Based on what?
I had a 1990`s VW diesel with an electrical “loud pedal” and that had two resistive tracks and compared values for the two of them. A difference in readings and it threw a fault. Replaced throttle sensor and all good again.
That is over 30years ago. Do you think these are less sophisticated?
yes but that is across one component. proper redundancy is across 3 of the same thing. each one from a different batch and on a different circuit. It costs big money and not economically viable to put in a 30 grand car or in the case of the news article 80k.
Admittedly I haven’t looked at every single car on the market but i have never seen one with three of anything unless we are counting wheels
One would hope so… although it is conceivable that it would ignore the brake input or the brakes weren’t powerful enough to over power the engine. Don’t forget 99.99% of the time you don’t use the accelerator and the brakes at the same time unless you are “heel and toeing”
More Jaguar action.
I blame AI, the machines are already jostling for dominance amongst themselves.
Why would anyone “heel and toe” in an electric car?
exactly my point
So, are you saying that is possible to be designed to ignore brake input under some circumstances?
Or, that a fault where brake input was ignored is possible?
i was saying that it is possible the brakes failed due to the high torque of the motor going at full chat ie brake fade or the friction material not being up to snuff.
However you make a point i would think the brake regen would help slow the vehicle i guess it is conceivable that the regen wouldn’t kick in if the throttle was sending a signal
I find it difficult to imagine any design that would allow any sort of power going to the drive if there was any brake input at all.
Brake input always over throttle input.
Brake on > All drive power off. Always.
As we agreed , no need to rev the engine for a quick down-change, nor to keep the turbos spinning fast! 
If there were circumstances where the car was powering all the time then undoubtedly the friction brakes would not be able to cope after a period.
The battery pack lasts for hours and nothing in the real automotive world would cope with that.
Brakes aren’t designed for exceptional circumstances…for infrequent emergencies yes, but not for ultra rare failures.
Any brakes designed for extreme use would be useless everyday.
F1 brakes on the school run? Dangerous!
sorry just woken up i didnt read the quote correctly… In the scenario we are discussing the throttle has failed in some way (i mean the peddle sensor not the tps) but it could of been a wiring fault.
All i am saying is it is possible both systems malfunctioned. it could be the brakes did work to a point and then failed through mechanical issues as i said. Only jag would know what was designed and how.
sensible idea i agree but has it been designed like that has someone actually sat and thought bugger if so and so happens they wont be able to stop we better put the braking system on a completely different circuit to the go system it means 2 different harnesses and a darn site more electronic control but its safety.
its easy to think about in hindsight however don’t forget it took them a long time to get the propellers to stay on airplanes till someone thought about using a left hand thread
don’t forget the Bosch ecu scandal that is still going on. Bosch told them it was a test program and wasn’t to be used real world they ALL went ahead and used it anyway.
Even the mot and more so the IVA test is designed with other peoples safety in mind the safety of the driver is almost coincidental. One would think that keeping the driver of a 1 to 44 tonne missile alive and safe to be able to control it was a big thing but apparently not.
Highly unlikely.
I reckon if we can figure out that stop has priority over go the a team of automotive engineers could do the same and design that in to the systems, from design “fail-safe”, “self -checking” and “redundant” systems.
I’m not saying that mistakes are never made, but that they are extremely rare.
Driver error is much more common.
both systems as in go and stop… if they are on the same loom and there is a short then both would fail
this is probably going to get me shouted at by others but have you ever driven one of those bloody mercs with ppc. and the dang thing suddenly accelerates because it has seen a road sign that the road speed limit has increased. fine with 26 tonne on the back but if solo or empty and something in front of you you have to understand the system and be ready to stop it.
IMHO far better to wait for an input from the DRIVER for it to accelerate up to the new limit but im guessing the design team didn’t think about that or didn’t care. If they did obviously it wasn’t implemented along the way
We can even get a warning when a bulb fails, whether it is on or not. The self checking systems are not in everyday view, but they are there.
We do see limp mode etc or a failure to start an engine because of what are most often sensor failures. They are not often critical, but the system does not assume it is an innocuous failure it decides on safety first and disables the vehicle.
As drivers we may frustrated at seemingly unnecessary failures but they are generally there to be “fail safe”. Systems assume the worst to save us from being impatient and assuming too much ourselves.
Never driven one of those.
The last DAFs I drove had active cruise control which set it’s own separation distance.
On good roads I set it to a longer separation and on poor road surfaces I turned it off.
These things are driver aids they are not auto-pilots.
They do have off switches.
If a company insists on them being used it is the company that is at fault. It is the company misunderstanding what they are.
And even real auto-pilots need setting up correctly.
self checking… do i see a signal that is in these parameters be it a wave form or dc voltage… yes … do i need to initialize fail safe system …no.
The blown bulb light works off current is there x amount of current flowing through the circuit no. put on magic bulb which is why the system thinks the bulb is blown with some led bulbs or rather the ones with out the resistor.
what happened when it was raining and the sensor got wet or dirty. did it stop you using cruise control or just turn off the “distance” feature
Signal inside parameters? No > fail safe.
What is your point?
Yes. It is designed to work inside a certain system.
It it doesn’t work in a different system? If someone deliberately alters the system?
Why be surprised the original system doesn’t work?
What is your point?