Stop & Go Cruise Control one thing I dont get?

H

Hockeye

:
2018 Madza CX-9 GT
Stop & Go Cruise Control one thing I dont get?

With a months experience now using Stop/Go Cruise almost exclusively (probably 95% of all the time Im driving, either in traffic jams, normal suburb roads, or freeways), one thing I really dont get is why Headway Control Mode is so very short while you are stopped?

As you may know, while under Headway Control (the time when the Radar is actively controlling your distance behind the vehicle in front of you and is stopping you as required), it brings you to a complete stop and waits a few seconds, ready to accelerate again when traffic starts moving. But it only waits for 4-5 seconds, after which it goes into Hold Mode, automatically keeping you from creeping without you having to keep your foot on the brake.

Thats when the magic automation stops, (for no apparent reason), and as the traffic starts moving again, you must take active control again and resume.

But it would be so much more valuable if it stayed under Headway Control the whole time you waited for the red light to change, and then automatically accelerated again, more fully automating the whole process. (So for example you could pay more attention to your phone / radio / messages and not waste time starring at the traffic in front of you, then its gentle acceleration would alert you to start driving again.

Clearly there is no technical reason for this unfortunate behavior; it could only require another Personnel Setting like:

Stationary Headway Control Auto-Off after:

5 Seconds (Default) 30 Seconds 1 Minute 3 Minutes

Of course I know it is implemented like it is because it is all about legal issues. The auto manufacturers fear of liability revolving around the growing semi-autonomous driving aids. Interestingly, it appears that all of the auto manufacturers Ive looked into (Volvo, GM, Ford, etc.) ALL appear to have implemented Stop & Go Cruise Control EXACTLY the same way, with that built-in automatic disengage of Headway Control at a standstill after 4-5 seconds.

I get why almost all auto manufactures (in their Lane Keep Assist or Auto-Pilot) steering systems, require active ways to force you to periodically take steering control after 10-20 seconds or so, but Im talking about the period while youre STANDING STILL!

I cannot see any logical or legal reason why Stationary Headway Control is OK for 5 seconds, but not for 1-3 minutes?
 
Hockeye said:
With a month’s experience now using Stop/Go Cruise almost exclusively (probably 95% of all the time I’m driving, either in traffic jams, normal suburb roads, or freeways), one thing I really don’t get is why “Headway Control Mode” is so very short while you are stopped?
Click to expand...

Probably because its for "stop and go" traffic. Its another way to turn control (liability) back into your hands. I'm just guessing here, but this could be one of those areas where Attorneys don't make very good car designers. I'm just throwing spaghetti on the wall here. I'd prefer a configurable option under Settings for the Vehicle with a list of time intervals at minimum or full time interval control at maximum. If I'm in serious stop and go traffic, the delay could be 60 seconds or more. But, like I said, its a great way to make sure that you have full responsibility (physical responsibility) for allowing the function to continue.

It could be a legal issue. It could be a Mazda Safety Philosophy issue. But, I'm like you - I don't see it as a Technology issue at all. This was clearly a decision made by a human being at design time. The question is as you say: Why? And, why no configurable time interval option under Settings?

The legal angle ranks higher in my mind than anything else, but I could be very wrong.
 
Hockeye said:
With a month’s experience now using Stop/Go Cruise almost exclusively (probably 95% of all the time I’m driving, either in traffic jams, normal suburb roads, or freeways), one thing I really don’t get is why “Headway Control Mode” is so very short while you are stopped?

As you may know, while under “Headway Control” (the time when the Radar is actively controlling your distance behind the vehicle in front of you and is stopping you as required), it brings you to a complete stop and waits a few seconds, ready to accelerate again when traffic starts moving. But it only waits for 4-5 seconds, after which it goes into “Hold Mode”, automatically keeping you from creeping without you having to keep your foot on the brake.

That’s when the “magic automation” stops, (for no apparent reason), and as the traffic starts moving again, you must take active control again and “resume”.

But it would be so much more valuable if it stayed under “Headway Control” the whole time you waited for the red light to change, and then automatically accelerated again, more fully automating the whole process. (So for example you could pay more attention to your phone / radio / messages and not waste time starring at the traffic in front of you, then it’s gentle acceleration would alert you to start “driving” again.

Clearly there is no technical reason for this unfortunate behavior; it could only require another “Personnel Setting” like:

Stationary Headway Control Auto-Off after:

5 Seconds (Default) – 30 Seconds – 1 Minute – 3 Minutes

Of course I know it is implemented like it is because it is all about legal issues. The auto manufacturers fear of liability revolving around the growing “semi-autonomous” driving aids. Interestingly, it appears that all of the auto manufacturers I’ve looked into (Volvo, GM, Ford, etc.) ALL appear to have implemented Stop & Go Cruise Control EXACTLY the same way, with that built-in automatic disengage of Headway Control at a standstill after 4-5 seconds.

I get why almost all auto manufactures (in their “Lane Keep Assist” or “Auto-Pilot”) steering systems, require active ways to force you to periodically take steering control after 10-20 seconds or so, but I’m talking about the period while you’re STANDING STILL!

I cannot see any logical or legal reason why “Stationary Headway Control” is OK for 5 seconds, but not for 1-3 minutes?
Click to expand...

In all honesty, I think it's due to the length of the average attention span :)

Seriously though, if the car has been stopped for an extended period of time, asking the driver to do *something* to show that they are still paying attention AND that they still want the car in charge isn't unreasonable.

I can't imagine a situation in which I'm sitting still for three minutes and want to car to start driving on its own without me double checking.

Having to touch the gas or hit resume seems perfectly reasonable to me!
 
MattGoose said:
I can't imagine a situation in which I'm sitting still for three minutes and want to car to start driving on its own without me double checking.
Click to expand...


Well, since you put it like that! (bowdown)

So, we are down to 180 second window of acceptable Mazda control of throttle and brakes? At least that is significantly better than the 3.5 seconds currently at play. Splitting the difference would be 92 seconds, or about 1.5 minutes. Probably more useful than 3.5 seconds.
 
I remember reading about a woman who won the “Darwin Award” for setting cruise control on her Winabago to go to the galley to make a sandwich.
I think Mazda has got it right with a 3-4 second limit considering the proliferation of idiots on the roads.
 
Proliferation of idiots on the road. I thought that's how Darwinism was supposed to work! A world where only the idiots survive. They've already taken over just about every other lane. Why not the entire planet.
 
Last edited:
Cessna CJ4 said:
Well, since you put it like that! (bowdown)

So, we are down to 180 second window of acceptable Mazda control of throttle and brakes? At least that is significantly better than the 3.5 seconds currently at play. Splitting the difference would be 92 seconds, or about 1.5 minutes. Probably more useful than 3.5 seconds.
Click to expand...

You have no idea how short my attention span is :)

Honestly though, based on how sophisticated the tech driving the car is (or, really, isn't) a very short leash is probably a good thing. The amount of attention that I pay when the car is fully stopped is very, very low. I want to be involved in the decision to make the car go again.
 
Hey guys, thanks for the discussion.

Yea I have been paying more attention and it is only about 3-4 seconds before it shuts off. Often in our traffic daily traffic jams I find 10-15 second pauses are very typical – MRCC would be so much better if that time-out period could be increased – even a very modest increase of 5-10 seconds would make a vast improvement in its usefulness. (And yet remain short enough to assure the driver is still engaged)!

Since (in my limited experience) all the Adaptive Cruise Controls from all manufacturers also share that very short interval, I would guess that as more of the general public buys, uses, and loves Adaptive Cruise, we will see that behavior addressed hopefully with software updates.
 
MattGoose said:
You have no idea how short my attention span is :)

Honestly though, based on how sophisticated the tech driving the car is (or, really, isn't) a very short leash is probably a good thing. The amount of attention that I pay when the car is fully stopped is very, very low. I want to be involved in the decision to make the car go again.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. :) I tend to look at anything that automates the driving operation the way I look at an autopilot on an airplane. It is not meant to replace the driver (yet) or relieve the driver of duty/responsibility. Rather, to augment (aid or assist) the driver's capabilities and provide opportunity to increase situational awareness (SA) while still keeping the driver engaged. So, you might be right about this 3.5 second deal as it does force more attention to detail. I just wonder if there should be a Configurable Option under Vehicle Settings for those driver's with a bit wider SA.

The other thing we have not talked about here is the mechanism that controls/manages distance to target - the on-board radar and its inherent limitations. I've noticed that when using Headway at night, distance control is reduced. When using Headway on the streets, distance control is reduced. Optimal performance for this system (at least in my 2018) seems to be on the freeway - whether in S&G (stop and go) traffic or loose traffic at the limit.

I'm pretty sure (though I could be wrong) that Mazda is using the 79GHz band as opposed to the more narrow 24Ghz and 76GHz bands that don't offer the same precision. With these radar systems, its all about distinguishing objects and algorithms that can make decisions based on the differentials in the returns from objects. It is also about filtering clutter and recognizing the difference between reflective clutter and solid objects that need to be dealt with. This tech (in the automotive industry) is still evolving and will continue to change/improve. Changes in the underlying technology will eventually lead to changes in usage protocols and that will ultimately affect what the driver has to do in order to properly use the system. Ergo, Mazda's 3.5 seconds today could become Mazda's Driver Interrupt Required To Disengage tomorrow. ;)
 
Last edited:
Hockeye said:
...even a very modest increase of 5-10 seconds would make a vast improvement in its usefulness.
Click to expand...

I was thinking somewhere along the 30 second span. It is interesting how different driver's see different time intervals as being potentially helpful to them.


Hockeye said:
Since (in my limited experience) all the Adaptive Cruise Controls from all manufacturers also share that very short interval, I would guess that as more of the general public buys, uses, and loves Adaptive Cruise, we will see that behavior addressed hopefully with software updates.
Click to expand...

Without question - it will evolve both the tech and the protocols.
 
Guest2018 said:
Fair enough. :) I tend to look at anything that automates the driving operation the way I look at an autopilot on an airplane. It is not meant to replace the driver (yet) or relieve the driver of duty/responsibility. Rather, to augment (aid or assist) the driver's capabilities and provide opportunity to increase situational awareness (SA) while still keeping the driver engaged. So, you might be right about this 3.5 second deal as it does force more attention to detail. I just wonder if there should be a Configurable Option under Vehicle Settings for those driver's with a bit wider SA.

The other thing we have not talked about here is the mechanism that controls/manages distance to target - the on-board radar and its inherent limitations. I've noticed that when using Headway at night, distance control is reduced. When using Headway on the streets, distance control is reduced. Optimal performance for this system (at least in my 2018) seems to be on the freeway - whether in S&G (stop and go) traffic or loose traffic at the limit.

I'm pretty sure (though I could be wrong) that Mazda is using the 79GHz band as opposed to the more narrow 24Ghz and 76GHz bands that don't offer the same precision. With these radar systems, its all about distinguishing objects and algorithms that can make decisions based on the differentials in the returns from objects. It is also about filtering clutter and recognizing the difference between reflective clutter and solid objects that need to be dealt with. This tech (in the automotive industry) is still evolving and will continue to change/improve. Changes in the underlying technology will eventually lead to changes in usage protocols and that will ultimately affect what the driver has to do in order to properly use the system. Ergo, Mazda's 3.5 seconds today could become Mazda's Driver Interrupt Required To Disengage tomorrow. ;)
Click to expand...

Not trying to be argumentative here :)

Can't say that I agree with the correlation between autopilot on an airplane and the autonomous support features in the car.

I may be way out of day on my knowledge of aviation autopilot capability, but last time I had any idea, autopilot was massively more simple than driver assist. The airspace is massively less congested, you don't use autopilot in and out of the landing/takeoff pattern, and you typically program where you are going through a series of waypoints.

Aviation autopilot is a lot more like boat autopilot to me.

At any rate - when I engage the assist on mine, it feels like a 16 year old is driving. Late and heavy on the brakes, late and heavy on the acceleration.

I don't think we should expect any real changes until there is someway for the cars to communicate directly. Right now we rely on the car to sense a change in the vehicle speed instead of reacting to the tail lights coming on :)

Best of luck!
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Atxyde
Weird noise when using adaptive cruise control and stopping (MRCC, 2018 CX-9)
Replies
6
Views
4K
shanilkns
S
H
2018 Stop & Go Cruise Demo
Replies
13
Views
7K
Guest2018
G
B
Stop and go cruise control is a game changer
Replies
1
Views
2K
MattGoose
M

Latest posts

Back