From Newsgroup: aus.cars

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should get a
new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation
between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's
capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down, increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed
to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are going to deal
with this.

Sylvia.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/01/2026 12:33 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should get a
new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down, increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed
to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are going to deal with this.

Adaptive cruise has been around for some time now, and it hasn't caused
any problems. As usual, you're late to the party and over thinking it :)
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/01/2026 12:33 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should get a
new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down, increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed
to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are going to deal with this.

Sylvia.

**Adaptive cruise control is brilliant. Used correctly and ADJUSTED
(your Subaru system can be adjusted easily) correctly, it takes some of
the tedium from driving. Moreover, as part of your Subaru system, it
employs an autonomous braking system which is also excellent. It
responds faster than any human driver can (as I have found in my Subaru).

There is nothing the government will, or needs to do in this matter. In
fact, it is likely that such systems will be mandatory at some point in
the future.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

Noddy <me@home.com> wrote:

On 4/01/2026 12:33 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should get a
new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a
motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation
between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's
capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down,
increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed
to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are going to deal
with this.

Adaptive cruise has been around for some time now, and it hasn't caused
any problems. As usual, you're late to the party and over thinking it :)

Ah Darren, poisoning the thread and attacking the poster, your SOP

____
Xeno



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should get a
new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down, increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed
to do,

Assistive braking has been around for yonks now, so I wonder if there's
been any study done on whether it reduces the incidence of Ripple Effect highway crawls.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/1/2026 12:33 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should get a
new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

Nothing new there, adaptive cruise has been around at least 20yrs maybe
more, it was an option on the 2002 C240 MB that I used to own.
Mates 2013 Volvo has it and it was my first experience with ACC, he
still owns that car and it still works perfectly 12years and 200,00km later.
I hear a lot of people complaining about annoying bings and bongs of new
cars, also annoying is that they have to be turned of every time you
start the car, generally not the car makers fault but the fault of
clueless fools in Govt.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a motorway.

Sure it could lead to inattention but at least if the driver isn't
paying attention the car will slow down and stop when it needs to by itself.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down, increasing journey times.

The separation is normally adjustable, distance to the car in front can
be reduced but generally the car won't allow you to closer than the
distance it needs to stop in an emergency.
Adaptive CC isn't that great in heavy traffic so in my experience it
doesn't get used so the chances of reduced capacity is almost non existent.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed
to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are going to deal with this.

Same as what they do now, nothing.

Sylvia.

--
Daryl
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/01/2026 8:34 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are
supposed to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are
going to deal with this.

Sylvia.

**Adaptive cruise control is brilliant. Used correctly and ADJUSTED
(your Subaru system can be adjusted easily) correctly, it takes some of
the tedium from driving. Moreover, as part of your Subaru system, it
employs an autonomous braking system which is also excellent. It
responds faster than any human driver can (as I have found in my Subaru).

There is nothing the government will, or needs to do in this matter. In fact, it is likely that such systems will be mandatory at some point in
the future.

Agreed.

Along with things like rear cross traffic alert and collision mitigation systems, it's one of the best features of modern cars.
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/1/2026 8:34 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/01/2026 12:33 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should get
a new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a
motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation
between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's
capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles
down, increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are
supposed to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are
going to deal with this.

Sylvia.

**Adaptive cruise control is brilliant. Used correctly and ADJUSTED
(your Subaru system can be adjusted easily) correctly, it takes some of
the tedium from driving. Moreover, as part of your Subaru system, it
employs an autonomous braking system which is also excellent. It
responds faster than any human driver can (as I have found in my Subaru).

There is nothing the government will, or needs to do in this matter. In fact, it is likely that such systems will be mandatory at some point in
the future.

Autonomous emergency braking has been mandatory in Australia since March
2023 (ADR98/00), since the equipment needed to make that work are more
or less the same as adaptive CC I'd be surprised if most car markers
don't just use ACC to comply with the AEB mandate.
Every new car I've looked at recently has had ACC.
From Aug 2026 ADR98/01 will include pedestrian detection for AEB which
could be interesting if you were driving in a CBD where there are lots
of people close to the road, if its badly implemented cars could be
almost impossible to drive.
--
Daryl
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 3/01/2026 9:33 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that),

Can you expand on how a mechanic allegedly damaged your transmission?

it was decided that we should get a

new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down, increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed
to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are going to deal with this.

Adaptive cruise control has been around for years now, you're late to
the party. The world hasn't ended.
--
In thread "May need to buy petrol soon" Sept 23 2021 11:15:59am
Keithr0 wrote: "He made the assertion either he proves it or he is a
proven liar."

On Sept 23 2021 3:16:29pm Keithr0 wrote:
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if it is unproven, he is lying."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/01/2026 5:56 am, Xeno wrote:

Noddy <me@home.com> wrote:

On 4/01/2026 12:33 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should get a >>> new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a
motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more
and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation
between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's
capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down,
increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed
to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are going to deal >>> with this.

Adaptive cruise has been around for some time now, and it hasn't caused
any problems. As usual, you're late to the party and over thinking it :)

Ah Darren, poisoning the thread and attacking the poster, your SOP

Just an accurate observation, not an attack.
--
In thread "May need to buy petrol soon" Sept 23 2021 11:15:59am
Keithr0 wrote: "He made the assertion either he proves it or he is a
proven liar."

On Sept 23 2021 3:16:29pm Keithr0 wrote:
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if it is unproven, he is lying."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/1/2026 10:44 am, Clocky wrote:

On 4/01/2026 5:56 am, Xeno wrote:

Noddy <me@home.com> wrote:

On 4/01/2026 12:33 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that), it was decided that we should
get a
new car, and went for a Crosstrek.

Amongst the the various annoying "features", which fortunately can be
turned off, there's one that is quite useful. The cruise control now
reacts to the vehicle in front, and keeps a safe distance behind,
slowing if necessary.

While I have some misgivings about leaving a driver with yet one more
thing less to do (leading to inattention), it is quite convenient on a >>>> motorway.

But I think there will be an unanticipated consequence of this if more >>>> and more people use it, which is that it will reduce the capacity of
roads. The reason is that, as I said, it keeps a safe distance behind
the vehicle in front, which a lot of drivers don't. So the separation
between vehicles will increase, which reduces capacity. If the road's
capacity is insufficient, then this automation will slow vehicles down, >>>> increasing journey times.

It's hard to argue against a system that does what drivers are supposed >>>> to do, but many do not. Still I wonder how governments are going to
deal
with this.

Adaptive cruise has been around for some time now, and it hasn't caused
any problems. As usual, you're late to the party and over thinking it :) >>>

Ah Darren, poisoning the thread and attacking the poster, your SOP

Just an accurate observation, not an attack.

An observation, yes. You must remember, however, if someone has kept a
car for a decade or more, their current car may not have had ACC so the
new might be their *first* real world experience with it. My previous
Toy didn't have ACC, my current Toy does so this is *my* first real
experience with ACC on a car I own. This newsgroup is not only for
tradies, it is for everyone with an interest in cars and, as such, they
should be cut some slack.
--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/01/2026 10:19 am, Daryl wrote:

On 4/1/2026 8:34 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:

There is nothing the government will, or needs to do in this matter.
In fact, it is likely that such systems will be mandatory at some
point in the future.

Autonomous emergency braking has been mandatory in Australia since March 2023 (ADR98/00), since the equipment needed to make that work are more
or less the same as adaptive CC I'd be surprised if most car markers
don't just use ACC to comply with the AEB mandate.
Every new car I've looked at recently has had ACC.
From Aug 2026 ADR98/01 will include pedestrian detection for AEB which could be interesting if you were driving in a CBD where there are lots
of people close to the road, if its badly implemented cars could be
almost impossible to drive.

It will be interesting to see how that pans out.

Apparently one of the most annoying features of current cars is the
driver monitoring systems whereby a device sits on top of the steering
column and continually checks to see if the driver is focussed and
paying attention.

It's another useless ANCAP requirement, and I watched a vid the other
day where the implementation is *so* bad in some vehicles that you can't
even wear sunglasses without it beeping it's fucking head off because it
can't see your eyes.

Like stop/start systems, it can be turned off but not permanently and
has to be turned off every time you start the car.

Which is complete and utter bullshit.
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 04-Jan-26 7:41 am, Clocky wrote:

On 3/01/2026 9:33 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that),

Can you expand on how a mechanic allegedly damaged your transmission?

Drained the front-diff and didn't refill it. There's some evidence that
the oil was added to the CVT instead. Either way the fix was to replace
the the combined front-diff and CVT module.

Adaptive cruise control has been around for years now, you're late to
the party. The world hasn't ended.

Still not everyone has it yet. So, it's a process. And not everyone will
use it if they have it. But I can't see how it will fail to have an
impact on road capacity.

Sylvia.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/1/2026 3:57 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 04-Jan-26 7:41 am, Clocky wrote:

On 3/01/2026 9:33 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:

After a mechanic damaged the transmission on our old Subaru XV (there
still current litigation over that),

Can you expand on how a mechanic allegedly damaged your transmission?

Drained the front-diff and didn't refill it. There's some evidence that
the oil was added to the CVT instead. Either way the fix was to replace
the the combined front-diff and CVT module.

Adaptive cruise control has been around for years now, you're late to
the party. The world hasn't ended.

Still not everyone has it yet. So, it's a process.

It will take a while to be on almost every car but even now its pretty
common.

And not everyone will

use it if they have it.

Some people are either weird or just plain stupid, I know a few people
that don't use their cars CC and they fit into one of the above categories.

But I can't see how it will fail to have an

impact on road capacity.

Having used ACC on a few different cars I know that its not very good in
heavy traffic so I don't use it in those circumstances and I think you
will find that many others do the same so the chances of it making much difference to road capacity is slim, if anything autonomous emergency
braking should reduce the number of nose to tail crashes which will
improve traffic flow, crashes even minor ones have a big impact on
traffic capacity on busy commuter routes.

Sylvia.

--
Daryl
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.cars

On 4/01/2026 3:57 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 04-Jan-26 7:41 am, Clocky wrote:

Adaptive cruise control has been around for years now, you're late to
the party. The world hasn't ended.

Still not everyone has it yet. So, it's a process. And not everyone will
use it if they have it. But I can't see how it will fail to have an
impact on road capacity.

I think there's many things you can't see.

Regular cruise control has been around for decades now, and when it was introduced there were some who feared complications which never
eventuated. Adaptive cruise is simply an extension of that, with the
only real difference being that it stops people slamming into the car in
front if they are asleep at the wheel.

Your biggest fear seems to be that the world will start to move slowly
if we let the cars do the driving and I don't know why the prospect of
that should worry you, but at the end of the day as much as people may
be sheep when driving if the pace gets too slow they'll just turn the
things off and go at their own pace.

If adaptive cruise has you concerned you're going to shit your pants
once full autonomous driving takes hold :)
--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2