BMW Car Club Chapter Retracts Ban on Vehicles Equiped with Crash Avoidance Technology

[Luccia at Pelican Parts]

Yesterday, the Genesee Valley Chapter of the BMW Car Club of America released a statement saying they have banned any new cars equiped with "certain collision avoidance features" from their HPDE's - even if your vehicle is able to disable this feature. Here is what they said:

As you know, the automotive world is rapidly deploying a variety of safety-related driver aids, and we are heading toward a brave new world of semi- and fully autonomous vehicles. This will undoubtedly be of great benefit to traffic safety, especially given the rise in accident rates attributed to smartphone use. However, some of these new driver aids may adversely impact the use of such vehicles on a racetrack. In particular, cars with “automatic emergency braking” and/or “lane keeping assistance” systems may behave in unpredictable and undesirable ways on a racetrack.

Because there is so much uncertainty about how these systems behave in a variety of conditions, GVC have decided to ban all vehicles equipped with Automatic Emergency Braking and/or Lane Keeping Assistance systems (or their equivalent) for use in our HPDE events, even if these systems may be disabled by the driver.

Here is the statement BMW issued to Road & Track regarding the organizations ban:

The Genesee Valley BMW CCA Chapter created and published an unauthorized policy banning BMW's with Driver Aids from participating in HPDEs. The national BMW CCA office does not share their opinion and is discussing the issue with the chapter.

BMW NA is working closely with the national BMW CCA office to educate and develop a nationwide procedure for including BMWs with Driver Aids in HPDEs. Most advanced driver aids like lane departure warning and blind spot detection do not affect the ability of the driver to control the car on-track at high speed. In addition the systems can be shut off so that they are also not a distraction to a student.

However, today they retracted their ban with the following statement:



Even though they have retracted their statement, other organizations still have this ban in place. What are your thoughts about banning vehicles equiped with Crash Avoidance technology?

[legion]

I don't disagree. Humans can adapt their understanding to new conditions. Computers do what they are programmed to do and are unable to tell if that programming is inappropriate for a given situation.

Someone can forget to disable a system like this and get themselves or others killed because the guy behind them comes out of a blind corner to find the car that was well ahead of them stopped dead on the straightaway.

On the road, I also think this kind of automation invites drivers to let these systems save them...and maybe they miss circumstances where their cars won't save them (like an un-gated at-grade crossing with a train approaching at 80 mph from their right).

[RANDY P]

I won't buy a car with an electronic nag on board, that's what a wife or GF is for.

What kind of incompetent boob wants that crap in their car? Better safety for FB and texting while driving, I guess.

[Nickshu]

It'll be interesting to see what the future holds for taking cars like this to the track. It seems unlikely that automakers would offer a "fully off" option for this technology from a liability perspective. Maybe on special track-focused models like the GT3RS but not on garden variety models?

[JD159]

Originally Posted by RANDY P

I won't buy a car with an electronic nag on board, that's what a wife or GF is for.

What kind of incompetent boob wants that crap in their car? Better safety for FB and texting while driving, I guess.

Because most people driving are incompetent boobs.

I welcome this technology and can't wait until it is standard.

[RANDY P]

Originally Posted by JD159

Because most people driving are incompetent boobs.

I welcome this technology and can't wait until it is standard.

Then you too can have your car hit the brakes for no apparent reason every time someone merges into your lane, or randomly jerk your car around in heavy traffic. Beeps and squeaks from the dash as well.

BMWCCA did this for a reason, certainly. All those gadgets suck and just gimmicks. People should just learn to drive instead of using crutches.

rjp

[JD159]

Originally Posted by RANDY P

Then you too can have your car hit the brakes for no apparent reason every time someone merges with you, or randomly jerk your car around in heavy traffic. Beeps and squeaks from the dash as well.

BMWCCA did this for a reason, certainly. All those gadgets suck and just gimmicks. People should just learn to drive instead of using crutches.

rjp

We'll see if this happens. The key word there is "should". People can't drive. They suck. 94% of all accidents are because of human error. Take the human out, and overall, accidents will decrease. You will see.

[RANDY P]

Originally Posted by JD159

We'll see if this happens. The key word there is "should". People can't drive. They suck. 94% of all accidents are because of human error. Take the human out, and overall, accidents will decrease. You will see.

Agreed, they can't drive, however I highly doubt that a machine can compensate for those same drivers, especially if that driver is in another car and barreling straight at you.

The unpredictability of driving will never be fully understood by some black box- unless you take all drivers off the road then it may work.

People are just too welcoming with new tech in general, it's just a hack or a bug away from being a death trap.

rjp

[Tobra]

No way would I be on the same track as a car so equipped. BMW CCA might be cool with it, but not me.

[RANDY P]

Could you imagine what would happen when they figure out a way to limit top speed by GPS location? Like, 5 seconds allowed at a time to exceed speed limits (to pass a car for instance)

-with that feature mandatory activated when you start the car
-with insurance discounts for having a car like that
-with a major hack required to disable it.

How many boobs would go for that if they advertised it as "GPS speed monitoring feature", I'm sure it's in the works.

Would you buy a GT3 with that tech on board if they mandated it? That's next, one step before a self-driving GT3.

rjp

[JD159]

Originally Posted by RANDY P

Agreed, they can't drive, however I highly doubt that a machine can compensate for those same drivers, especially if that driver is in another car and barreling straight at you.

The unpredictability of driving will never be fully understood by some black box- unless you take all drivers off the road then it may work.

People are just too welcoming with new tech in general, it's just a hack or a bug away from being a death trap.

rjp

If by barrelling down you mean on a track, ya I'd agree with that.

Another important factor is vehicle safety. Check out what Volvo is doing. Incredible stuff.

We might have to agree to disagree, because I firmly believe for everyday driving, especially on the highway, a self-driving car will be superior. Maybe not for you and I, but for the masses. I'd feel safer if everyone had one.. Also, I'll drive myself to the grocery store, but if after a long day at work I can press a button and my car takes me from the train station to the highway exit near my house, and hands me back controls, I'll buy 100%>

[RANDY P]

Originally Posted by JD159

If by barrelling down you mean on a track, ya I'd agree with that.

Another important factor is vehicle safety. Check out what Volvo is doing. Incredible stuff.

We might have to agree to disagree, because I firmly believe for everyday driving, especially on the highway, a self-driving car will be superior. Maybe not for you and I, but for the masses. I'd feel safer if everyone had one.. Also, I'll drive myself to the grocery store, but if after a long day at work I can press a button and my car takes me from the train station to the highway exit near my house, and hands me back controls, I'll buy 100%>

How could that be safer (or fair) if you impose that stuff on others but not yourself?

Oh, and no, I mean barreling right at you for some unknown reason on the road. Your car stalls, panic stop, child in street 5 cars ahead of you and everyone stops, semi truck in the way, accident, plane crashes on road, mudslide, or a million other reasons that a human may have to take into account and make a decision a computer can't. I think tech it will make them more dangerous, and people will learn to crutch on it- Teach people to be even less attentive. Hell, I'd make manual trans mandatory and cell phone jammers if I could, and the driving test would be 3 hours long.

Raise the competency requirements, but that doesn't sell cars.

rjp

[KNS]

The crew of Asiana flight 214 let the plane fly the approach into SFO and crashed. The policy was "let the plane fly the approach" rather than the crew hand fly it.

There was pilot error involved too of course but the pilots relied too much on the equipment.

Instead of pilots we'll have millions of "drivers" become too dependent on the vehicle to do the driving as their skills turn to mush.

[JD159]

Originally Posted by KNS

The crew of Asiana flight 214 let the plane fly the approach into SFO and crashed. The policy was "let the plane fly the approach" rather than the crew hand fly it.

There was pilot error involved too of course but the pilots relied too much on the equipment.

Instead of pilots we'll have millions of "drivers" become too dependent on the vehicle to do the driving as their skills turn to mush.

You speak as if drivers have skills currently

[RKDinOKC]

Instead of the crash avoidance stuff due to smart phone usage, instead they should come up with and app in the smart phone os that turns off texting etc when the phone is in a car that has been put into gear. Much better option. Stop the source instead of training drivers that failure to give full time and attention is okay because the car will take care of it for them.

oh wait...that would mean the car companies would have to communicate with the phone companies.

[Tobra]

Richard, that would never fly, because the cell phone service providers want passengers to be able to text and what not.

[DanielDudley]

We now live in a world where technology is used to solve the problems that technology creates. I was pretty damn unhappy in the 70s when carburetor cars were so strangled and miserable, but by the 80s fuel injection really made cars shine again.

Today things change faster than the weather in Vermont. Don't like today's technology ? Wait a minute.

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by RANDY P

What kind of incompetent boob wants that crap in their car? Better safety for FB and texting while driving, I guess.

I'm not an incompetent boob, but I would welcome it on cars - and it seems like most of them these days - that have dashboards designed to make you take your eyes off the road to accomplish simple tasks. I haven't had a car since my 2003 Mercedes that had heater controls that you could adjust by feel alone.

[berettafan]

So we see a clear signal that Nat'l BMW CCA is simply a proxy of BMW NA.

it's not about the cars themselves, it's just about corp sales.

sad.

[Joe Bob]

Could they make them turn on their blinkers?