Volvo goes for the crash-proof car

“Our aim for 2020 is that no one should be killed or injured in a Volvo car,” says Thomas Broberg, safety expert with the Swedish auto maker. So how can such a worthy goal be achieved? Broberg’s reply would be that Volvo is working on the world’s first accident-proof car.

And such a vehicle is not that far away. Next month, Volvo unveils its next-generation S60 mid-size sedan at the Detroit auto show. Although still a concept, it showcases many features that the production car (on sale in 2010) will have, such as Collision Warning with Full Auto Brake and pedestrian detection.

“Up until now, we have focused on helping the driver avoid collisions with other vehicles,” says Broberg. “Now we are taking a giant step forward with a system that also boosts safety for unprotected road users. New sensor technology also makes it possible to advance from 50% to full-automatic braking power.”

Radar and cameras are deployed to detect pesky things like pedestrians and other vehicles. If a collision is imminent, the system will first warn the driver and then, if no action has been taken, apply the brakes automatically. Even if there is an unfortunate coming-together, a reduced impact speed could result in a much happier outcome.

This news couldn’t have come at a more opportune time. With the auto industry as a whole in its current sorry state and Volvo looking a little shaky, this technology could help the company itself avoid a crash.

-- Colin Ryan

Photo: Volvo

Comments

[Scotts13]

I can see it now, the newest student "prank" - tossing a lightweight, aluminum-foil radar target into traffic and watching all the Volvos slam on their brakes.

[M]

Chris: "It sounds as though Volvo's new design assumes that failure to break when approaching an obstacle is the only reason accidents occur."
David: "I think it's quite audacious of Volvo to make the claim 'no one should be killed or injured' while driving this car."
Brian: "Why would Volvo make such a silly claim?"

Volvo safety expert: "Our aim for 2020 is that no one should be killed or injured in a Volvo car”

"Our aim for 2020"

"2020"

[Monster Truck]

Now that gas is cheap again, I am going to dust off my huge SUV hybrid-squishing monster-thing and go Volvo crushing. I already squished all the hybrids I could find.

[p-dawg]

Brian:

What should the Volvo engineers say?
"We want lots of people to die in our cars."
Don't think that would go over well.

[Brandon Zylstra]

Steve, you apparently didn't read the article very carefully. They said they were working toward a future where no one would be killed "in a Volvo", not in a car that collided with a Volvo.

>“Our aim for 2020 is that no one should be killed or
> injured in a Volvo car,” says Thomas Broberg, safety
> expert with the Swedish auto maker.

I'm not saying whether this can be achieved or not, but they didn't claim they were going to save bad or drunk drivers in other cars, as that would be totally ludicrous.

[kris]

This would only be advantageous if the braking were not too abrupt and infinitely adjustable according to the situation. Should a car suddenly cut in front of you while you are driving at a high speed you may just want to slow down gradually rather than hit the brakes thereby avoiding being rear-ended. If the sensors detected this case as an impending accident it actually could cause one by braking unnecessarily.

The voice warning would be helpful in situations where there is plenty of time to react but not under critical conditions.

Volvo has a lot of work to do before I would give control of the vehicle over to computer software. Can you say "Windows"?

[blagggo]

why does everyone here focus on just the collision braking system mentioned in the article? A little critical, no?

Surely that is just one example of the many features such a car in 2020 would have to help them acheive 'no one should be killed or injured'. I'd imagine such a vehicle would include other measures such as some protective air bag bubble that inflates inside the vehicle to protect the driver.

Not saying it's possible but a lot of people here are bashing them for thinking they can eliminate deatch with just the collision detection. It's not like they're going to abandon the seat belt, air bags, and whatever else is developed in the next 10+ years.

[tadpolesmom]

Agree with you blaggo; it sounds like the scene in the movie Demolition Man where crashees were encased in foam.

Maybe the future will leave nothing to our imagination. I'm a 50-year-old who's never driven anything but a stick shift. I expect a day, not too soon when I'll have to let that go. A hybrid would be welcome, if only I didn't have to let go of my five-speed. Then again, I've been driving the same car for nearly 18 years; it was a year-old lease return when I got it. I trade off the eco-benefits of replacing it, with respect to my (excuse me) carbon footprint against the costs of the resources to produce a new car.

To change the subject somewhat, and speaking, as I am, from one of those rarefied spots where nearly every bleached-blonde suburban stay-at-home mother drives her kids to school in her--yes--you guessed it--Suburban (not me, though; I'm a working brunette), I'd like to hear from the incoming president's bully pulpit, in the most energetic of terms, that SUVs are wasteful and just too dang big. When I try to pull my tiny sedan out of a parking spot where I've been wedged between an Explorer and a Yukon, I really have no idea what lies before (or, rather, behind) me. I've already been rammed (broadsided, or in the current jargon, T-boned) waiting for a spot in the rain while someone backed into me.

The safer cars can be made, the happier I'll be. There's no need to make them so big, so gas-guzzling, and so dangerous to everyone else on the road.

[DW]

Ford ripped Volvo off in several areas. The Ford Escape is basically the Volvo SUV that Ford forced them to make. All Ford Hybrid engines are made in England, where Volvo had started on hybrid engines waaay back before anybody else and Ford forced them to stop and then stole the idea.

Volvo used to be a very good brand and Ford has come along and cheapened it. I can't wait till they are bought by somebody who appreciates quality again. Cause quality isn't job 1 at Ford.

[RAs]

If every single driver owned that volvo then "accident-proof" just might be a reality

[jintoreedwine]

The thought of the car taking over for me does not sit well with this driver... Sure, there are times when the automatic braking could probably help. Suppose the sensors and all these electronics malfunction... Now I am without a vehicle. Also, how does Volvo intend to stop the potential onslaught of lawsuits: "Well.. the car says it's accident proof and I had an accident!" . Quite frankly I think this is a pie in the sky dream.

Also, lets the consider the senario when the car has to stop suddenly. Well, I imagine that means it was getting fairly close to whatever is in front of it. Suppose someone is tailgating the Volvo, well if that person doesn't have great reflexes or auto-braking they will probably slam right into the Volvo now.

I think we should spend more time educating drivers instead of trying to program away their deficiencies. Computers are awesome, but people are still superior to machines in our ability to foresee potential dangers.

[Michel]

Many people seem to think that it's great to have a car stop automatically (stopping is always safe, right?) and that people who think otherwise are just mad control freaks. I beg to differ. What could possibly go wrong?
- You are in the right hand lane, a car pulls up in front of you way too close for you to stop for it, you know there's a gap coming up in the faster left hand lane and you'll be able to smoothly move into it before you reach the stopped car. Only your car has decided to perform an emergency stop for you so you can't even change into the faster lane anymore. Kaboom.
- You are overtaking a car, misjudged the speed of an opposite direction car (or it just drove onto the road), you'll only just make it except... your car has decided to brake for you. Kaboom, no way to avoid the collision.
- You are crossing a street, your car decides to stop because it measured some irrelevant obstacle as being too close, traffic on the street hits you on the side.
- etc, etc, etc...

I have had countless occasions on the road where I intentionally did not brake, sometimes even accelerated, because there was a much safer alternative to avoid an obstacle, and I would hate to have a car slamming on the brakes for me on every one of those.

You just can't compare this kind of "feature" to any other safety devices like ABS, seat belts, etc... which are rarely ever counterproductive.

I recently took a skidding course, which had a prevention side attached to it as well, and they showed us many examples of crashes where stopping was exactly the wrong thing to do.

[rohan l. gunning]

Ever since I was a child in the late seventies, I've always respected Volvo. They were always a very sensible car, conservatively styled, reliable, beloved by their owners and owned by some of the most decent middle class people. I've never owned one though perhaps because they were always priced out of my range. Besides during my younger years, when I had access to greater resources, It was MGs that I use to blow my hard earned money on. I didn't really see the need to purchase a sensible car. I bought the ones that would always break down, though charming and stylish.