Donate SIGN UP

Oh Dear, It Seems That A Big Red Fire Truck Is Actually Invisible!

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 12:11 Thu 25th Jan 2018 | News
39 Answers
"Culver City's fire service said the Tesla had "ploughed into the rear" of one of its fire engines parked at the scene of an accident on Monday." - PMSL.
in a separate incident with GM offering: The rider says the car - which was using GM's Cruise Automation technology - caused him serious injury and is now suing GM, according to local newspaper The Mercury News.
With this sort of injury and carnage being caused is it time to stop these car makers using the public for their experiments?


1 to 20 of 39rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
>>The rider says the car - which was using GM's Cruise Automation >>technology - caused him serious injury and is now suing GM

So he says.

He may not have been on cruise control, he is just looking to sue a large company for all he can get.
Question Author
that refers to a motorcyclist that was hit by the GM automated car Guilbert, I'd say he's within his to sue.
Best answer for Guilbert. ;)
-- answer removed --
Question Author
BA for mis understanding the entire post spicerack, right oh!
We all understand you, 3t.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
There are so many issues here.
First, we get to hear about the incidents where auto-driving (AD) leads to collisions, but very rarely where auto-driving prevents those collisions.

Second, human drivers lead to so many collisions that they are rarely reported. The evidence shows that AD systems are safer than human drivers.

Those two facts mean that AD-related collisions are over-reported.

The key issue is that human drivers routinely and regularly break the rules of the road, but in minor and socially-acceptable ways.

AD systems have road rules programmed into them and they obey those rules when human drivers would choose not to do so.

There are hundreds of reports of low-speed rear-end collisions in which an AD vehicle stops at a junction and the human driver behind rams into the rear. These happen because although the rules are that one should stop at junctions, many drivers routinely look to see if the way is clear as they approach and then do not stop.

Something similar happened with the motorcyclist, according to the official accident report:

The AD vehicle was under AD control at the time.

ANyone who suggests it was not is contradicting the official accident report (above). Those reports are a legal requirement in California of any incident involving an AD vehicle.

The GM vehicle was preparing to move into a gap in the adjacent lane when the vehicle in front (in the adjacent lane) decelerated sharply, making the lane-change manouvre unsafe, so the AD braked sharply and moved back to its original lane. By this time a fast-moving motorcycle had moved into the area previously occupied by the AD car. As the AD car returned to its original lane, it side-swiped the motorcyclist.

I think this is a case where the motorcyclist has a legitimate case. The motorcyclist was travelling at around 17 mph - well within the speed limit.

-- answer removed --
Beautiful cars. No exhausts, lol. Believe they can shift too.
I should have read my own report. The motorcyclist was deemed to be at fault for overtaking on the wrong side in an unsafe manoever
Accident statistics in California resulting in an injury.

Involving automated cars = 2

Involving non automated cars = 155,000
Number of people injured = 225,000
Deaths = 3,680

If there is to be a ban on any cars, it would seem the ones driven by dangerous human beings should be the first to go.
indeed undertaking is illegal, I hate driving, because it takes so much energy to mange the situation safe in the knowledge that knobs will break rules like undertaking, might not cause them a problem but causes problems for me. Had to go around a roundabout twice the other day as my exit was blocked by an undertaking car. Roundabouts are junctions not roads for competitive driving.,
-- answer removed --
Roundabouts are probably the most dangerous parts of our road system .

Some people just don't know which lane to proceed for their intended exit .

We should just have intersections , like for eg the americans road system
-- answer removed --
It is never time to halt progress.

The bike rider better be certain that the car was in the wrong as I'm sure it'll be monitoring/recording everything. In any case the cars are required to have an alert driver ready to take over at any time they need to, so one wonders if they are suing the right individual/corporation.
More often folk get in the left hand lane and turn right.

Or like someone I know, want's to turn right so correctly gets in the right hand lane, wanders over to the left while on the roundabout, then back to the right to exit on the right hand lane; and then after exiting, knowing their car (nor they) won't go as fast as others around them, spend ages trying to get back to the left lane while less considerate and more impatient drivers undertake. (The passenger side is not the best place to be.)
Intersections are far more dangerous than roundabouts and considerable stop traffic and increase journey times. Roundabouts are much safer.

Have you seen Swindon’s Magic Roundabout. That’s 7 roundabout in one.

1 to 20 of 39rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Oh Dear, It Seems That A Big Red Fire Truck Is Actually Invisible!

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.