is perferable to a large truck hitting it at 70mph.

[1] http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/traffic/2015/04/12/fatal-cras...

2 comments

"There seem to be hundreds of accidents like this [1] annually where large trucks smash into cars stopped at red lights or that have slowed down during traffic jams."

Isn't that solved by the automatic collision detection with emergency braking, as implemented by Volvo?[1]

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ridS396W2BY

If I'm not mistaken, the OP is postulating an avoidance mechanism for the front ("victim") car, not the rear car. Indeed the rear car is at a higher risk of injury than the front car in read-end accidents.
>While most human drivers have a hard time avoiding rear-end collisions in which they are the victim This happens every day. -car A comes to a sudden stop for a less than legitimate reason (e.g "I need to be in that stopped left turn lane, not this moving through lane but I was too busy being distracted") -car B (behind A) begins to come to a stop as fast as possible -car B sees car C in rear-view -car B moves right one lane -car C manages to avoid rear ending A by less than the length of B Obviously this is set off by A having jack shit for situational awareness and B picks up the slack