R2 emergency door opening sanity check

[CharonPDX]

So just to play Devil's Advocate here.

What if Rivian and other manufacturers provide an internal release similar to the front doors as many advocate and a number of kids manage to fall out from a moving vehicle by using it to override the software driven child lock? There is a reason why child locks were implemented in the first place after all.

It seems the odds of a child falling out because they are messing around with a door latch on mass produced cars is going to be much higher than the very rare car fires that seem to be driving the expressed concerns about the current system.

I do notice that no R1S owners seem to have picked up on the third row egress issue I highlighted in the original post, so I'm curious if none of them ever put people in that third row because of the risk?

How many people/parents don't even know about "child locks" on doors that have existed for decades? How many instances do *YOU* hear of kids randomly opening back doors and falling out of moving vehicles?

Yes, it does happen. Yes, it's tragic when it happens. But guess what? Even child locks don't prevent this. And even on vehicles with child locks, the doors can still be manually unlocked, then mechanically opened from the outside. If 12V fails, R2 can't be opened from the outside.

And guess what - the opposite happens, too! Even on vehicles with mechanical door latches, there are instances of the driver being incapacitated, and a rear seat passenger unable to exit the vehicle due to a child lock being engaged.

It's all "whataboutism" in every direction - but one argument is arguing for "simple fail-safe". And you could still have an electronically-activated child lock, without needing to have the entire door opening mechanism be electronic, or emergency release hidden. Simple mechanical release like the front door, that obeys the child lock except in an accident.

Sponsored

 

[2kwik4u]

Be really curious if anyone tested this on the 'electronic' door mechanism that Audi has had for more than 8 years? Our old A7 had these curious if they have the same 'issues' people are complaining about.

I had a '17 Q7 with proximity unlock......it was amazing and, IMO, a masterclass in how to do passive entry.

I had two problems with that entry system in the 36mo or so I owned it. Once the car battery died. Wouldn't let me in. Solution was to use the physical key, unlock the door, and it let me in. Car wouldn't start, but it wasn't because the truck wouldn't let me in. Second time was when I swapped the battery in the fob "backwards". Again, used the physical key to get in, and the prox feature built into the key to start and drive away.

They did really well with the premise of separating permission from action. If the key was close you had permission to unlock, but the action of unlocking didn't happen until you touched the vehicle. Tiny detail, but huge distinction in how it works. It was great.

There's lots of talk about the "security of an all BT connection". Audi worked well around this as well, the key had motion sensors and would only broadcast when being moved. The car only ever listened. So to "clone" the key you had to be listening while the key was moving, which is arguably more work than most thieves want to put in to stealing with that method. Again, IMO, this was the appropriate mix of security and usability. Rivian's security is great, but the juice isn't worth the squeeze. I'll take a small modicum of risk to allow something to work MUCH MUCH better.

Coming from the Q7 to the Rivian feels like a major downgrade in how PaaK haphazardly works, as well as the combination of permission and action into just the proximity. It's just not as good.

 

[f1racer328]

Rivian is clearly doing damage control on the handles, citing a well designed system and the benefits of... child locks....

If I had to guess, most people probably don't even use the child locks on their doors.

I want a door that I can open without power.

I fly airplanes for a living. Anything that your life depends has three sources of power/hydraulics. Three.

We provide FULLY redundant and fault-isolating power across the vehicle (between high-voltage and 12V batteries) in the event of a crash. In the case of an emergency or collision, the redundant physical architecture ensures we always deliver power to the electronic door system.

What does fully redundant mean Rivian? Tell us more than the lawyer approved paragraph here. Current R1s have one high voltage battery and one 12 volt battery.

If we lose high voltage power and the 12 volt battery at the same time (lets just say from a really bad crash, the batteries are physically disconnected before the software unlocks the doors) you're not getting out.

Maybe there are capacitors that they charge up and store power in the unlikely event that the 12 volt and high voltage is lost?

Tell us more about the doors Rivian.

By the way, no airliner is flying around that relies on electricity to open the exit doors and deploy the slides.

 

[sparked]

If we lose high voltage power and the 12 volt battery at the same time (lets just say from a really bad crash, the batteries are physically disconnected before the software unlocks the doors) you're not getting out.

Maybe the way they have wired it makes power loss of both sources less likely? That's on Rivian to prove though. Do they check all this after crash tests to see of exiting the vehicle is still possible and not compromising both power sources at the same time?

 

[TimK]

Having owned a Tesla for the last 8 years having to give an explanation like an airliner safety brief on how to open the door got old pretty quick.

Sponsored