[Loiter]

Yep, my wife's brand new Volt, less than 48 hours after picking it up from the dealer.

Found an open parking spot, pushed the park assist button, car told me to move forward, I drove forward, car told me to stop and place the vehicle in reverse, I did.

At that point all hell broke loose.

The vehicle whipped the steering wheel around and practically floored the pedal.

Before I could even realize what was happening, it hit the car beside me.

The moment I knew it was going to hit the other I went for the brakes - TOO LATE.

I doubt anyone will believe me, but there was no reaction time. It took off in reverse so fast, it was flying and by the time I saw the trajectory, there were backup alarms going off, the rear camera had warning signs all over the view that an impact was about to happen, and the CAR KEPT GOING.

I will NEVER trust the parking assist again. There is no reason a car should be backing up at 10-15 mph. If they had put a very simple "no more than 2-3 mph" limit on this feature, it would have never happened because I would have had plenty of time to register that it wasn't parking correctly.

I've called GM customer service and let them know, but I have 0 expectations anything will be done.

 

[Jdl30]

That's a horrible thing to happen, especially when the car is so new, but you need to take it in right away. The Park Assist system does not control the accelerator at all. You, the driver are responsible for pushing the pedal at the appropriate speed. If there was sudden, unintended acceleration there's something else major going on.

 

[RePo]

The parking assist only operates the steering. It still requires the driver to safely operate the accelerator and the brake pedal. Just the creep feature is necessary for movement, and the driver applies the brake as necessary. Here's a demonstration:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWnEgNRbKfI

It appears a case driver error if the car was allowed to move without driver input on the brakes.

 

[Loiter]

I never touched the brake or the accel. It just took off in reverse.

 

[sparks]

...which reminds me, what again was the recent GM announcement on bringing self-driving cars to market?

 

[Bacardi]

Based on what you stated, I believe you...

No red flags, no "It really did happen <despite not being there>", and you saw no reason to inform us that you called insurance...That's why this story checks out to me...

Lesson learned if nothing else, time to invest into a dashcam...No one nowadays should be driving without one...

 

[Bacardi]

...which reminds me, what again was the recent GM announcement on bringing self-driving cars to market?

They're PRODUCING them but have not stated who exactly they'll be for...Most likely available for fleets only (for now) and if that's the case may have huge roof arrays of equipment and therefore be very pricey...

 

[bro1999]

Yep, my wife's brand new Volt, less than 48 hours after picking it up from the dealer.

Found an open parking spot, pushed the park assist button, car told me to move forward, I drove forward, car told me to stop and place the vehicle in reverse, I did.

At that point all hell broke loose.

The vehicle whipped the steering wheel around and practically floored the pedal.

Before I could even realize what was happening, it hit the car beside me.

The moment I knew it was going to hit the other I went for the brakes - TOO LATE.

I doubt anyone will believe me, but there was no reaction time. It took off in reverse so fast, it was flying and by the time I saw the trajectory, there were backup alarms going off, the rear camera had warning signs all over the view that an impact was about to happen, and the CAR KEPT GOING.

I will NEVER trust the parking assist again. There is no reason a car should be backing up at 10-15 mph. If they had put a very simple "no more than 2-3 mph" limit on this feature, it would have never happened because I would have had plenty of time to register that it wasn't parking correctly.

I've called GM customer service and let them know, but I have 0 expectations anything will be done.

You don't happen to live in SoCal, do you?

 

[sparks]

They're PRODUCING them but have not stated who exactly they'll be for...Most likely available for fleets only (for now) and if that's the case may have huge roof arrays of equipment and therefore be very pricey...

Sorry, I tried to edit my post to put a /sarc tag on it, but the edit failed to post. As background, I am one of the staunchest opponents to the (what I consider to be) ill-informed meme these days that self-driving technology is pretty much ready for prime-time. I think it will need another 20 years or so.

One case in point is this thread. Either the technology failed, or the human-machine interface (to include possibly customer education) failed. In either case, it's really the same problem, since the self-driving function will be engaged by humans and subject to human interaction. This falls in the field that used to be called cybernetics -- that is, a closed loop system with both human and computer elements in the loop. Recent high-profile fatalities (the Tesla that plowed into a truck turning onto the highway) are an example where the human element decided to take itself out of the loop, leaving the self-driving computer in an open-loop state. Cybernetics is still very much in its infancy but now with the excitement/buzz factor gone.

 

[scoops]

Pics or it didn't happen

 

[Loiter]

I left a note on the windshield, called my insurance, thankfully the damage to their car is fully covered + I have accident forgiveness.

The damage to my wife's car is not quite as easy - I have $1000 deductible, so I'm out 1k to fix the driver's side, anything beyond that the insurance will cover.

I would have expected it to slowly creep backwards with me having plenty of time to react with the brakes. It didn't - it took off backwards far faster than I expected and I wish to all hell I'd never took my foot off the brake for even a moment.

 

[Loiter]

You don't happen to live in SoCal, do you?

NorCal (Sacramento) -- what's up ?

 

[Bacardi]

Sorry, I tried to edit my post to put a /sarc tag on it, but the edit failed to post. As background, I am one of the staunchest opponents to the (what I consider to be) ill-informed meme these days that self-driving technology is pretty much ready for prime-time. I think it will need another 20 years or so.

One case in point is this thread. Either the technology failed, or the human-machine interface (to include possibly customer education) failed. In either case, it's really the same problem, since the self-driving function will be engaged by humans and subject to human interaction. This falls in the field that used to be called cybernetics -- that is, a closed loop system with both human and computer elements in the loop. Recent high-profile fatalities (the Tesla that plowed into a truck turning onto the highway) are an example where the human element decided to take itself out of the loop, leaving the self-driving computer in an open-loop state. Cybernetics is still very much in its infancy but now with the excitement/buzz factor gone.

Humans aren't perfect so we cannot expect them to build perfect self-driving cars, even in 20 years...And a big problem will always be, mixing self driving cars with human drivers who can drive aggressively and not obey the traffic rules...With the Tesla, it was determined the guy was watching a Netflix movie and perhaps if the truck was self-driving an accident may have never have happened...

The good thing about self driving cars is they are programed to obey all laws...One exception is Tesla's AP which allows for 5MPH over but most people manually drive at least 10MPH+ over the speed limit so 5MPH is the lesser of all evils...Where I live, you drive as fast as you possible can, at least 80MPH on the 55-70MPH highways, or you are in gridlock...There's no stopping people from speeding, cutting people off, being impaired and driving drunk/high or from being distracted, laws certainly have never worked...There are also health risks where a human is subject to heart attack/seizer/etc and is unable to control the vehicle...

 

[sparks]

With the Tesla, it was determined the guy was watching a Netflix movie and perhaps if the truck was self-driving an accident may have never have happened...

The whole point is, if the Tesla driver was actively driving the car and NOT using self-driving, an accident would not have happened. Self-driving on just one end already proved to be the problem. So why compound it?

Adding more self-driving is not the way to solve the problems introduced by self-driving. The way to success would be to slow down the rollout and spend the time needed (years) to get a better handle on this lofty pursuit.

 

[Bacardi]

The whole point is, if the Tesla driver was actively driving the car and NOT using self-driving, an accident would not have happened. Self-driving on just one end already proved to be the problem. So why compound it?

Adding more self-driving is not the way to solve the problems introduced by self-driving. The way to success would be to slow down the rollout and spend the time needed (years) to get a better handle on this lofty pursuit.

Too narrow of a point...We cannot guarantee he would be alive today if AP never existed; if he's okay with not paying attention to the road with AP, he probably breaks other rules such as texting and driving even when manually driving...We also do not know if AP had saved him from potential accidents in the past...

 

[scoops]

I left a note on the windshield, called my insurance, thankfully the damage to their car is fully covered + I have accident forgiveness.

The damage to my wife's car is not quite as easy - I have $1000 deductible, so I'm out 1k to fix the driver's side, anything beyond that the insurance will cover.

I had the car in "L" - so I would have expected it to slowly creep backwards with me having plenty of time to react with the brakes. It didn't - it took off backwards far faster than I expected and I wish to all hell I'd never took my foot off the brake for even a moment.

L has no effect on creep speed. The car will not reverse while in L. Your story makes no sense to me.

 

[Loiter]

L has no effect on creep speed. The car will not reverse while in L. Your story makes no sense to me.

You're right, I have no clue why I thought driving in L would make a difference in reverse. I've removed that part from the post since it's not relevant.

 

[Henry_FL]

Well we seem to have these every few weeks ...

remember this??

http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread...started-moved-Backed-into-garage-wall-cabinet

GM read the data recorder and drum roll ... its the owners fault ... what a surprise, not some magical fault with the car

So to the OP, go ahead and call GM, they will be happy to come read your recorder, which reports things like throttle and brake position. In your case, it will show you had your foot on the go vs stop peddle. I understand you may think otherwise, but the data recorder will show your recollection isn't too be replied on.

 

[Loiter]

Well we seem to have these every few weeks ...

remember this??

http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread...started-moved-Backed-into-garage-wall-cabinet

GM read the data recorder and drum roll ... its the owners fault ... what a surprise, not some magical fault with the car

So to the OP, go ahead and call GM, they will be happy to come read your recorder, which reports things like throttle and brake position. In your case, it will show you had your foot on the go vs stop peddle. I understand you may think otherwise, but the data recorder will show your recollection isn't too be replied on.

I am human, I won't deny that - Perhaps I'm expecting things that aren't there. I'm not demanding a recall, didn't yell at the GM rep, and haven't threatened a lawsuit. Just stating that the parking assist feature needs some work to make it clearer to the user to keep your foot on the brake before it engages the assist feature.

That simple change would have prevented me from being caught off guard by the reverse speed that it took off at. I sure didn't expect the car to reverse as fast as it did, from my perspective, it was far faster than what I was prepared to react to.

 

[sparks]

Too narrow of a point...We cannot guarantee he would be alive today if AP never existed; if he's okay with not paying attention to the road with AP, he probably breaks other rules such as texting and driving even when manually driving...We also do not know if AP had saved him from potential accidents in the past...

LOL, pure speculation and not engaging the topic at hand. It's right there for all to see, a clear failure of today's self-driving technology, proof that an attentive driver is needed at all times. This accident is clear proof of that. It also validates often-stated concerns that AP, by its very nature (autonomy) lulls the human's attentiveness. So when AP errs, the lulled human's attention may not be there to intervene. So why bother with it? Classic man-in-the-loop problem. More cybernetic work required. QED