There is no question: the development of new technology in our cars can no longer be stopped. More and more assistants are being added and it can seem like you don’t actually have to drive yourself anymore. Marketing word jugglers, who also call the systems “Auto Pilot,” for example, further reinforce the feeling. But viewed soberly, the reality looks completely different. This is shown by a study by the American Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). 14 different, partially automated systems were examined for a new study – and only one provider failed.
“Partial automation of driving is a convenience feature intended to make long journeys easier. There is no evidence that it makes driving safer, and it may even create new risks as it can more easily divert the driver’s attention. For this reason “It is important that all systems for partially automating driving are equipped with robust safety precautions,” says the IIHS findings summary.
For the institute, the security precautions mentioned primarily consist of driver monitoring, attention reminders and emergency procedures, for example in the event of software defects. The systems that can make driving easier include, for example, adaptive cruise control, lane keeping and steering assistants or a lane change assistant.
Since no system currently guarantees absolute safety, manufacturers must ensure that overly gullible drivers do not get the idea of letting the cars drive alone. In the past, there have been repeated cases of Tesla drivers sleeping on American highways, some of whom used tricks to free themselves from the car’s constant control.
Mercedes-Benz also caused a stir years ago because the then new S-Class could be driven with a Coke can on the steering wheel. It is the job of the manufacturers to prevent exactly that – Tesla was recently ordered to take stricter measures (find out more here).
How the institute tried to outsmart the cars can be read in a comprehensive document (PDF). For example, the driver’s face was covered with a cloth or weights were attached to the steering wheel – in each case to test whether the car was clever enough to see through these tricks.
The result is quite sobering: Only system was found acceptable: Lexus’ teammate with Advanced Drive. Two were rated mediocre: General-Motors’ Super Cruise and Nissan’s ProPilot Assist. And the rest, including Ford’s Bluecruise, Tesla’s FSD, BMW’s Active Driving Assistant Pro and Mercedes-Benz’ system, were rated unsatisfactory.
The reasons for the bad reviews are individual. Ford did poorly in terms of safety functions, Mercedes-Benz did not warn often enough about inattentive driving and BMW showed weaknesses in cruise control reactivation. Most of the weaknesses were evident in Tesla (software version 2023.7.10). There were problems with security measures in almost every area, with the exception of emergency interventions.
IIHS President David Harkey expressed concern about the apparent hasty deployment of these systems: “These results are worrying when you consider how quickly vehicles with these partially automated systems travel on our roads,” he concluded, “But there is also hope when looking at the group’s performance as a whole. No single system performed well in all categories, but at least one system performed well in each category. This means the fixes are readily available and in some cases can be resolved with a simple software update.”
