Honda "Drive by Wire" question... what if the power goes out?

Hi there.

I have been looking at the new Honda Civic, it's pretty sweet, and the
welds and everything are as nice as anything I have ever seen. I just
have a question about the "Drive by wire" system that they are supposed
to have.

What happens if the Engine dies on you? In my current car, my timing
chip went once and the engine went out. I had enough steering control
left, even without power steering, to pull my car over before it came
to a stop. If the drive by wire system has no "real" or active
connection, how can it work if the engine or electronics quit on you?
Are there any backups built into the system in case any of that stuff
happens? And what if your battery dies and you need to push the car?
Can you turn the steering wheel to adjust your wheels when you push the
car?

Much thanks, sorry to bother.

David

I have always gotten a laugh out of such a foolish system.

The way I understand it, basically if the power fails when you are at
speed, you crash, just like on an airplane. I guess you could also put
your head between your legs and kiss your ass good-bye like they do on
planes too... ;-)

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Aug./05 http://www.imagestation.com/album/in...?id=2120343242
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)


"David E. Powell" wrote:
>
> Hi there.
>
> I have been looking at the new Honda Civic, it's pretty sweet, and the
> welds and everything are as nice as anything I have ever seen. I just
> have a question about the "Drive by wire" system that they are supposed
> to have.
>
> What happens if the Engine dies on you? In my current car, my timing
> chip went once and the engine went out. I had enough steering control
> left, even without power steering, to pull my car over before it came
> to a stop. If the drive by wire system has no "real" or active
> connection, how can it work if the engine or electronics quit on you?
> Are there any backups built into the system in case any of that stuff
> happens? And what if your battery dies and you need to push the car?
> Can you turn the steering wheel to adjust your wheels when you push the
> car?
>
> Much thanks, sorry to bother.
>
> David

Mike Romain wrote:
>
> I have always gotten a laugh out of such a foolish system.
>
> The way I understand it, basically if the power fails when you are at
> speed, you crash, just like on an airplane. I guess you could also put
> your head between your legs and kiss your ass good-bye like they do on
> planes too... ;-)
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> Aug./05 http://www.imagestation.com/album/in...?id=2120343242
> (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
>

Most of the fighter jets are fly-by-wire and they generally don't have
problems with failures of this system. The fly-by-wire system is
multiply redundant and rather expensive though. The main reason for it
is the fact that it allows faster response and allows the computers to
assist in stabilizing some inherently unstable aircraft designs.

In the auto world drive-by-wire would be constrained by the price points
and the multiple redundancy would probably be sacrificed. At auto speeds
the faster response of by-wire technology is not needed, so the only
possible reason to use the more expensive technology would be to allow
the computer to try to compensate for a drivers lack of skill.

Pete C.

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 17:15:19 GMT "Pete C." > wrote:

> so the only
> possible reason to use the more expensive technology would be to allow
> the computer to try to compensate for a drivers lack of skill.

That would fit in this day-n-age of
soccer-moms-driving-SUVs-with-a-phone-stuck-on-their-ear.

--
remove MYSHOES to email

In article >,
"Pete C." > wrote:

> Mike Romain wrote:
> >
> > I have always gotten a laugh out of such a foolish system.
> >
> > The way I understand it, basically if the power fails when you are at
> > speed, you crash, just like on an airplane. I guess you could also put
> > your head between your legs and kiss your ass good-bye like they do on
> > planes too... ;-)
> >
> > Mike
> > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> > Aug./05 http://www.imagestation.com/album/in...?id=2120343242
> > (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
> >
>
> Most of the fighter jets are fly-by-wire and they generally don't have
> problems with failures of this system. The fly-by-wire system is
> multiply redundant and rather expensive though. The main reason for it
> is the fact that it allows faster response and allows the computers to
> assist in stabilizing some inherently unstable aircraft designs.

The F-16 - Proof that even a brick will fly if you can cram a big enough
engine into it...


> In the auto world drive-by-wire would be constrained by the price points
> and the multiple redundancy would probably be sacrificed. At auto speeds
> the faster response of by-wire technology is not needed, so the only
> possible reason to use the more expensive technology would be to allow
> the computer to try to compensate for a drivers lack of skill.

Or more accurately phrased, to allow the computer to *ATTEMPT* to
compensate for what it *PERCEIVES* as operator inability.

When I turn the steering wheel, the wheels better move correspondingly
*EVERY* time. Not "just when the engine is on", not "When there's a
charged battery installed", not "When the computer thinks that what I'm
doing is OK", but *EVERY* *SINGLE* *TIME* *NO* *MATTER* *WHAT*. While
I'm behind the wheel, I will accept *ABSOLUTELY NOTHING* less than
*TOTAL*, godlike control of that vehicle, subject to *NO* influences
outside of my own decisions and actions.


(By way of illustration, a few years ago in europe, a "fly by wire"
plane decided it knew more than the pilots - Pilots said "We gotta
hammer on the power and crank the bejeezus out of the controls so we can
lift, or we're gonna crash!". Fly-by-wire system said "Sorry, you can't
do that", and proceeded to "fix their mistakes" by throttling down and
not permitting them to crank the control surfaces to the needed degree,
which caused the plane to crash and burn. After something like that, I
can't see *ANYBODY* with a functioning brain-cell wanting anything to do
with getting into a machine that might decide at any time that what
they're trying to do is "off limits".)

--
Don Bruder - - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info

Don Bruder wrote:
>
> In article >,
> "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > Mike Romain wrote:
> > >
> > > I have always gotten a laugh out of such a foolish system.
> > >
> > > The way I understand it, basically if the power fails when you are at
> > > speed, you crash, just like on an airplane. I guess you could also put
> > > your head between your legs and kiss your ass good-bye like they do on
> > > planes too... ;-)
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> > > Aug./05 http://www.imagestation.com/album/in...?id=2120343242
> > > (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
> > >
> >
> > Most of the fighter jets are fly-by-wire and they generally don't have
> > problems with failures of this system. The fly-by-wire system is
> > multiply redundant and rather expensive though. The main reason for it
> > is the fact that it allows faster response and allows the computers to
> > assist in stabilizing some inherently unstable aircraft designs.
>
> The F-16 - Proof that even a brick will fly if you can cram a big enough
> engine into it...
>
> > In the auto world drive-by-wire would be constrained by the price points
> > and the multiple redundancy would probably be sacrificed. At auto speeds
> > the faster response of by-wire technology is not needed, so the only
> > possible reason to use the more expensive technology would be to allow
> > the computer to try to compensate for a drivers lack of skill.
>
> Or more accurately phrased, to allow the computer to *ATTEMPT* to
> compensate for what it *PERCEIVES* as operator inability.
>
> When I turn the steering wheel, the wheels better move correspondingly
> *EVERY* time. Not "just when the engine is on", not "When there's a
> charged battery installed", not "When the computer thinks that what I'm
> doing is OK", but *EVERY* *SINGLE* *TIME* *NO* *MATTER* *WHAT*. While
> I'm behind the wheel, I will accept *ABSOLUTELY NOTHING* less than
> *TOTAL*, godlike control of that vehicle, subject to *NO* influences
> outside of my own decisions and actions.

Indeed, one of the reasons I demand a manual transmission.

>
> (By way of illustration, a few years ago in europe, a "fly by wire"
> plane decided it knew more than the pilots - Pilots said "We gotta
> hammer on the power and crank the bejeezus out of the controls so we can
> lift, or we're gonna crash!". Fly-by-wire system said "Sorry, you can't
> do that", and proceeded to "fix their mistakes" by throttling down and
> not permitting them to crank the control surfaces to the needed degree,
> which caused the plane to crash and burn. After something like that, I
> can't see *ANYBODY* with a functioning brain-cell wanting anything to do
> with getting into a machine that might decide at any time that what
> they're trying to do is "off limits".)

You're partly confusing two different things, the fly-by-wire i.e. no
mechanical link, and an automated control system. Not really the same
thing although the fly-by-wire makes implementing the automated control
easier. If it's a simple electronic replacement for a mechanical link
(with suitable redundancy) it's ok with me. Automated control trying to
second guess my decisions based on far less sensory input than I have,
is not ok with me.

The hydraulic steering on a lot of tractors and construction equipment
that was noted by another poster is a good example of basic fly-by-wire
or in this case fly-by-oil technology. It makes no attempt to second
guess the operators decisions and simply replaces what could be a very
complex mechanical linkage with a couple of nice flexible hoses.

The hydraulic brakes in cars is another even earlier example.
Brake-by-oil basically, and we still require the mechanical cable
operated backup system in addition to the split hydraulic redundancy. Of
course in recent years they've added the automated control a.k.a. ABS to
try to second guess the operator.

Pete C.


>
> --
> Don Bruder - - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
> or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
> somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
> ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info

Pete C. wrote:

> Don Bruder wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> "Pete C." > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Mike Romain wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have always gotten a laugh out of such a foolish system.
>>>>
>>>>The way I understand it, basically if the power fails when you are at
>>>>speed, you crash, just like on an airplane. I guess you could also put
>>>>your head between your legs and kiss your ass good-bye like they do on
>>>>planes too... ;-)
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>>>>Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
>>>>Aug./05 http://www.imagestation.com/album/in...?id=2120343242
>>>>(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
>>>>
>>>
>>>Most of the fighter jets are fly-by-wire and they generally don't have
>>>problems with failures of this system. The fly-by-wire system is
>>>multiply redundant and rather expensive though. The main reason for it
>>>is the fact that it allows faster response and allows the computers to
>>>assist in stabilizing some inherently unstable aircraft designs.
>>
>>The F-16 - Proof that even a brick will fly if you can cram a big enough
>>engine into it...
>>
>>
>>>In the auto world drive-by-wire would be constrained by the price points
>>>and the multiple redundancy would probably be sacrificed. At auto speeds
>>>the faster response of by-wire technology is not needed, so the only
>>>possible reason to use the more expensive technology would be to allow
>>>the computer to try to compensate for a drivers lack of skill.
>>
>>Or more accurately phrased, to allow the computer to *ATTEMPT* to
>>compensate for what it *PERCEIVES* as operator inability.
>>
>>When I turn the steering wheel, the wheels better move correspondingly
>>*EVERY* time. Not "just when the engine is on", not "When there's a
>>charged battery installed", not "When the computer thinks that what I'm
>>doing is OK", but *EVERY* *SINGLE* *TIME* *NO* *MATTER* *WHAT*. While
>>I'm behind the wheel, I will accept *ABSOLUTELY NOTHING* less than
>>*TOTAL*, godlike control of that vehicle, subject to *NO* influences
>>outside of my own decisions and actions.
>
>
> Indeed, one of the reasons I demand a manual transmission.
>
>
>>(By way of illustration, a few years ago in europe, a "fly by wire"
>>plane decided it knew more than the pilots - Pilots said "We gotta
>>hammer on the power and crank the bejeezus out of the controls so we can
>>lift, or we're gonna crash!". Fly-by-wire system said "Sorry, you can't
>>do that", and proceeded to "fix their mistakes" by throttling down and
>>not permitting them to crank the control surfaces to the needed degree,
>>which caused the plane to crash and burn. After something like that, I
>>can't see *ANYBODY* with a functioning brain-cell wanting anything to do
>>with getting into a machine that might decide at any time that what
>>they're trying to do is "off limits".)
>
>
> You're partly confusing two different things, the fly-by-wire i.e. no
> mechanical link, and an automated control system. Not really the same
> thing although the fly-by-wire makes implementing the automated control
> easier. If it's a simple electronic replacement for a mechanical link
> (with suitable redundancy) it's ok with me. Automated control trying to
> second guess my decisions based on far less sensory input than I have,
> is not ok with me.
>
> The hydraulic steering on a lot of tractors and construction equipment
> that was noted by another poster is a good example of basic fly-by-wire
> or in this case fly-by-oil technology. It makes no attempt to second
> guess the operators decisions and simply replaces what could be a very
> complex mechanical linkage with a couple of nice flexible hoses.
>
> The hydraulic brakes in cars is another even earlier example.
> Brake-by-oil basically, and we still require the mechanical cable
> operated backup system in addition to the split hydraulic redundancy. Of
> course in recent years they've added the automated control a.k.a. ABS to
> try to second guess the operator.

This is a good example of who benefits & who is penalized, i.e., ABS
undoubtedly saves more asses/lives than it costs.

I can understand why manufacturers would put automated vehicle stability
on unstable vehicles like SUVs, same logic as above.

On 2005-11-18, Don Bruder > wrote:

> The F-16 - Proof that even a brick will fly if you can cram a big enough
> engine into it...

Tell it to a bumblebee.

nb

notbob wrote:

> On 2005-11-18, Don Bruder > wrote:
>
>
>>The F-16 - Proof that even a brick will fly if you can cram a big enough
>>engine into it...
>
>
> Tell it to a bumblebee.

Huh?

(I'm aware that according to early engineering estimates bumblebees
should not be able to fly)

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:16:33 -0600 notbob > wrote:

> On 2005-11-18, Don Bruder > wrote:
>
> > The F-16 - Proof that even a brick will fly if you can cram a big enough
> > engine into it...
>
> Tell it to a bumblebee.

Why - your mention of a urban legend is just that: legend...
http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/people/jou...bumblebee.html

--
remove MYSHOES to email