5 ms·

Volvo introduces airbags for pedestrians

48 points by flexie 14y ago

digitalengineer 14y ago
There's also new braking technology to automatically stop the car when it's about to hit something in front of it. (Of course this could lead to another car crashing againt car nuber 1 if it doesn't carry the technology). Apart from that cars added "shock absorbency" in hoods and widened the space between the engine and the hood. But still, do people start to drive faster and closer to another because of the extra safety-features like airbags, ABS, safetly belts, roll-cages? Imagine a long spike shooting out of the logo on the steering wheel if you really hit something hard. That would greatly reduce accidents.
- flexie 14y ago
  Yes, some studies have shown that people take more chances when they feel more protected by safety measures. This is called risk compensation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation Still, less people are dying in road accidents now than before safety features were common.
- nodata 14y ago
  I think you're quoting Steven Landsburg: http://stuartbuck.blogspot.nl/2008/08/spikes-and-steering-wheels.html http://stuartbuck.blogspot.nl/2008/08/spikes-and-steering-wh... But remember this is a fallacy: http://forums.theregister.co.uk/post/259350 http://forums.theregister.co.uk/post/259350
  - digitalengineer 14y ago
    Thank you for the links. There's a link to a great book in there: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Road-Accidents-Prevent-J-J-Leeming/dp/1897856296 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Road-Accidents-Prevent-J-J-Leeming/d... As a motorcycle driver I know I drive a lot more devensive when I'm on two wheels.
  - rgbrenner 14y ago
    I think this is a better link to prove it's wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in... Deaths in 1980: 51,091 Deaths in 2011: 32,367 And that's w/ 90m more people, and nearly double the number of miles driven. Clearly safety improvements DO work.
- Swizec 14y ago
  We had that from the 1900's until something like the 1960's. All it did was cause a lot of unnecessary deaths.
  - Gravityloss 14y ago
    I've heard the argumentation that in developing countries the rate of death per kilometer driven or some such is currently the same as it was earlier in developed countries, despite better safety features in newer cars in developing countries. And that it's in part a cultural issue... I don't necessarily agree that it's everything but it's still interesting.
    - Swizec 14y ago
      You know, I can't possibly imagine why they'd have more deaths despite better cars ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9w7SODzoa8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9w7SODzoa8
- barrkel 14y ago
  Risk compensation isn't linear, and it can't be considered in isolation. If there was a long spike on the steering wheel, most likely it would be chopped off by end users; otherwise the vehicle wouldn't be driven at all. ABS is associated with a decrease in motorcycle injuries even though riders ride faster with it, especially in the wet. But ABS on a bike has a bigger value, because a slight slip on a bike is a very serious problem; a sliding front will cause an accident almost immediately, while a sliding rear when cornering may cause a serious high-side.
prawks 14y ago
Once a pedestrian steps in front of the vehicle, the car’s brakes apply automatically if the driver doesn’t react fast enough. If the sensors detect an imminent collision with a pedestrian while driving at high speed, the airbag pops-up and inflates in a U-shape. This sounds like it will be a lot of fun once those sensors start to wear out and malfunction.
- objclxt 14y ago
  What's the worst that can happen if they do malfunction? Presumably no airbag, but you're no worse off than being hit by a car without pedestrian airbags. I suppose the other type of malfunction would be accidentally discharge, but this is a) exceedingly rare, and b) no riskier than the airbags already in the car
  - prawks 14y ago
    Meh, I was thinking more of the latter. First generation sensors I'd imagine would be more prone to erroneous readings, including false positives. Randomly having the car force you to a stop in traffic could be a little annoying.
  - robgough 14y ago
    and they've compensated for that, by allowing the driver to still see once the airbags have deployed.
- yk 14y ago
  Or if a leaf is flying in front of the sensor. Now I wonder which sensors they use, if they use a camera and some people detection algorithm, it can probably be fooled by a plastic toy. And of course a car which activates the brakes automatically can be quite dangerous depending on the situation, especially if the driver is not prepared for a malfunction. So I wonder who is actually responsible when the car decides to activate the brakes and the driver loses control.
  - prawks 14y ago
    I'm wondering along the same lines, at what speed does the car decide to deploy airbags, and at what speed to automatically brake? And how hard is the braking? I'd imagine it would be pretty hard braking to prevent the car from hitting something. But one would hope the car wouldn't be going fast enough to lose control.
vincentkriek 14y ago
I don't mind reposts of old stuff when it is interesting, but this has been introduced about a year ago? The streets are filled with the Volvo V40 (first model that has it, and every V40 has it standard) over here, so to speak.
atarashi 14y ago
There's a video on youtube of the the pedestrian airbags in action https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4d9dqaMDxI&feature=player_detailpage#t=70s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4d9dqaMDxI&feature=play...
westicle 14y ago
In Australia Volvo drivers are stereotyped as terrible, unaware drivers (possibly due to the tank-like nature of early-model Volvos). So much so that the phrase "Bloody Volvo driver" is a commonly understood phrase. And now Volvo itself doesn't trust its drivers to brake before driving into pedestrians. Perhaps even Volvo is embracing the "Bloody volvo driver" stereotype. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IYKdzNUd1A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IYKdzNUd1A Edit: I should admit that I drive one myself.
- tomgallard 14y ago
  interesting- in the UK, Volvo drivers tend to be thought of as left-wing, cautious, careful, slow. The brand is also associated with the left-leaning newspaper 'The Guardian' as well as museli and wearing socks with sandals!
  - snogglethorpe 14y ago
    Hmm, in the U.S., they seem to have aspects of both these stereotypes (at least at one time; I haven't lived in the U.S. in many years): cautious, slow, sandal-wearing, but also self-centered and kind of clueless, blithely mowing down pedestrians despite their avowed support for all living beings... >< p.s. I've actually known some Volvo owners in the UK, and they really did read the Guardian! p.p.s. I'm totally left wing, wear socks with my sandals, and eat tons of muesli... oO;
nagrom 14y ago
Hm. This seems odd to me - the system certainly costs some money to install, and the person paying for it (the driver) derives minimal (no) benefit from it. Why would the driver pay for this system if not forced to by a regulator? Does it result in lower insurance premiums? I understand that it is nice to drive a car that is more safe for other people in the case of an accident, but you can do that cheaper by driving more slowly and more carefully, surely? I would think that if you are the type of driver who cares enough about potentially injuring others to pay several hundred dollars for this safety system, you're not the kind of driver who is recklessly endangering other people's lives and thus requiring it. EDIT: I don't understand this being downvoted at all. I'm not saying it is a bad or pointless system. I'm saying that the people most likely to need it are not likely to pay for it! Is the solution to enforce usage by regulation, to reduce insurance premiums for cars that have this system fitted or something else?
- xyzzyz 14y ago
  Your post suffers from fundamental attribution error, where you assume that the driver who hits the pedestrian must be reckless and dangerous driver. For example, I am a very inexperienced driver, and while I try to be as careful as I possibly can, to the point where people sometimes ridicule me, I still probably have higher probability of causing accident in near future than some slightly reckless, but much more experienced drivers.
  - nagrom 14y ago
    Hm. My point was that I cannot see that the people most likely to use this system are also the people most likely to pay for it. I don't deny that inexperienced careful drivers may be interested - but the majority of careful, inexperienced drivers do not drive brand new Volvo V40 cars, and the addition of a pedestrian safety system won't make them do so!
    - lprubin 14y ago
      Let's say I'm a rich Dad who has two children, ages 15 and 16 who will begin driving soon. I want them to be less neurotic when they're driving and minimize the chance that they'll have to experience the traumatic event of seriously injuring or killing a pedestrian. Then this car/option might be very appealing to me. But on top of that, the reason this is on the frontpage of HN isn't because the system is installed in a Volvo V40. It's that this system is now a reality and might soon become part of standard safety systems. I personally had never heard of this system and think it's a fantastic idea. And news coverage and consumer interest/awareness could result in this system being installed in more and more cars.
jeroen 14y ago
march 9, 2012: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/volvo-introduces-pedestrian-airbags-222726925.html http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/volvo-introduces...
darxius 14y ago
Very cool, but I'm not sure how I feel about the brakes being applied immediately. Maybe I'm missing some information. Do the brakes remain engaged as long as there is something in front of the car? If so, this could become dangerous for the driver. A criminal would just have to have his criminal buddy stand in front of a stopped car and the driver now can't get away because of the automatic brakes.
- nagrom 14y ago
  The automatic braking system is likely turned off below a certain speed. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to reverse out of a parking space that faces a wall.
  - lttlrck 14y ago
    It's just as likely to disengage when you reverse.
    - nagrom 14y ago
      Nope, because then you couldn't park facing a wall in the first place.
duck 14y ago
Next up, people wearing helmets when they go for a walk.
stcredzero 14y ago
Inhabitant: is it really necessary to add your own zooming code for tablets? Yours doesn't work as well as Apple's. It's not as smooth, and why would I want to zoom and simultaneously twist my page 31.7 degrees to the left!? I never want to do that, which Apple engineers understood. Zooming is a core feature of mobile browsers. Please cut this extraneous stuff out.
jack-r-abbit 14y ago
I'm surprised that the air bag in that location is even that effective. Before the pedestrian encounters the airbag, they have already been struck in the lower body by the very front of the car, then roll up the hood before hitting the windshield. And while this may prevent them from hitting their head on the windshield or A-pillar, they are still likely to be thrown off the hood before everything is settled. So I guess in a situation that involved 4 impact points... making one of them softer is better. But this surprises me. Also, not every body even rolls up onto the hood. Depending on the speed, height, etc... pedestrians often just get launched out in front of the vehicle.

48 points by flexie 14y ago

There's also new braking technology to automatically stop the car when it's about to hit something in front of it. (Of course this could lead to another car crashing againt car nuber 1 if it doesn't carry the technology). Apart from that cars added "shock absorbency" in hoods and widened the space between the engine and the hood. But still, do people start to drive faster and closer to another because of the extra safety-features like airbags, ABS, safetly belts, roll-cages? Imagine a long spike shooting out of the logo on the steering wheel if you really hit something hard. That would greatly reduce accidents.

flexie 14y ago
Yes, some studies have shown that people take more chances when they feel more protected by safety measures. This is called risk compensation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation Still, less people are dying in road accidents now than before safety features were common.
nodata 14y ago
I think you're quoting Steven Landsburg: http://stuartbuck.blogspot.nl/2008/08/spikes-and-steering-wheels.html http://stuartbuck.blogspot.nl/2008/08/spikes-and-steering-wh... But remember this is a fallacy: http://forums.theregister.co.uk/post/259350 http://forums.theregister.co.uk/post/259350
- digitalengineer 14y ago
  Thank you for the links. There's a link to a great book in there: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Road-Accidents-Prevent-J-J-Leeming/dp/1897856296 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Road-Accidents-Prevent-J-J-Leeming/d... As a motorcycle driver I know I drive a lot more devensive when I'm on two wheels.
- rgbrenner 14y ago
  I think this is a better link to prove it's wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in... Deaths in 1980: 51,091 Deaths in 2011: 32,367 And that's w/ 90m more people, and nearly double the number of miles driven. Clearly safety improvements DO work.
Swizec 14y ago
We had that from the 1900's until something like the 1960's. All it did was cause a lot of unnecessary deaths.
- Gravityloss 14y ago
  I've heard the argumentation that in developing countries the rate of death per kilometer driven or some such is currently the same as it was earlier in developed countries, despite better safety features in newer cars in developing countries. And that it's in part a cultural issue... I don't necessarily agree that it's everything but it's still interesting.
  - Swizec 14y ago
    You know, I can't possibly imagine why they'd have more deaths despite better cars ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9w7SODzoa8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9w7SODzoa8
barrkel 14y ago
Risk compensation isn't linear, and it can't be considered in isolation. If there was a long spike on the steering wheel, most likely it would be chopped off by end users; otherwise the vehicle wouldn't be driven at all. ABS is associated with a decrease in motorcycle injuries even though riders ride faster with it, especially in the wet. But ABS on a bike has a bigger value, because a slight slip on a bike is a very serious problem; a sliding front will cause an accident almost immediately, while a sliding rear when cornering may cause a serious high-side.

prawks 14y ago

Once a pedestrian steps in front of the vehicle, the car’s brakes apply automatically if the driver doesn’t react fast enough. If the sensors detect an imminent collision with a pedestrian while driving at high speed, the airbag pops-up and inflates in a U-shape. This sounds like it will be a lot of fun once those sensors start to wear out and malfunction.

objclxt 14y ago
What's the worst that can happen if they do malfunction? Presumably no airbag, but you're no worse off than being hit by a car without pedestrian airbags. I suppose the other type of malfunction would be accidentally discharge, but this is a) exceedingly rare, and b) no riskier than the airbags already in the car
- prawks 14y ago
  Meh, I was thinking more of the latter. First generation sensors I'd imagine would be more prone to erroneous readings, including false positives. Randomly having the car force you to a stop in traffic could be a little annoying.
- robgough 14y ago
  and they've compensated for that, by allowing the driver to still see once the airbags have deployed.
yk 14y ago
Or if a leaf is flying in front of the sensor. Now I wonder which sensors they use, if they use a camera and some people detection algorithm, it can probably be fooled by a plastic toy. And of course a car which activates the brakes automatically can be quite dangerous depending on the situation, especially if the driver is not prepared for a malfunction. So I wonder who is actually responsible when the car decides to activate the brakes and the driver loses control.
- prawks 14y ago
  I'm wondering along the same lines, at what speed does the car decide to deploy airbags, and at what speed to automatically brake? And how hard is the braking? I'd imagine it would be pretty hard braking to prevent the car from hitting something. But one would hope the car wouldn't be going fast enough to lose control.

vincentkriek 14y ago

I don't mind reposts of old stuff when it is interesting, but this has been introduced about a year ago? The streets are filled with the Volvo V40 (first model that has it, and every V40 has it standard) over here, so to speak.

atarashi 14y ago

There's a video on youtube of the the pedestrian airbags in action https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4d9dqaMDxI&feature=player_detailpage#t=70s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4d9dqaMDxI&feature=play...

westicle 14y ago

In Australia Volvo drivers are stereotyped as terrible, unaware drivers (possibly due to the tank-like nature of early-model Volvos). So much so that the phrase "Bloody Volvo driver" is a commonly understood phrase. And now Volvo itself doesn't trust its drivers to brake before driving into pedestrians. Perhaps even Volvo is embracing the "Bloody volvo driver" stereotype. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IYKdzNUd1A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IYKdzNUd1A Edit: I should admit that I drive one myself.

tomgallard 14y ago
interesting- in the UK, Volvo drivers tend to be thought of as left-wing, cautious, careful, slow. The brand is also associated with the left-leaning newspaper 'The Guardian' as well as museli and wearing socks with sandals!
- snogglethorpe 14y ago
  Hmm, in the U.S., they seem to have aspects of both these stereotypes (at least at one time; I haven't lived in the U.S. in many years): cautious, slow, sandal-wearing, but also self-centered and kind of clueless, blithely mowing down pedestrians despite their avowed support for all living beings... >< p.s. I've actually known some Volvo owners in the UK, and they really did read the Guardian! p.p.s. I'm totally left wing, wear socks with my sandals, and eat tons of muesli... oO;

nagrom 14y ago

Hm. This seems odd to me - the system certainly costs some money to install, and the person paying for it (the driver) derives minimal (no) benefit from it. Why would the driver pay for this system if not forced to by a regulator? Does it result in lower insurance premiums? I understand that it is nice to drive a car that is more safe for other people in the case of an accident, but you can do that cheaper by driving more slowly and more carefully, surely? I would think that if you are the type of driver who cares enough about potentially injuring others to pay several hundred dollars for this safety system, you're not the kind of driver who is recklessly endangering other people's lives and thus requiring it. EDIT: I don't understand this being downvoted at all. I'm not saying it is a bad or pointless system. I'm saying that the people most likely to need it are not likely to pay for it! Is the solution to enforce usage by regulation, to reduce insurance premiums for cars that have this system fitted or something else?

xyzzyz 14y ago
Your post suffers from fundamental attribution error, where you assume that the driver who hits the pedestrian must be reckless and dangerous driver. For example, I am a very inexperienced driver, and while I try to be as careful as I possibly can, to the point where people sometimes ridicule me, I still probably have higher probability of causing accident in near future than some slightly reckless, but much more experienced drivers.
- nagrom 14y ago
  Hm. My point was that I cannot see that the people most likely to use this system are also the people most likely to pay for it. I don't deny that inexperienced careful drivers may be interested - but the majority of careful, inexperienced drivers do not drive brand new Volvo V40 cars, and the addition of a pedestrian safety system won't make them do so!
  - lprubin 14y ago
    Let's say I'm a rich Dad who has two children, ages 15 and 16 who will begin driving soon. I want them to be less neurotic when they're driving and minimize the chance that they'll have to experience the traumatic event of seriously injuring or killing a pedestrian. Then this car/option might be very appealing to me. But on top of that, the reason this is on the frontpage of HN isn't because the system is installed in a Volvo V40. It's that this system is now a reality and might soon become part of standard safety systems. I personally had never heard of this system and think it's a fantastic idea. And news coverage and consumer interest/awareness could result in this system being installed in more and more cars.

jeroen 14y ago

march 9, 2012: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/volvo-introduces-pedestrian-airbags-222726925.html http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/volvo-introduces...

darxius 14y ago

Very cool, but I'm not sure how I feel about the brakes being applied immediately. Maybe I'm missing some information. Do the brakes remain engaged as long as there is something in front of the car? If so, this could become dangerous for the driver. A criminal would just have to have his criminal buddy stand in front of a stopped car and the driver now can't get away because of the automatic brakes.

nagrom 14y ago
The automatic braking system is likely turned off below a certain speed. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to reverse out of a parking space that faces a wall.
- lttlrck 14y ago
  It's just as likely to disengage when you reverse.
  - nagrom 14y ago
    Nope, because then you couldn't park facing a wall in the first place.

duck 14y ago

Next up, people wearing helmets when they go for a walk.

stcredzero 14y ago

Inhabitant: is it really necessary to add your own zooming code for tablets? Yours doesn't work as well as Apple's. It's not as smooth, and why would I want to zoom and simultaneously twist my page 31.7 degrees to the left!? I never want to do that, which Apple engineers understood. Zooming is a core feature of mobile browsers. Please cut this extraneous stuff out.

jack-r-abbit 14y ago

I'm surprised that the air bag in that location is even that effective. Before the pedestrian encounters the airbag, they have already been struck in the lower body by the very front of the car, then roll up the hood before hitting the windshield. And while this may prevent them from hitting their head on the windshield or A-pillar, they are still likely to be thrown off the hood before everything is settled. So I guess in a situation that involved 4 impact points... making one of them softer is better. But this surprises me. Also, not every body even rolls up onto the hood. Depending on the speed, height, etc... pedestrians often just get launched out in front of the vehicle.