This is why we need AVs. The humans are the problem.
2017 Bolt AV cars crash reports:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/autonomousveh_ol316+
9 of 13 California AV crashes were Bolts.
However,
8 crashes were the AVs being rear-ended, 6 Bolts.
1 AV crash in manual mode (Waymo) AV driver at fault.
So 1 AV at fault, 12 other vehicles at fault. AVs are 12:1.
Bolts had no at fault accidents. There are a lot of Bolt AVs on the road. Look at the 2016 data for a clue.
9 of 13 California AV crashes were Bolts.
However,
8 crashes were the AVs being rear-ended, 6 Bolts.
1 AV crash in manual mode (Waymo) AV driver at fault.
So 1 AV at fault, 12 other vehicles at fault. AVs are 12:1.
Bolts had no at fault accidents. There are a lot of Bolt AVs on the road. Look at the 2016 data for a clue.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
I went back and read many of the pre-2017 reports.This is why we need AVs. The humans are the problem.
The AV drivers were at fault in several of the crashes. In other words, they were safer when the vehicle was in AV mode than them just driving the car in manual.
So when are AV's unsafe? When humans are driving them or following them in another car. 
When one AV rear-ends another AV, which one is at fault?
I'm a little reluctant to let the AV completely off the hook in the rear-ender cases without knowing more detail. Courts have assigned at least some of the blame to the leading vehicle in some such cases.
That being said, I do agree that AV technology promises to be much safer. The big challenge that I see is ensuring that it remains so in inclement conditions. (Of course, human drivers have a much poorer record in those kinds of conditions too...)
I'm a little reluctant to let the AV completely off the hook in the rear-ender cases without knowing more detail. Courts have assigned at least some of the blame to the leading vehicle in some such cases.
That being said, I do agree that AV technology promises to be much safer. The big challenge that I see is ensuring that it remains so in inclement conditions. (Of course, human drivers have a much poorer record in those kinds of conditions too...)
The problem is that at this point the AV is safer than a human driver unless it's not. Essentially there will be situations in which the human driver is better. You just don't know when that will be the case. But overall I think AVs will be safer if only because they won't take unwarranted risks and won't be influenced by emotional things like fights with significant others or running late for work. Plus they don't doze off ... .
The minute that AV mode is safer than the average driver is the time to start deploying it. It will never be perfect. But if the goal is to reduce accidents, injuries, and deaths, then AVs will be improve auto safety, which sadly is in a state of decay right now.The problem is that at this point the AV is safer than a human driver unless it's not. Essentially there will be situations in which the human driver is better. You just don't know when that will be the case. But overall I think AVs will be safer if only because they won't take unwarranted risks and won't be influenced by emotional things like fights with significant others or running late for work. Plus they don't doze off ... .
It will be interesting to see what the insurance and legal liability is. This is something that needs to be addressed by legislation. However since most legislators are lawyers, it's probably going to hurt more than help. They will want the deep pocket automaker to be at fault since there is more income for their occupation.
But it really should be that the owner of the AV's insurance should carry all the load. Much like airbags, which still kill some occupants in survivable crashes, having the safety system exempt from litigation is what is truly needed to get these cars on the road.
I have a strong suspicion that there is going to be quite a significant spike in people rear-ending AVs until drivers become more generally aware of their more conservative driving style. When I'm in traffic I've become more and more aware of whether or not the person behind me seems to be paying attention, and if they're not I will tend to stop with more than the normal amount of distance in front of me to make sure I have somewhere to go "just in case".The minute that AV mode is safer than the average driver is the time to start deploying it. It will never be perfect. But if the goal is to reduce accidents, injuries, and deaths, then AVs will be improve auto safety, which sadly is in a state of decay right now.
And I wonder how drivers that are prone to road rage are going to deal with their stress levels when they're stuck behind a stopped AV that senses an unsafe condition that those drivers would just ignore.
Interesting times...
The minute that AV mode is safer than the average driver is the time to start deploying it.
When the first one kills this all gets turned on its head. Ideals go out the window. "When machines kill" or some similar headline will follow right behind the ambulance chasers. Schumer and Blumenthal will be calling for senate hearings....... you know the drill.So 1 AV at fault, 12 other vehicles at fault. AVs are 12:1.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
GM Volt Forum
A forum community dedicated to Chevy Volt electric car owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about hybrid performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, reviews, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
