Xiaopeng High -speed High -speed Banging People Analysis: Can't recognize still things?The anti -collision system fails?

Produced | San Yan Finance Author | Born

Recently, a Xiaopeng P7 hit another car parked on the lane at a high speed, causing casualties. Judging from the video, Xiaopeng P7 did not seem to slow down at the accident, and one person was hit by a person.

According to Xiaopeng P7 owner, it opened auxiliary driving at the time. The owner said that the speed of 80km/h at that time opened the LCC (auxiliary lane in the lane). Usually there were abnormal situations to warn, but this time there was no prompt. In addition, if he was distracted, a collision accident occurred.

Soon Xiaopeng responded. Xiaopeng said that on the afternoon of August 10, a car owner in Ningbo drove the vehicle to collide with the person in front of the vehicle, which caused casualties to cause casualties. Xiaopeng Automobile was sad and regrettable for the victims of the unfortunate death in the accident. At present, the traffic police department has filed a case, and the store has gone to the site for assistance. Xiaopeng will fully cooperate with relevant departments to conduct an accident investigation, continue to follow up the follow -up results, and assist customers to handle related matters.

In addition, the local traffic police stated that the owner of the accident had been summoned on August 10, but it was currently unable to confirm whether the vehicle was turned on whether the driving assist mode was turned on.

The incident was quickly fermented on the Internet, which once again triggered discussions on intelligent driving safety.

In this serious accident, what role does the car owner and auxiliary driving system play?

Xiaopeng P7 owner only opened LCC?

In fact, there is ACC

It may be more important

To discuss the accident, we must first understand the intelligent auxiliary driving system of Xiaopeng Automobile.

In fact, Xiaopeng P7 has 20 versions according to different configurations. Different versions of the positioning of different versions, battery life and functions are also different. Of course, the intelligent configuration is also different.

Specifically, we see that each version has different letters suffering. Among them, E, N, G, are actually the last three letters of Xiaopeng Peng, which represents the XPILOT gradient gradient of the intelligent and intelligent driving system, that is, the intelligent grade E ＞ N> G. The N+, E+suffix models are actually upgrades of N and E, and there are some upgrades on details.

The G version models do not have the XPILOT intelligent auxiliary driving system; the N version intelligent auxiliary driving system hardware system version is XPILOT 2.5+; E -version hardware system version is XPILOT 3.0.

Xiaopeng P7 owner revealed that its model is XPILOT 2.5+, which is the L2.5 autonomous driving level. L2.5 generally has functions such as ACC adaptive cruise, ALC intelligent auxiliary channels, LCC lanes, and ATC adaptive curve cruise and other functions.

The owner of the accident Xiaopeng P7 said that the LCC lane was supported at the time.

Xiaopeng's official website introduces only a simple sentence: by detecting the lane lines installed on the front windshield glass, the vehicle is maintained in the center of the lane.

In fact, LCC is a simple auxiliary driving function, and many traditional car companies have this function. Its function is to keep the car driving in a lane.

But LCC is usually used with ACC adaptive cruise. ACC's simple understanding is that the vehicle follows the front car and adjusts the speed according to the speed of the front car. If there is no car in front, drive at the set cruise speed.

According to Xiaopeng P7's user manual, the premise of launching LCC is that the ACC function must be opened first. Therefore, the accurate driving status of Xiaopeng P7 was ACC+LCC. At that time, it kept at a speed of 80 yards at the far left.

Many reports were given only LCC, but did not mention ACC. In fact, ACC is the most important role to control the speed of vehicles. LCC only provides the function of maintaining a lane.

The user manual reads: (After successfully activating the LCC) LCC will assist the driver to control the steering wheel, and the speed is still controlled by ACC.

So the question has become an ACC. Why did Xiaopeng P7 hit a static vehicle?

Facing quiet people or objects

Why does ACC+LCC fail?

In fact, on the day of the Xiaopeng P7 high -speed accident, there were no adverse conditions that were not conducive to vehicles in both weather conditions and road conditions.

At that time, it was also a relatively straight pavement, and did not turn sharply, nor did it change rapidly.

According to Xiaopeng owner, there were still warnings in the past, but this time it seems that all the warnings have disappeared?

Before the survey results came out, we could not know the real reason. However, from the user manual, you can also try to analyze the possible causes of the accident.

In the user manual, it is mentioned in the case of a static vehicle or object on driving vehicles.

The original text is this: For static vehicles or objects (such as pavement obstacles), especially when the vehicle left your driving lane causes static vehicles or objects in front, adaptive cruise (ACC) cannot detect all objects, or may not be possible Brake/deceleration.

However, from the scene of the accident, it can be known that at the time in front of the lane of Xiaopeng P7, the crash was very close to the person. It could be seen as a still matter. Basically in line with this "static vehicle or object", ACC may not be able to brake/decelerate in time.

In addition, the user manual mentioned that there are several targets of ACC that will not be responded, including but not limited to: people, animals; traffic lights; accident vehicles, etc.

It is worth noting that before the accident occurred, the collision was just between Xiaopeng P7 and the car that was hit by the vehicle. The user manual mentioned that LCC cannot respond to static obstacles. If you encounter road repair facilities (traffic cone, traffic barrel, or other roadblocks), please be careful and prepare at any time.

Whether it is ACC or LCC function, there are similar descriptions in the user manual: ACC/LCC is designed to drive comfort and convenience. Keep vigilant, drive safely, and control vehicles. Do not rely on the system to fully reduce the speed/cope with emergency emergencies. Be sure to observe the road conditions ahead and prepare to take corrective measures at any time, otherwise it can cause serious damage or death.

From the introduction of the user manual, we seem to be able to see that the ACC and LCC still cannot guarantee high standards of recognition for static vehicles or objects, and the driver must be ready to take over at any time.

But in addition to ACC and LCC, Xiaopeng P7 also has the driver monitoring system DSM and active safety system. Are they also invalidated?

Drive monitoring system DSM, and the active safety system is also invalidated

I believe many people should remember that last month, a Xiaopeng car owner was reminded to fall asleep because of small eyes.

In fact, the driver's monitoring system is involved, referred to as DSM. DSM will judge the driver's state through the camera, sensor, etc., and reminds the driver to maintain attention.

At that time, when Xiaopeng appeared on the hot search, some people talked about Xiaopeng's "demanding" judgment standards. Even in the eyes of some people, this has become an excellent promotional opportunity.

However, the owner of the Xiaopeng P7 accident did not say a similar reminder.

In fact, not all P7 models have DSM functions.

According to Xiaopeng customer service, DSM is part of NGP and LCC functions. There is no separate switch. It automatically opens with NGP and LCC, and the NGP and LCC functions will be automatically exited after the end of the NGP and LCC functions.

Therefore, DSM can only be used on the E and N version models. Then Xiaopeng P7 high -speed accident owner should also open the DSM function.

The owner of the Xiaopeng said that he was distracted at the time, which was curious what kind of distraction would lead to the accident.

This is also confusing, why DSM did not give a reminder.

In other words, looking at Xiaopeng's DSM from another perspective, its "harsh" is actually inaccurate identification. Did you come to another extreme this time?

In addition, there is a point that the N version of Xiaopeng P7 also has an active safety system, including the front -to -war early warning FCW and AEB automatic emergency braking.

The front -to -collision warning is to judge the risk of collisions, and the driver will be warned by vision, hearing and touch. If the driver does not use braking in time, the car may take the initiative to use braking to reduce the risk. If the risk is further increased, AEB automatic emergency braking will be triggered.

The user manual introduces these two active safety auxiliary functions to prevent collision or reduce the speed of collision. But it seems that the accident vehicle has obvious deceleration.

Moreover, the owner did not reflect that there were reminders and warnings, nor did they mention the details of the car's active braking.

It is worth noting that the collision warning was turned on by default after the vehicle was started, and the owner could choose to close it manually.

Judging from the current situation, it is not clear whether the owner of the accident closed these two functions manually. But from the perspective of common sense, it seems that it does not need to close these two functions, because they will only trigger in emergencies, and they usually do not affect the car owner's driving experience.

Is the manufacturer's risk prompts to promote the promotion of the auxiliary system?

In this discussion on assisting driving safety, there are also voices that may be exaggerated propaganda of car companies, allowing car owners to overestimate the ability of intelligent auxiliary driving.

Or the car company does not distinguish between different models, allowing car owners to blur the vehicle's intelligent auxiliary driving capabilities.

In fact, whether it is Xiaopeng or Weilai and ideal new energy vehicle brands, the official website of its official website is not detailed enough for the assistance driving system.

It is just a rough description of the function, and the introduction of its intelligent auxiliary system is usually the latest system.

However, the prompts that encounter static vehicles and objects on the way are not very sufficient, and there are not many other risk prompt contents in prominent positions.

Although the content of the complicated user manual is detailed, how many car owners can read it carefully?

From the perspective of communication, car companies can understand this. After all, to show the latest technology, the text should be simple and powerful.

But for consumers, is it easy to blur the difference between various versions? Is the understanding of risks clear?

Although the owner of Xiaopeng Automobile is currently required to answer the question when using the intelligent auxiliary system, it has learned the risks and precautions. But how much can answer only one answer?

In fact, new energy vehicles have more intelligent functions and more market education than traditional fuel vehicles.

We are willing to pursue intelligence, which is also the inevitable development of science and technology. But the seemingly convenient auxiliary driving is far from the point where we can let go.

In recent years, accidents that have occurred due to excessive believe in auxiliary driving have occurred repeatedly.

In March of this year, Mr. Deng, an owner, drove Xiaopeng P7 in the local high -speed road section that collided with the rolling vehicles in front of him. The accident did not cause injuries. At that time, Xiaopeng Automobile responded: "After investigation, the initial judgment was that the owner did not maintain the observation of the ACC+LCC (adaptive fixed speed cruise & maintenance function) in the process of After the local traffic police department investigated and judged, the conclusion also conforms to the above situation. "Similar accidents remind us again and again that the current auxiliary driving still has a lot of room for progress.

There are millions of fan cars who point out that problems such as assisting driving rear -end front -end cars are difficult to completely solve in the short term, and it still depends on the driver to deal with such scenarios.

He also said that people's understanding of the traffic environment is far higher than the system. "The cause of major auxiliary driving safety accidents is almost the same: the system fails in the disadvantaged scenarios + the distraction of drivers."

He called on the industry to increase the research and development and investment in these two directions. On the one hand, the auxiliary driving system perceives the static objects at high relative speed. On the other hand, it is recommended to equip the DMS driving monitoring system. Give strong reminders or warnings during fatigue driving.

- END -