Driving automation: Learning from aviation about design philosophies

Whether we like it or not, automation is gradually taking over the driver’s role. Full vehicle automation is predicted to be on British roads by 2030 (Walker et al., 2001). However, experience in aviation gives us some cause for concern for the ‘drive-by-wire’ car (Stanton & Marsden, 1996). Problems of workload and situation awareness have been attributed as the root cause of some aircraft accidents (Beaty, 1995). These problems may be approached in two different ways, depending on the level of automation used. These two philosophies are exemplified by the positions of the two major aircraft manufacturers. Airbus use a ‘hard protection’ system in their A320 and A340 series, employing automation to prevent error, and hence it can override the pilot. Boeing, on the other hand, opted for ‘soft protection’ in their 777 aircraft, using automation as a tool to aid pilots, and not giving it the authority to override pilot control (Hughes & Dornheim, 1995). This paper speculates whether hard or soft automation provides the best solution for road vehicles, and considers an alternative design philosophy in vehicles of the future based on coordination and cooperatio