Video: Jaguar bike detection system taps driver on the shoulder

It should just shout 'on yer left' or 'on yer right'.

I'm always a little puzzled by the " a cyclist came out of nowhere and NEARLY caused an accident" concern of many drivers - it maybe a rational response to having to interact from within a vehicle to the world outside but doesn't actually harm anyone

Love the technological solution so why can't HGV co's do this now were it may be considered essential rather than an aid to aggression on the school run? Straight economics I guess.

As to Jaguar Land Rover how about working a bit harder on some of the difficult bits of vehicle design that aren't part of the driver experience?

The Evoque is a 2012 model :

"Pedestrian Summary
Only the bumper scored maximum points, for the protection it provided to pedestrians' legs. The front edge of the bonnet scored no points, offering poor protection in all areas. The bonnet provided predominantly poor protection in the areas likely to be struck by a pedestrian's head."

source http://www.howsafeisyourcar.com.au/2012/Land-Rover/Range-Rover-Evoque/Pure-TD4-4D-Wagon-6sp-auto-2_2L-4cyl-TDiesel/

TXT to the police when passing too close?
Or electric shock through to seat to the tender parts?

This is technology to be embraced.

The company I work for makes GPS data logging systems and JLR is a customer of ours, so some of our kit was used to develop this stuff. It's not going to go away - the advent of ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance Systems) is pushing towards truly autonomous vehicles, and that will almost certainly make life easier when it comes to sharing road space. Volvo are championing such systems and lead the way in commercial vehicle ADAS. The tests required for this kind of technology to be passed as fit for purpose - administered by NCAP in Europe and NHTSA in the US - are robust and detailed. Vehicle manufacturers are competing with each other as much within the safety sector as those of performance and economy.

Further development of stuff like this makes us all safer, not at greater risk.

@dalbyka - already exists : http://www.gocompare.com/car-insurance/telematics-car-insurance/

I think there is already something on the new Range Rovers that blinks lights in the wing mirror if you are approaching the rear quarter blind spots.

No doubt this is designed to prevent the owner from spilling their Latté and ruining their clothes rather than to protect cyclists.

I'm not a fan of the 'no human required' approach! I'd rather the money was put into technology that monitors and records the drivers actions e.g. 'black boxes' to record (or control?) speed relevant to speed zones, and cameras. Statistical information could be used by insurers to assess individual driver competence and evidence would be available in the event of an accident. Drivers would be responsible and accountable for their own actions. It mat not affect attitude but it would affect behaviour?

I think self driving vehicles and collision avoidance systems are far closer than we might imagine. Most people *want* to be zoned out, on their phone, texting, listening to music, eating, talking, working, thinking about riding their bike etc., - not driving - just look around at occupants of vehicles today!

Insurance companies start heavily ramping up the premiums for non-autonomous vehicles...private self-drive (how quaint) disappears or becomes the preserve of "track days". Most buses disappear replaced by robot on-demand taxis. Unions complain bitterly that buses, taxis, trains, vans and trucks can't possibly be better driven by a computer but the lure of hauliers to have a vehicle running 24hrs non-stop without needing a pay cheque proves too much - after all aviation and marine sectors went most of the way years ago.

In the end, the only self-drive non-autonomous vehicles will have pedals...

As others have pointed out, we already have the "answer" to cycling safety, clearly demonstrated in some continental countries, and it isn't clever cars.

This reminds me so much of the helmet debate, with drivers and car manufacturers promoting things to save cyclists which has the only effect of reducing the responsibility of the drivers and manufacturers.

If you put lipstick on a gorilla it's still a gorilla.

This is just lipstick.

Not only that, it'll be turned off after a few weeks because drivers will find it irritating.

The only way to stop motor vehicles bumping into bikes is to separate them; either through segregated infrastructure, or banning motors.

Frankly im grateful for anything that helps but the real answer is and always will be segregating the cars and bikes in barriered lanes. Even then some vehicles will im sure cross this and cause injury. Sadly you cant take the stupid or even random weather and road conditions totally out of the equation.

Still heres a thought to ponder we all know the risks and yet we still ride and many of us go skiing and skydiving etc and its dangerous and we still do it...perhaps a life without some risk is like an egg without the salt...and i still see plenty of 'cyclists' without any vis, helmet or lights and riding on busy main roads in black....go figure..

As jacknorell indicates. It wo'nt be long before the driver is completely uneccessary anyway. Just think; they'll all keep the speed limits. keep their distance, stop at lights . . .

Ok! So the driver gets a warning. Wonderful! Unless the driver reacts and takes action - what exactly is the point?

I'll illustrate.
This morning just after 0500 I was driving westbound on the A2016 towards the Belmarsh lights near Thamesmead. Weather is cold & frosty and the visibility is good. I am in the outside lane as there are two cyclists riding in the secondary position, working lights, reflective detailing and about 100m apart. Basically they are very visible and riding correctly.

Also in the inside lane is a large silver S-class Mercedes weighing, if I remember rightly, just over 2.3Te. I hold back to give the Mercedes driver a generously proportioned protected space to pull out into. Generous in this case means that I am 20m behind him.

Does he pull out? No is the simple answer. He maintained his course and speed (50mph) and if he passed either cyclist by more than 30-40cm then I would be very surprised.

Technology is not the answer. Attitude and education is.

Not to be pedantic...but in the first scenario I would normally recommend that if a car is ahead of you at the roundabout and clearly indicating left, you shouldn't proceed on their inside. Still, a good system that will help compensate for bad cycling and bad driving.

Will we be seeing law suits against Jaguar in future though when "I didn't see you" to "my car didn't see that I didn't see you"?

This would just frustrate drivers in city traffic, though would be good on rural lanes I'm sure.

Better just make the car take decisive action if an incident seems likely (and by that I mean stop / ignore the accelerator).

Good stuff. Now, in the interest of education, can we add something to the system so that it will perform a more 'robust' action than a tap on the shoulder when a driver passes a cyclist too closely? I'm not usually one to advocate violence, but ...