Autonomous driving has a comms problem

At an event in London exploring the idea of autonomous driving, Car Design News experienced first hand how the conversation can become laden with jargon and buzzwords – "human-centric AI mobility" being an excellent case in point. 

A well-intentioned and thorough presentation from the host company, Xpeng, detailed how European drivers are more sceptical of autonomous driving tech than those in China, with the findings of a survey on hand to back that up. This was quite interesting but not entirely surprising, particularly the notion that most drivers in China consider an AV to be more capable than they are; anyone who has experienced Beijing traffic would no doubt feel safer in the hands of a robot, frankly.  

But beyond the polished presentation from head of marketing Sven de Smet, much of the points made by Xpeng and its industry guests from the likes of Siemens and Monolith felt fluffy, laden with buzzwords and at times a little disheartening as a promising car brand seemed to champion everything but the joy of driving. 

That said, there were some interesting points to be gleaned. Thatcham Research's Yousif Al- Ani raised the need for better 'collaboration' between car and driver and explained the risks of poorly developed active safety systems: "False positives and failures lead to distrust and people turning those systems off. A key thing will be avoiding those conflict scenarios." Credit should also go to the aforementioned Smet, who recognised that 'physical AI' is a new sub-topic that is admittedly a little vaguer or at least misunderstood for now. 

The main discussion put forward themes we have all heard before: democratised robotaxis that provide universal mobility, a proposed reduction in road traffic collisions, and cars that communicate like a human companion. Few would argue with these ideas, albeit with some caveats around design and emotional connection, and this is a well established narrative by now. By contrast, the language employed around these topics becomes ever more convoluted. 

We believe the ultimate differentiation for a product, in the experience of mobility, is intelligence

Q&A is always a good opportunity to double click on certain themes, and so CDN asked vice chairman and co-president Brian Gu a straightforward question: where does autonomous driving sit in his list of priorities alongside more conventional metrics like aesthetics, performance and comfort?

"Design is always the number one priority," Gu told Car Design News. "It's not about which one is more important. If you want to sell your product, you want to make sure it has good aesthetics, great engineering, a high quality product with strong materials and design. But when people want to think about the future, that is autonomous driving — and that is what we want to bring to our customers."

Autonomous driving and its impact on car design is fascinating and will no doubt herald many exciting changes, no less the obvious benefits of having a private 'chauffeur' for those opportune moments: long mundane journeys, traffic jams, a lift home from the pub, or simply day-to-day life for those with mobility challenges. Will that lead to exciting new interior forms? Undoubtedly. Beautiful, endearing exterior forms? Who knows. 

Gu champions his design team, however, and seems confident that exciting things are on the horizon. He gave particular kudos to design boss (and People Awards judge) JuanMa López. "He [Lopez] is very experienced and used to be a design leader at Ferrari, Lamborghini, has been head of design for Genesis in Korea, worked as head of design for Changan in China, so is really a global designer," Gu told CDN. "We spend a lot of effort to ensure we can differentiate with our family design language, and our products have a consistency and uniqueness to the design. We are quite proud of that and we are very focused on that."

Although design is framed as sitting at the top of that list of values, the long-term vision perhaps suggests that technology is jostling for position. 

"Autonomous driving is something that will differentiate our products," Gu explains. "I joined the company nine years ago, and it's only 12 years old, but when I started our model was that we didn't think electrification would be the ultimate differentiator. We believe the ultimate differentiation for a product — in the experience of mobility — is intelligence. We said that nine years ago and I think today some of our peers are only just starting to say that. We think autonomous driving will be the differentiator and change people's lives."

Design driven: Xpeng G6 refresh

This electric fastback SUV has been subtly refreshed, but does it stand out any better than the previous version?

But what does this mean for design when the conversation feels more like a workshop on public transport and infrastructure.? 

The G6, for what it is worth, is a decent offering and one of the better electric crossovers from a Chinese brand available in the UK. That model was recently refreshed but as we noted at the time, much of the focus appeared to be on technology rather than design. And so while it is pleasing to hear Gu's take on where design sits in the brand's hierarchy, drivers in the UK may have a different experience. Let's hope other more compelling products like the P7+ and X9 minivan make it over here soon. 

Clear messaging is vital for autonomous driving. But for now, that discussion is being rendered ever more opaque by Silicon Valley-style jargon that merely adds to the confusion. And this is not directly solely at Xpeng, which deserves credit for attempting to add to the conversation, but seems industry-wide. After the best part of a day talking about "human-centric AI mobility", we still are none-the-wiser. Frankly, that is a problem we all face.