It's time for legislators of in-car technology to start listening

Michael van der Sande also described the functions as “a nightmare” Alpine's managing director believes ADAS functions are "annoying as hell" – I agree

I have a lot of time for Michael van der Sande, who as Alpine managing director brought the A110 to market and was later in charge of JLR’s Special Vehicle Operations. Plus, anyone who owns an Alfa Romeo SZ is all right in my book.

But I have even more time for him since he recently took a well-aimed pop in an online post at level-one autonomous driving functions, which he described as “a nightmare”.

Citing speed warning systems getting limits wrong, multiple emergency braking alerts and unwarranted steering assistance interventions, he said these systems are “confusing, annoying and (in my humble opinion) not very safe”.

Problems like this are compounded, he said, by “the most ‘basic’ functions, such as air vent speed, hidden on the second page of a centre screen” meaning “we have the perfect mix of distractions that will render the car less safe than the previous generation of cars. And most of this new functionality is annoying as hell.”

I’m glad he’s said it. We say it, and keep saying it (sorry not sorry about that). But, on the whole, industry people say it less so. I can understand why they don’t, or are reluctant to on the record, because they have cars to sell. But given that legislators and those who are mandating inadequate, infuriating technology aren’t listening to us, it’s time they did – and loudly.

It's time for legislators of in-car technology to start listening

It's time for legislators of in-car technology to start listening

It's time for legislators of in-car technology to start listening

It's time for legislators of in-car technology to start listening

It's time for legislators of in-car technology to start listening