[vahidkh62]

I am not sure if this is intended or is a bug. Drive assist is great in detecting surrounding cars when they are moving, but if I arrive at a location where the vehicles are already stopped (like a red light) it can't detect them and it becomes really dangerous if I have high speed.
I even feel like emergency break is not working too the point I get scared and hit the break myself.
Any similar experiences or ideas?

 

[mochalatte]

but if I arrive at a location where the vehicles are already stopped (like a red light) it can't detect them and it becomes really dangerous if I have high speed.

That’s been my experience too, and I think that it Is reasonable it behaves that way. Cars stopped at a signal is not terribly different than cars parked on the curb as you drive by them. I would hate for the car to misinterpret a parked car and suddenly stop in traffic. So I’m totally fine letting ACC be in charge around moving cars but putting the responsibility on me for interpreting stopped cars.

I haven’t tested the emergency stop/collision avoidance functionality yet.

 

[John411iD]

This is exactly how the ACC is supposed to work. As described in detail in the user's manual, with good description of system limitations.

 

[vahidkh62]

That’s been my experience too, and I think that it Is reasonable it behaves that way. Cars stopped at a signal is not terribly different than cars parked on the curb as you drive by them. I would hate for the car to misinterpret a parked car and suddenly stop in traffic. So I’m totally fine letting ACC be in charge around moving cars but putting the responsibility on me for interpreting stopped cars.

I haven’t tested the emergency stop/collision avoidance functionality yet.

Let's say I want to use stop and go. If cars are stopped in a traffic before I arrive I have to hit break and that will disable acc.
And I still feel it's dangerous to arrive at a location of stopped traffic and acc doesn't even reduce speed even for the car stopped directly in front of you (not on the side).
Sometimes I am following a moving car arriving at a red light. If the car in the front changes lane, so that I am left with a stopped car in Front of me, the acc starts to increase speed! This is annoying and dangerous imo.

 

[gtwhitegold]

I normally manually stop anyways since I tend to prefer a longer stopping distance, so this hasn't been as much of a concern for me.

My concern with ACC is phantom vehicles. It's only happened once, but on a clear road, it recognized that a vehicle was in front of me and immediately started applying the brakes. No harm was done, but it was pretty scary when it was happening.

 

[mochalatte]

(not on the side)

Get a camera, interface it to a computer, then write me a program that can tell the difference between a parked car that's not in your lane verses a car that you should come to a stop behind. And be sure to get it right 99.999% of the time. If you feel confident of your work, interface it to your car.

In the mean time, I'm perfectly happy keeping the responsibility of interpreting stopped cars and hoping government agencies keep their heads while society gets all juiced up about FSD FOMO.

 

[Wilsonium]

I normally manually stop anyways since I tend to prefer a longer stopping distance, so this hasn't been as much of a concern for me.

My concern with ACC is phantom vehicles. It's only happened once, but on a clear road, it recognized that a vehicle was in front of me and immediately started applying the brakes. No harm was done, but it was pretty scary when it was happening.

This hasn't happened yet in my ID.4 but in my Tiguan, the camera would occasionally mistake a dark shadow or spot in the road and try to break. It was almost always when a truck in a lane over was casting a shadow in my lane. Another thing I experience often is power line shadows on the road will sometimes cause my lane assist to freak out when the shadows are parallel to the road and present wavy shadows. After 3 years of this and the inability to detect stopped cars in my Tiguan has me trained to be ready for them.

 

[vahidkh62]

Get a camera, interface it to a computer, then write me a program that can tell the difference between a parked car that's not in your lane verses a car that you should come to a stop behind. And be sure to get it right 99.999% of the time. If you feel confident of your work, interface it to your car.

In the mean time, I'm perfectly happy keeping the responsibility of interpreting stopped cars and hoping government agencies keep their heads while society gets all juiced up about FSD FOMO.

Interesting how you insist on defending a bug. Why should my car start to increase speed when it already reduced it from 60 to 20? Isn't it dangerous? It takes me at least a second to take over and it is dangerous. Even if it is technically challenging, it is still a bug.

And as for the problem you described: the car already tells which lane other cars are in. No reason for me to do it. And it already sometimes detects the stopped car in the front, but it is grayed out (not blue, like the following car). And I have never seen it detecting parked car mistakenly in the front. And I am talking about roads with high speeds and sometimes highways. No parked cars there most of the times. So it seems to me this is just an overlooked situation and could be improved.

 

[cosev]

Travel assist is a driver assist system, like all other production systems on the market today. If you’re not willing to monitor and override it at any time, you shouldn’t be using it.

 

[vahidkh62]

Travel assist is a driver assist system, like all other production systems on the market today. If you’re not willing to monitor and override it at any time, you shouldn’t be using it.

I didn't say I don't want to. I am reporting an issue to first see if there is a setting I am missing. And secondly, to hope that it Is noted and fixed in the future.
Thanks for letting me know about what I "should" do

 

[John411iD]

There is no bug. ACC works exactly as you want it to work, but only up to 37 mph (60 kmh) in ID.4.

Page 151:
file:///C:/Users/admin/AppData/Local/Temp/Owners-manual-ID.4-10_2020.pdf

Currently available machine-vision AI systems can reliably handle such situations at speeds up to 37 mph. Better solutions are already in the pipeline.

Tesla Autopilot works at higher speed, at the expense of phantom braking - slamming the brakes at random shadows and overhead power lines, which is much less predictable and often dangerous (for the cars behind), than approaching a line of stopped cars in front at over 37 mph. This limitation simply cannot be overcome right now, and you've been warned in user's manual. Better solutions are here in a few years' time.

 

[Nai3t]

Interesting how you insist on defending a bug. Why should my car start to increase speed when it already reduced it from 60 to 20? Isn't it dangerous? It takes me at least a second to take over and it is dangerous. .

I'm with you / not wth you on this.

It shouldn't take you 1 seconds to take over. Your car just slowed from 60 to 20. That took more that one second, and ought to have given you plenty of time to take over. This is cruise control, after all, not take over driving responsibility control.

That said, I've purposefully tested the auto braking in a near panic stop situation. I covered the brakes, ready to take over, but let the ID.4 do the work. It performed very well right up until the car II was following partially dove for the shoulder, stopping only partly in the lane. The ID.4 interpreted this as a clear lane, didn't "see" the next car immediately in front of us both, and either released brake or began accelerating — not sure which, because I mashed the brake to end the experiment.

So I agree that if there's a big reduction in speed, the system should rely heavily on the radar and and probably on the driver to resume.

But I also believe that, as I experienced it, under normal circumstances I works have taken control well before it ever got to that point.

This is why Tesla's Auto Pilot is frequently in the news: owners are giving these systems far too much leeway, believing they're more capable than they are. And Travel Assist isn't even close to Auto Pilot in capability.

 

[vahidkh62]

I'm with you / not wth you on this.

It shouldn't take you 1 seconds to take over. Your car just slowed from 60 to 20. That took more that one second, and ought to have given you plenty of time to take over. This is cruise control, after all, not take over driving responsibility control.

That said, I've purposefully tested the auto breaking in a near panic stop situation. I covered the brakes, ready to take over, but let the ID.4 do the work. It performed very well right up until the car II was following partially dove for the shoulder, stopping only partly in the lane. The ID.4 interpreted this as a clear lane, didn't "see" the next car immediately in front of us both, and either released brake or began accelerating — not sure which, because I mashed the brake to end the experiment.

So I agree that if there's a big reduction in speed, the system should rely heavily on the radar and and probably on the driver to resume.

But I also believe that, as I experienced it, under normal circumstances I works have taken control well before it ever got to that point.

This is why Tesla's Auto Pilot is frequently in the news: owners are giving these systems far too much leeway, believing they're more capable than they are. And Travel Assist isn't even close to Auto Pilot in capability.

Right. So when it is going from 60 to 20, it is behaving normally so I am not hitting the break so that I don't have to set the accspeed again. But suddenly it accelerates and it takes a little while for me to notice and take over. And this was just an example. The one you mentioned is a better one. I expect the acc or emergency break to do something when there is a stopped car in the front. Of course I am always monitoring. But safety features are paid for to help for critical situations. If not, what are they good for.

 

[NBCGLX]

I’m fairly certain most adaptive cruise control systems function this way, even Tesla’s Autopilot (not to be confused with Full Self-Driving; not sure if the latter can detect a stopped vehicle).

 

[vahidkh62]

There is no bug. ACC works exactly as you want it to work, but only up to 37 mph (60 kmh) in ID.4.

Page 151:
file:///C:/Users/admin/AppData/Local/Temp/Owners-manual-ID.4-10_2020.pdf

Currently available machine-vision AI systems can reliably handle such situations at speeds up to 37 mph. Better solutions are already in the pipeline.

Tesla Autopilot works at higher speed, at the expense of phantom braking - slamming the brakes at random shadows and overhead power lines, which is much less predictable and often dangerous (for the cars behind), than approaching a line of stopped cars in front at over 37 mph. This limitation simply cannot be overcome right now, and you've been warned in user's manual. Better solutions are here in a few years' time.

So if it is mentioned in the manual, it is OK that my car accelerates when there is a stopped car in the front? Where is the emergency break? Aren't these supposed to be safer cars than 2010 chevy cruze?

 

[vahidkh62]

I’m fairly certain most adaptive cruise control systems function this way, even Tesla’s Autopilot (not to be confused with Full Self-Driving; not sure if the latter can detect a stopped vehicle).

They are all equally bad then.

 

[Nai3t]

Right. So when it is going from 60 to 20, it is behaving normally so I am not hitting the break so that I don't have to set the accspeed again. But suddenly it accelerates and it takes a little while for me to notice and take over. And this was just an example. The one you mentioned is a better one. I expect the acc or emergency break to do something when there is a stopped car in the front. Of course I am always monitoring. But safety features are paid for to help for critical situations. If not, what are they good for.

That there is the engineering dilemma. The radar sees something there (undoubtedly), but somebody needs to decide the threshold where the brakes are activated. Definitely can't have the car braking for ghosts in the middle of a fast flowing highway. At the same time, they don't want to create a threshold so low that the benefit of traffic following cruise becomes ineffective or to much hassle to use.

But I would expect, like everything else software related about this car, that we'll see tweaks down the road.

 

[YowVil]

They are all equally bad then.

Yes, they are. There's a lot of reports of Teslas hitting stationary vehicles with Autopilot on.

 

[mlsstl]

To expect current driver assist systems to work perfectly in all situations at this point in time is unrealistic.

Think of when basic cruise control was introduced decades ago. Here was a system that maintained a steady speed regardless of the situation. Set it at 70 mph and you'd run into the car doing 60 in front of you. Manual intervention was required. The purpose of the system was to give your right foot a rest when driving long stretches of open highway, nothing more.

I started with Adaptive Cruise Control with Subaru's Eyesight system about 7 years ago. It was a startling improvement at the time, but I spent months learning what it did well and, more importantly, finding what it didn't do. Only then did I trust it, but I still never forgot who was responsible for paying attention while driving the car -- me!

In short, ACC makes certain driving situations easier and more convenient, but not all of them. It is NOT a true autopilot. We are probably years away from that point. The technical part will probably arrive sooner than the legal and public acceptance of that, especially while there continues to be a mix of manually piloted cars on the road with the automated ones.

I happen to like VW's driver assistance features and certainly consider them no more "dangerous" than the plain cruise control that was on a 1965 Cadillac. It is our responsibility to learn how to use any of the features on a car in a safe manner.

 

[mochalatte]

Regarding ACC reacting to stopped cars, it is not a bug if the ACC fails to react correctly. Here is the verbiage from the manual p. 153:

ACC reacts to stationary vehicles to a limited extent up to a speed of 60 km/h (37 mph), provided a stationary vehicle is detected and your own vehicle can be comfortably braked behind the stationary vehicle, subject to the system limits of the ACC. ACC does not per- form emergency braking.

The ACC capabilities are heavily qualified--the wording makes it clear that you will definitely need to take over the braking on a regular basis.

Here it is in context:

The software engineering for driving cars has come a long way, but there is so much in play in driving that there is a lot further to go before we can give over to the machines. The manual illustrations show just a few of the situations were ACC will fail. The parked cars on the side of the road that I mentioned before is just one more situation where ACC faces frequent interpretation challenges.

And as for the problem you described: the car already tells which lane other cars are in. No reason for me to do it.

Driver assist does not know what lanes other cars are in all the time--that's not a done deal. On the highway, the software currently relies heavily on the painted line markings to determine which lane the surrounding cars are in, but the cues available from painted lines for parked cars in the city are much more varied and less reliable if there are any painted lines at all. And the parked car challenge is just one of hundreds of interpretation challenges the software system must interpret correctly on every drive with lots of nines behind the decimal.

I am not sure if this is intended or is a bug.

As to your first question on the thread, the answer is much more the former based on the manual's claims than the latter.