Why Would A Faultless Driverless Car Need A Sticky Coat?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36332146
They are faultless, surely they could never hit a pedestrian. Have we been misled here? I mean I was looking forward to calling my car from a club and have it drive me home whilst I sleep on the back seat. I'd seriously hoped it would increase the range of establishments I could visit. My hopes are dashed if this doesn't work.

[RATTER15]

Just because the car hits a pedestrian, it doesn't mean it was the fault of the car. pedestrians can still cause the accident.

[ToraToraTora]

so it can only be the pedestrians fault then?

[RATTER15]

I am sure the car could also be at fault but most likely less often than manually driven cars.

[bookbinder]

It ain't necessarily so, TTT.

[Old_Geezer]

There may be fewer accidents but there is no reason to think there would never be any. Why not minimise damage to the potentially injured party ? Going to be difficult keeping the bonnet clean though.

[vulcan42]

Won't grit, leaves, paper insects etc stick to the bonnet?

[Old_Geezer]

Yes but they'll be safe from further injury.

[chiaroscuro]

It would have to be a bloody big insect to break the protective coat!

[mikey4444]

This is sheer bloody madness !

[vulcan42]

With all the rubbish these cars are picking up, by the time it hits somebody there won't be any stickiness left to hold on to them. :o)

[chiaroscuro]

'Google's patent explained that the adhesive layer would be hidden under a protective coating, to ensure it did not gather debris during journeys.
"Upon the initial impact between the colliding object and the vehicle, the coating is broken, exposing the adhesive layer," the patent document said.'

It helps to read the article

[vulcan42]

It doesn't give any details on the protective coat so we don't know how much impact force is required to break it. At least it will save calling an ambulance.