self driving car hits motorcycle

They must be getting close on the self driving car programming as just like regular divers they have the autonomous vehicles programed to not see motorcycles.

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/gm-sued-over-self-driving-car-crash-with-motorcyclist/

Seems to be some disagreement about what happened.

"For its part, in its accident report, the SFPD found Nilsson to be culpable. According to its accident report, "…the motorcyclist was determined to be at fault for attempting to overtake and pass another vehicle on the right under conditions that did not permit that movement in safety…" The same report also indicates that the Cruise test car did attempt to stop its lane-change manoeuvre, and notes that the GM backup driver tried to steer away from Nilsson, but could not avoid the accident."

They must be getting close on the self driving car programming as just like regular divers they have the autonomous vehicles programed to not see motorcycles.

 

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/gm-sued-over-self-driving-car-crash-with-motorcyclist/

Well, maybe the car was answering a text or email.

Seems to be some disagreement about what happened.

 

"For its part, in its accident report, the SFPD found Nilsson to be culpable. According to its accident report, "…the motorcyclist was determined to be at fault for attempting to overtake and pass another vehicle on the right under conditions that did not permit that movement in safety…" The same report also indicates that the Cruise test car did attempt to stop its lane-change manoeuvre, and notes that the GM backup driver tried to steer away from Nilsson, but could not avoid the accident."

 

I'm sure there was no political pressure for the police to side with GM to keep the program and jobs in their city. If it was a just an everyday commuter who suddenly "aborted" the lane change it would that persons fault for unsafe lane deviation.

That would not be surprising ...LOL!

I can certainly see both sides of this - it will be interesting to find out what they can produce from the car's onboard systems. It's kind of surprising none of the following vehicles have come forward with dashcam footage (yet).

if the bike came from behind then the bike is at fault, simple as that.

As a car driver if I was halfway into changing lanes at 12 mph into what was a clear lane until a lane-splitting motorcycle came up from behind going 17 mph bashed into the side of my car, I'd feel no blame at all. Thank goodness lane-splitting is illegal here in the East (although that doesn't stop all of it).

"Blame game" aside, I'm curious as to why this "self driving car" decided to abort it's lane change.

The last thing I need in my world are a bunch of confused robo-cars...

Car started into a gap that was became too short because the car ahead decelerated. It sounds like the bike tried to move into a spot that had not been completely vacated.

More details here.

This situation may not be an issue in the future when cars start wirelessly sharing their intentions with surrounding vehicles. The car could have "known" that traffic in the adjoining lane was about to slow before attempting the lane change.

having spent nearly 20 years in San Francisco, those speeds are highway speeds....

If you don't ride in an area like Los Angeles or San Francisco then you would never know how essential lane splitting is in that environment, and how much safer it is.

If a car starts to go one way, and then terminates that direction and unexpectedly goes another way, it needs to watch for what is coming that second way, before it causes an accident. And that goes whether it's some airhead driving the car, or an airhead computer.

dc

For better or worse the litigation process will assign blame. Could be way wrong on this, but Isn't that there is never 100% blame asigned to a party in an accident? Something like wronged party gets 10% of the fault for just being involved in the collision. After reading The Verge article it leaves me with even more questions. AV was moving from center to left lane that slowed and aborted the lane change as MC ride was simultaneusly filling what was thought to be a vacated lane slot. Which lanes were being split? Was it between 1&2 or 2&3? If splitting 2&3 , I would guess the rider saw a lane slot open to his left and was filling the space just as AV jammed on the brakes scrubbing off speed to avoid a crash and snapped back to center lane to further avoid striking the car ahead in that left lane. That would explain the speed difference and the scrape along the side of the car. So was the AV actually executing an unsafe lane change itself? Does the programmer now need liability insurance? ( joking on that last question). I could see a 50% asigned blame to both GM and Nilsson.

Inquiring minds want to know. I would be interested to read the case file after it gets settled, but there will likely be a sealed settlement with neither GM or Nilsson admitting any blame. I'm guessing GM will want to avoid disclosing any details of their technology in a deposition and that will be worth a 5 to 6 figure settlement depending on how good Nilsson's lawyer is.

100%? Yes. In traffic in a truck. Traffic rapidly stops. I don't stop before rear ending the vehicle in front of me. Ticket? Failure to reduce speed to avoid accident. Person I rear ended. 0% In Missouri.

100%? Yes. In traffic in a truck. Traffic rapidly stops. I don't stop before rear ending the vehicle in front of me. Ticket? Failure to reduce speed to avoid accident. Person I rear ended. 0% In Missouri.

In Virginia, a rear-ender is about following too closely, which gets a ticket and up to 4 points and $500.

Violation

Ouch!

States vary on the assignment of responsibility. Oregon, for instance, has contributory negligence and can split "blame" for crashes between parties - and that's not limited to the drivers necessarily. This can be split by LEOs, I believe, and, definitely, but the court system.

My understanding is that some states do not allow such splits and "blame" will be assigned 100% to one party.

What California does I don't know. Probably something utterly nutty - I mean, it's California after all