[1985Darkkid85]

UPDATE:

So we went to the jurisdiction traffic police station because it was a Medico-legal Case notified by the hospital anyway to the cops.

The Investigating Officer also called the Opposite Party and asked us if we wanted to compromise or fight it out in the courts. Both agreed for closure with no proceedings.
Defendant seemed in good health with only abrasion injuries and did not want a trial.

We had a specialist moto lawyer on call in case things got hostile, only for us NOT to utilize his services.

Opposite Party seemed to be charitable and said " it is not about the money "at all , but still paid 6k for his troubles and booked a taxi for his travel.

General Diary case closed out by the cops saying both parties agreed for a full closure with no opportunities for the Opposite Party to exploit the situation.

Lessons learnt:

1. Yield right of way to bikers and pedestrians as 1 hit can maim them for life. I am glad the Opposite Party is still walking with no issues at all.
2. Contribute to noise pollution by honking a higher dB component
3. Do the right thing by admitting the injured to the hospital (which I did) rather than running away in CITY limits.
4. Get a dashcam, cannot stress this enough. The cops only faulted me for being the bigger vehicle, but did not clearly conclude I was at fault.
Note: We got a specialist video analyst to elucidate the video, frame by frame and it was concluded that I was blinded by the electric bounce scooter & poor lighting.

Planning to sleep a little longer than 4 hours tonight and put these stressful events behind me.

Needless to say, heartfelt thanks to BHP-ians for their virtual support.

Mod Note : Please do NOT use abbreviations (e.g. I.O., O.P,, G.D.) as others might not be familiar with them.

Thanks for the support & understanding

[vnabhi]

Originally Posted by Funny

There is a separate rear dashcam installed. I have just joined the two video footages together. It's recommended to have both front and rear dashcams instead of just one, both are equally important in case of any incidents.

Attachment 2296034

Good to know that you have the footage of the accident, that will be of immense help in absolving you from being responsible.

May I know the make of the dashcam and the cost? After seeing your footage, I have decided to get one installed on my Ecosport. You may PM me the details.

[ecenandu]

That is one grand entrance.

https://youtu.be/J96Hq7-FNRM

[adisan]

Originally Posted by 1985Darkkid85

Lessons learnt:

Is it that you were anxious about something even before the incident?

[RohaNN_kWh]

Came across this video of an XUV 700.

The owner states that his XUV 700 had an issue that increased the car speed automatically without any input from the driver, without ADAS/ACC Activated. This issue had occurred previously too after which the owner probably stood on the brakes and got the car to a halt.

The owner mentions that Mahindra ASS just performed a system restart and did not handle the problem considering its severity & fatal consequences it could lead to.

He also mentions that the airbags weren't deployed (after a frontal impact with a truck, the speed mentioned is 80+).

Although the passengers were wearing seatbelts, they did suffer injuries.

On examining the car's front, it looks like the upper bonnet area took the impact which did not trigger the airbag sensors.

Should companies have sensors placed more sensibly for situations like these? I have seen multiple cases where the car is totalled but the sensor area is untouched resulting in no airbags deployment.

Autopilot and ADAS are cool but ultimately the driver is the one who's gonna pay the price for any error caused by autonomous tech, even Tesla's Autopilot has come under bashing a lot of times for accidents on freeways, colliding with trailers, traffic cones etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orFCjLLyUn0

Accident info by the owner

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by ecenandu

That is one grand entrance.

I can't resist this. We should have an occasional light touch in this thread!

Driver gets out. Looks around.

"Sorry, Sir, wrong house."

Originally Posted by RohaNN_kWh

The owner states that his XUV 700 had an issue that increased the car speed automatically without any input from the driver, without ADAS/ACC Activated. This issue had occurred previously too after which the owner probably stood on the brakes and got the car to a halt...

This is very serious. I recall this happening with one brand at least once in the past. I bet someone can fill the details: was it Ford in USA? Followed by long, drawn-out denials from the company before an eventual admission.

[fiat_tarun]

Originally Posted by RohaNN_kWh

...
On examining the car's front, it looks like the upper bonnet area took the impact which did not trigger the airbag sensors.

Should companies have sensors placed more sensibly for situations like these? I have seen multiple cases where the car is totalled but the sensor area is untouched resulting in no airbags deployment.

...

Airbag sensors work on the principle of deceleration and do not need to have come in contact physically to trigger the Airbags. If the deceleration recorded meets the calibrated criteria it will work and in this case it looks like there was significant impact, however it's hard to say just by looking at pictures.

[ron178]

Originally Posted by RohaNN_kWh

Autopilot and ADAS are cool but ultimately the driver is the one who's gonna pay the price for any error caused by autonomous tech

I'll say one thing: there is not yet such a thing as an autonomous car that a consumer can buy. You can have safety assist tech, you can have assisted driving, you can have autonomous driving. In passenger cars currently you can only get the first two at best.

By safety assist I refer to systems that alert the driver of a risk or intervene to prevent it in an emergency. Seatbelt reminders, tyre pressure monitoring, forward collision warning, lane departure warning, electronic stability control, automatic emergency braking, emergency lane keeping. They are not designed to the degree that they will always work but can intervene in a number of common scenarios.

By assisted driving I mean systems that allow the driver some degree of comfort but need driver engagement. Adaptive cruise control, for example. And some more advanced lane centring systems that are marketed as driver assistance packages. They're called "partially autonomous" but recently there have been advocates of removing the word 'autonomous'.

Autonomous would mean a system that does not need the driver.

The problem is consumers often want to force themselves to believe they've got the maximum bang for their buck and of course there's something much more exciting about telling a relative "Look, my car can drive itself" than "I spent extra on an option pack for a safety system". The problem is when you convince yourself the former is true. There are many Tesla fans who have blind faith in Musk and swear by Teslas' "autonomous driving capabilities". There's a book on it and the term has been coined autonowashing, although that is more assisted vs autonomous driving and what's happening in India is safety assist vs assisted/autonomous driving.

I recently test-'rode' a Thar and my father was casually discussing the XUV700; the SA said "Sir it is the safest car in India with five star rating and ADAS autonomous capability".

Tesla Full Self Driving is not full self driving. It's another assisted driving package and yes, maybe it's better than those from competition (I mean BMW Driving Assistant, Volvo Pilot Assist etc.) but the name grossly misrepresents it.

For example this is how Honda advertises its Sensing package for the City e:HEV:


In comparison this is the MG Astor, which misleads consumers by mixing the safety functions with the comfort functions:

[Rohan265]

Originally Posted by RohaNN_kWh

The owner states that his XUV 700 had an issue that increased the car speed automatically without any input from the driver, without ADAS/ACC Activated. This issue had occurred previously too after which the owner probably stood on the brakes and got the car to a halt.

He also mentions that the airbags weren't deployed (after a frontal impact with a truck, the speed mentioned is 80+).

Although the passengers were wearing seatbelts, they did suffer injuries.

Should companies have sensors placed more sensibly for situations like these? I have seen multiple cases where the car is totalled but the sensor area is untouched resulting in no airbags deployment.

As rightly pointed out Fiat_Tarun, airbag sensors use deceleration to determine deployment. But not just the deceleration magnitude. Even the criteria for the deceleration force's direction should be met (to prevent any unwanted deployment).

In this case, I don't think the damage is considerable enough to trigger the sensors. Airbag deployment in truck underrides is not frequent as the impact rarely produces sufficient deceleration.

I have some doubts regarding the crash summary though.

Considering the minimal intrusions of the windshield and the occupant survival area in an XUV, it is unlikely for belted occupants to get injured. The deceleration doesn't seem high enough to cause belt injuries either. Maybe they sustained a minor jerk. I doubt airbag deployment would have helped much.

Also, the crash location is at an area with rumble strips (probably at an intersection). It is likely that the truck slowed down at the rumble strips, and the car rear ended it since the stopping distance was not sufficient. Did the car really accelerate due to an ACC bug? or was the driver himself going at a high speed? This is something only an inspection can answer.

Cant comment much on the ACC bug. If true, that is indeed a major system issue. Hopefully Mahindra has extracted the crash data from the vehicle.

[AVIS]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I can't resist this. We should have an occasional light touch in this thread!

Driver gets out. Looks around.

"Sorry, Sir, wrong house."



This is very serious. I recall this happening with one brand at least once in the past. I bet someone can fill the details: was it Ford in USA? Followed by long, drawn-out denials from the company before an eventual admission.

Of all the companies - that recall came from Toyota! There was a major recall for Toyota Corollas sold in the US in 2009 and 2011. They also had to pay a hefty fine for covering up severe safety problems with "unintended acceleration". Here are some details -

Wikipedia article

Related news article

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by AVIS

that recall came from Toyota!

Thanks for that. If I recall correctly, there was a completely different long-running Ford story, and I mixed them up.

[RohaNN_kWh]

Originally Posted by ron178

I'll say one thing: there is not yet such a thing as an autonomous car that a consumer can buy.

Thanks for the comprehensive info Ron !!

I am very well aware that there is no autonomous car that a consumer can buy, as of April 2021.

What I mentioned here was:

Originally Posted by RohaNN_kWh

Autopilot and ADAS are cool but ultimately the driver is the one who's gonna pay the price for any error caused by autonomous tech, even Tesla's Autopilot has come under bashing a lot of times for accidents on freeways, colliding with trailers, traffic cones etc.

By the word Autonomous Tech,
I didn't mean a fully Autonomous Car.
I was referring to the "Safety Tech" you explained.

My point is that even with a fully functional FSD in place, any malfunctions like these (XUV700 Increasing Speed), it's the driver who's gonna pay the price (I mean personal injury).

Also, I'm aware of the fact that Tesla FSD isn't available yet, only one example known to public that has Level 4 FSD belongs to Elon Musk himself which he daily drives. (Model S Plaid).

Tesla advertises it's current software as Level 2(it's much better than that), musk claims level 4 capable FSD would be ready by 2022, which should be capable of self driving without drivers inputs. Current Teslas come equipped with the hardware required for Level 4.

So technically , people can brag about their Teslas !!
"Look, my car can drive itself"
It's only a software update / legal permission away.

Originally Posted by ron178

There's a book on it and the term has been coined autonowashing, although that is more assisted vs autonomous driving

Well the amount of learning and data tesla is collecting with each car everyday is enormous, so if theres someone who's gonna be the first to bring mass market FSD, it's most probably gonna be them.

Also, I would prefer to blindly follow a billionaire (and his countless engineers working day/night for years) who made a rocket and it's 2 boosters land by themselves and practically started / is leading the EV revolution than to be influenced by some guy with any amount of qualifications writing a book.

[RGK]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Even as a pedestrian, always look both ways on a one-way road.

Sir, I'd like to rephrase it. Even as a pedestrian, always look both way on a "NO ENTRY" road.

[ron178]

Originally Posted by RohaNN_kWh

It's only a software update / legal permission away.

That's the catch. I'm not saying it's a bad system, but it's not autonomous. It's just an excellent assisted driving package, much more competent than rivals. But despite whatever Musk might claim it's far away from 'autonomous'. You'd think the US government would regulate things like this but NHTSA has been asleep for decades and you can get away with claiming things like this.

There's a recent report from the UK Law Commission (chapter 7) recommending banning of the use of terms like 'autopilot' or 'self-driving' to market driver assistance systems unless they've been approved as autonomous - which none of Tesla's systems are close to yet, though competitors are even further away.

The IIHS (as you might know, Tesla have often showed off their excellent crashworthiness ratings) will now issue ratings for assisted driving packages that make themselves appear to be more capable than they really are - and it's not just Tesla.

So far, even the most advanced systems require active supervision by the driver. However, some manufacturers have oversold the capabilities of their systems, prompting drivers to treat the systems as if they can drive the car on their own.

Originally Posted by RohaNN_kWh

Also, I would prefer to blindly follow a billionaire (and his countless engineers working day/night for years) who made a rocket and it's 2 boosters land by themselves and practically started / is leading the EV revolution than to be influenced by some guy with any amount of qualifications writing a book.

I admire Musk, and his engineers' efforts have been revolutionary. But the amount of effort it would take to make an 'autonomous' vehicle exceeds even that. I understand what they've done needs to be recognised but you simply cannot tell people their car can drive itself because it's superior to rivals, to justify their efforts.

Trusting a Tesla with driving itself because there's a revolutionary man behind it is as dangerous as trusting a Tata or a Mahindra with your life because there's a revolutionary man behind it (as for Volkswagen the man behind it is best not spoken of). The latter is obviously local but the former being on a larger scale does not make it right. At the end of it both can kill. When it comes to safety letting emotions come into the picture can be a big problem. The biggest thing stopping people from doing anything about it is backlash from Tesla fans who often fail to understand that not all criticism is an attempt to undermine Musk's or his engineers' efforts.

Originally Posted by RohaNN_kWh

if theres someone who's gonna be the first to bring mass market FSD, it's most probably gonna be them.

There's no question of that. As you pointed out, the amount of data they're collecting from cars to further develop these systems far exceeds rivals. And all the evidence points to them being the first to do it, but even that is likely longer away than you'd think and what Musk claims. What I'm talking about is the deaths and serious injuries, not only to Tesla drivers but also to other road users, that happen between now and then because of the failure to recognise that what is happening today with consumer information about FSD's capabilities is an uncontrollable mess.

[Rohan265]

Originally Posted by Rohan265

As rightly pointed out Fiat_Tarun, airbag sensors use deceleration to determine deployment. But not just the deceleration magnitude. Even the criteria for the deceleration force's direction should be met (to prevent any unwanted deployment).

Apparently, the top court in our country has different ideas:

https://auto.hindustantimes.com/auto...596205376.html

An excerpt:

"The bench said that a consumer while buying a car would assume that the airbag would open automatically in the case of collision. Further, a consumer is not meant to be an expert in physics calculating the impact of a collision on theories based on velocity and force, the top court said"

There is no mention of belt usage by the injured occupant. As per the article, the victim sustained dental injuries. Such injuries are highly unlikely in belted occupants.

If this verdict becomes precedence, we can expect airbags to deploy in all crashes, even if the deployment is nonrelevant. No manufacturer is going to take any risks, especially with 6 airbags being made mandatory. We can expect all 6 to deploy even in a minor frontal impact. Seat belt usage becomes much more important if this happens or soon we will start seeing airbag injuries in non-belted occupants.