backtop


Print 28 comment(s) - last by incargeek.. on Dec 14 at 6:54 PM


Emergency Vehicle Warning - Image courtesy Auto Spectator
Not be outdone by DaimlerChrysler, GM shows off its own communications system

It looks as though DaimlerChrysler isn't the only automotive company looking at car-to-car communications systems. General Motors has announced its new vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) system which is currently being tested on Cadillac, Chevrolet, Opel and Saab models in Germany.

Like DaimlerChrysler's system, V2V uses Wireless LAN (WLAN) technology, GPS and a vehicle’s numerous computer controlled active safety systems to relay data back and forth between vehicles. The system is capable of relaying such data as Emergency Brake Warning, Blind Spot/Lane Change notification (with accompanying blinking LEDs in the side view mirror and vibrating driver's seat), Forward Collision Warning and Emergency Vehicle Warning (with location and direction of travel for the emergency vehicle).

"Driving is a very complex task. Knowing where the other guy is and where he’s headed can be as critical as being in control of your own vehicle," said GM's Hans-Georg Frischkorn. "With V2V technology, we intensify the driver’s awareness of his environment to improve road safety, without any distraction to him and certainly without reducing his level of control. This sixth sense lets drivers know what’s going on around them to help avoid accidents and improve traffic flow."

Whereas DaimlerChrysler's system will be employed in high-end Mercedes vehicles at first, GM is using off the shelf components to drive down costs and implement the system on as many vehicles as possible.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By therealnickdanger on 12/12/2006 3:22:58 PM , Rating: 3
Cynicism aside, this technology is not only beneficial, but necessary. I love breaking my tires loose and hearing my V8 howl as much as any gearhead, but automation is the future of transportation and a vital step in reducing traffic fatalities.

Contrary to common belief: driving is a privaledge, not a right.


RE: just what we need - less skilled drivers
By Fenixgoon on 12/12/06, Rating: 0
By FITCamaro on 12/12/2006 4:09:17 PM , Rating: 2
I'm actually with you on this. People are already lazy enough when driving. How many people do you see on the freeway doing 75 mph and barely paying attention to the road (if at all)? With all the airbags, ABS, etc equipment in cars nowdays people feel so safe that they don't think they need to pay attention. The safety equipment will save them and insurance will replace the car. This will just amplify that lack of concentration. Also add to that that the average kid these days doesn't even learn to drive properly to begin with, and you can see why this scares the hell out of me.

My first 4 cars were two 85 Camaros, an 87 Camaro, and an 89 Camaro. You want to know what safety features I had? A seatbelt. So guess what, I paid attention to the road because if I hit something or someone hit me hard enough, I was leaving in an ambulance or a body bag. Plus if I wrecked it, the insurance money I'd get wouldn't come anywhere close to replacing the car. And my parents wouldn't be buying me another car like a lot of kids (even college students).


RE: just what we need - less skilled drivers
By TomZ on 12/12/2006 3:53:04 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Contrary to common belief: driving is a privaledge, not a right.

LOL, you've been listening to too many police officers, government agencies, etc., to repeat that kind of crap. It is only not considered a "right" in the sense that it is regulated due to safety and taxation reasons. In other words, we all have the "right" to drive as long as we follow the rules, which necessarily have to be reasonable. We don't have unconditional or unrestricted "rights" to do anything regarding driving, just as our freedom is generally not absolute and unbounded.


RE: just what we need - less skilled drivers
By Aikouka on 12/12/2006 4:03:52 PM , Rating: 5
I hate to nitpick, but your attitude was a bit bothersome to me... so, I don't see where he's wrong, TomZ.

quote:
A privilege—etymologically "private law" or law relating to a specific individual—is an honour, or permissive activity granted by another person or a government.


Looks like driving is a privilege to me ;). They also go on to say

quote:
Defining the difference between a 'privilege' and a 'right' is quite simple: a right is inherent, while a privilege is granted.


Driving is not inherent as we must take a proficiency test to be allowed to drive on public roads and we have a license issued by the government that states that we're allowed to drive on their roads.

People who tend to consider driving as a right are the ones who tend to abuse their privilege to drive.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilege


By Tsuwamono on 12/12/2006 8:40:44 PM , Rating: 1
W00t for Wikipedia....


By rushfan2006 on 12/12/2006 4:25:10 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry dude you are wrong on this one....driving is not a right...you can "consider it" all you want as a right, but legally its not.

Btw, that was funny when you said you've been listening to many police officers......yeah because the ones that enforce the law traffic laws (among laws in general) wouldn't be a good source on knowing whether or not a simple thing like driving is a right or not... ;)

That's akin to replying to a post in a cooking forum after someone commented on how to cook a steak and going "lol you've been listening to too many chefs....".....

it is their field of expertise is it not?

;)



RE: just what we need - less skilled drivers
By rushfan2006 on 12/12/2006 4:29:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Cynicism aside, this technology is not only beneficial, but necessary. I love breaking my tires loose and hearing my V8 howl as much as any gearhead, but automation is the future of transportation and a vital step in reducing traffic fatalities.


No. Automation isn't necessary, just like having cruise control isn't "necessary" -- its a nicety for driving, but what is NEEDED is more alertness, skillful drivers and a bit more courtesy while driving sure wouldn't hurt either. Scary that some think like you -- automate everything.



By therealnickdanger on 12/12/2006 4:52:53 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
No. Automation isn't necessary

So, do you think reducing fatalities is necessary?

Believe me, I don't really WANT automation, but when you consider the social and economic costs to this country when 43,000 people die every year, more has to be done. Driver education, continued education, and driving proficiency standards in this country are pathetic at best. We are making some strides toward improving the situation, but education will still only get you so far.

Look at Deutschland: they have one of the most comprehensive (and cost prohibitive) driver education and vehicle inspection systems in the world and they still have a fatality rate very close to the U.S. national rate. The saddest part about traffic fatalities is that the causal driver is often statistically not the one killed. It's the family of four that gets wiped out by the drunk driver.


By Fenixgoon on 12/12/2006 10:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
better driver education standards will improve things greatly. make it harder for people to pass - give failing a driver's test a REAL consequence, not just "come back in X days." make people attend driving schools (as in performance driving, where you learn how to handle a car in bad situations), use simulators. there's TONS that COULD be done. it would make getting a license far more expensive, but that's what better driver training costs.


By ira176 on 12/13/2006 3:56:05 AM , Rating: 2
Automation, seems to be the future for humans. We will be taken out of the decision making process by our government, and they can think for us.


"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki