Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Transport
Drivers must not become over-reliant on technology, says IAM RoadSmartRenault driverless car (image taken from YouTube video).jpg

Drivers must not become over-reliant on technology, says IAM RoadSmart

House of Lords report encourages behavioural research
by Alex Bowden
Fri, Mar 17, 2017 12:22
7

Road safety charity IAM RoadSmart has echoed a recent House of Lords report in expressing concern that cars with growing levels of autonomy could make drivers over-reliant on gadgets.

In a recent report on connected and autonomous vehicles, The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee concluded: “Autonomous cars could have negative implications for drivers' competence, making drivers complacent and overly reliant on technology. This is of particular concern in emergency situations, where a driver may react slowly to taking back control of a vehicle.

“The Government should give priority to commissioning and encouraging research studying behavioural questions and ensure it is an integral part of any trials it funds.”

Mercedes-Benz chooses drivers in self-driving car safety debate

IAM RoadSmart backed these sentiments and also pointed to the possibility that a vehicle could be hacked as being another area of concern.

A survey carried out by the organisation last year asked whether respondents agreed with amending Highway Code rule 150, ‘do not rely on driver assistance systems’.  55 per cent of respondents said no, compared to 35 per cent who said yes.

The research also found that 74 per cent of drivers thought insurers should provide cover for damage caused by hackers accessing control systems in driverless cars.

Truck driver says man killed in Tesla Autopilot crash was watching Harry Potter

Neil Greig, IAM RoadSmart director of policy and research, said:

“When it comes to driverless cars, IAM RoadSmart members are not keen to give up full control and are also very concerned about hacking, so we welcome the House of Lords Technology Committee’s view that cyber security is an important issue.

“The implications for future driver competence and training as we become more reliant on technology are still far from clear, and it is vital that the government supports the committee’s call for further research in this area.

“IAM RoadSmart is already responding to this call by providing research grants and organising a conference in October on how we safely manage the transition to autonomous cars.”

driverless cars
autonomous vehicles
IAM RoadSmart
House of Lords Science and Technology Committee
Alex Bowden

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

Add new comment

7 comments

Avatar
me | 7 years ago
2 likes

horse, stable door and bolted.

Sooner that cars become completely automated the better.  There's no driving standards  - if that really was an priority we'd all have to retake our tests evey 10 years when we get a new license.

The times I've been stuck behind someone who can't reverse in a straight line.  Or park.  Or anything else that doesn't involve blundering on headlong in the biggest bit of metal they can afford.

Yes, I think that I'm a great driver.  But I'm probably shit.

Avatar
davel | 7 years ago
2 likes

There's a massive disconnect between 'driving' and usual car use.

Adverts showing the open road or ploughing through a river or monstering up a mountain should be fucking banned by the ASA - or come with a mahoosive US-style disclaimer at the end: your car will spend the vast, vast majority of its life sitting outside your home or work, and you will spend 99% of your time using it sitting in fucking traffic.

Even Clarkson & Co's Top Gear wasn't about driving - you didn't learn anything, it was all arty shots, lens filters, shit jokes and farting about in cars that try to drive for you as much as possible.

Most cars don't get 'driven' so let's make them as comfy as possible, and let's take even the pretence of 'driving' out of the equation. Roll on driverless cars.

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet | 7 years ago
0 likes

Sadly the mobile phone was invented before the driverless car so we will still have to suffer those glued to the screen for a while yet. 

Avatar
CygnusX1 | 7 years ago
1 like

The single biggest item of technology that drivers have become reliant on is the internal combustion engine

Avatar
Yorkshie Whippet | 7 years ago
1 like

You missed out the biggest ball aches. Sat Nav and mobile phones.

I'd argue parking sensors, I drive a lot of different cars and the number that have limited visability out of the back is increasing. There does seem to be a race to get the rear window as high as possible and the driving position as low as possible and then rely on cameras or sensors to rectify the situation.

Role on fully automated google pods. Yeah!

Avatar
STiG911 replied to Yorkshie Whippet | 7 years ago
1 like

Yorkshie Whippet wrote:

You missed out the biggest ball aches. Sat Nav and mobile phones. I'd argue parking sensors, I drive a lot of different cars and the number that have limited visability out of the back is increasing. There does seem to be a race to get the rear window as high as possible and the driving position as low as possible and then rely on cameras or sensors to rectify the situation. Role on fully automated google pods. Yeah!

Good Point - the increasing amount of unnecessary faf associated with modern cars just creates more and more idiots, who think of driving the actual car as a secondary activity to whatever it is they're doing instead, THEN blame the technology when it all goes pearshaped.

'Oh it's the SatNavs fault I drove into the river'

Do what now?

Agree that Parking Sensors are kind of OK - self-parking cars can piss off, though. And don't get me started on why a car needs a WiFi hotspot, FFS.

Avatar
STiG911 | 7 years ago
1 like

Daylight Running Lights

Auto wipers

Auto lights

Auto parking

Parking Sensors

 

Bit late for that, isn't it?

Latest Comments