Name : Muhammad Fariz Fadillah

NIM : 18509134013

Class : B1.2

Academic Reading Skills

Critical Reading

A. Question 1
“Are Diesel Engines Bad for Environments?”

1. Answer 1
Don Sutton says:

“Yes like all internal combustion engines.

1. Petrol MPi high hydrocarbon and CO2 emissions.
2. Petrol GDi high particulate emissions and high CO2.
3. Diesel high particulate and NOx emissions.
The above is relative to each other.”
From the answer that Don says. we can check to few criteria :

a. Are the answer is clear (To the purpose)?

Yes, the answer refers to diesel engines and environtment.

b. Are the answer is logical?

Close enough, since all internal combution engines produces many exhaust gases.

c. Are the answer is open minded?

Yes.

d. Are the answer have Valid Infromation?

No, the given information wasn’t based on an articles, books, or journal.

Then, we check writer’s purpose. As we can see, he just inform the author about
enginse that produces gases, and he not inform wich one is most causing
environmental damage.

Then, we check the writer’s background of the topic. He is the writer of

automotive journals and magazines. so, we can get trust about his information

Then, we check the bias behind the answer. Seems he wasn’t promoting or
supported by a product or something.
 2. Answer 2
Ricard Cadwell says:

“ Yep. Diesels are bad for the environment. Gasoline cars are bad for the
environment. EVs are bad for the environment (especially since they add an extra
energy conversion and shed rubber from tire wear far exceeding other choices.
The current best solution is a non-plug-in hybrid.”

From the answer that Ricard says. we can check to few criteria :

a. Are the answer is clear (To the purpose)?

Yes, the answer refers to diesel engines and environtment.

b. Are the answer is logical?

Yes, EV (Electric Vehicle) wasn’t best solution to minimize polution.

c. Are the answer is opne minded?

Yes

d. Are the answer have Valid Infromation?

Enough.

Then, we check the writer’s background of the topic. He wasn’t automotive

expert or journals writers. So his argument still doubted.

B. Question 2
“Are Autonomous Cars/Vehicles are dangerous when malfunction?”

1. Answer 1
Steve Nozkowicz says:

“You might say very poorly.

These kinds of systems must be designed with sufficient redundancy such that
sensor failures are not causing trouble. Redundancy means either you have multiple
sensors for each function or you have different sensors where their functions overlap.
If One sensor fails then another sensor will provide the correct information. We have
things such as double redundancy, triple redundancy, and so on.

In the space program there's a concept where they have voting. You can have
perhaps three sensors. Unless two of the sensors agree you must have a fallback
position. If the system cannot resolve one of these discrepancies then there must be
some way to gradually pull the vehicle over to the side or something such as that.
 The most difficult situation to detect is when one of sensor doesn't fail
completely, but is providing false information. This is a common problem that an
ordinary Airplane pilot faces should one of the instruments start providing incorrect
information rather than completely failing. Pilots are trained to scan the instrument
panel very frequently and compare the data from each of the instruments. With
multiple instruments you have overlapping data coming from each instrument that
can be compared with other instruments to determine what the problem is. This is a
complex problem even for humans.

The electronic computers in cars have something called a “limp home” mode. In
the computer which controls the spark timing advance, if the main software fails to
reset a external hardware timer, that timer when it times out causes some Hardware
circuit to provide a fixed spark timing so that the engine can run and prevents the
vehicle speed from going above some safe limit, say 20 miles an hour.

Design of this type requires a considerable amount of thought to this type of

problem. This is not a trivial area. Just as an off-the-cuff comment, I think it will be a
long time before we have fully autonomous vehicles on our ordinary roads. It seems
to me that in order to have fully autonomous vehicles the roads will have to have
significant modifications to allow the vehicles to be much safer.

We don't have fully autonomous railroads on railroad tracks yet. However, that
would seem like it should be possible because we have already so much Automation
in the routing of trains.”

From the answer that Ricard says. we can check to few criteria :

a. Are the answer is clear (To the purpose)?

Yes. About Autonomous Vehicle’s malfunction and it’s affect to humans.

b. Are the answer is logical?

Yes. since every electrical tech have built-in fail-safe systems to avoid crash or
harming humans.

c. Are the answer is opne minded?

Yes.

d. Are the answer have Valid Infromation?

Yes.

Then, we check writer’s purpose. His purpose seems to entertains people about
autonomous system failures.
 Then, we check the writer’s background of the topic. His background is from
Railroaders Technician. So, his argument can be trusted.

2. Answer 2
Bob Reisner says:

“How do human driven cars handle the following dangerous situations while the car
is driving (in motion)?
 the driver has a fit of sneezing
 the driver falls asleep
 the driver becomes distracted
 the driver has a heart attack
 the driver is too inexperienced for speed and conditions
 the driver is too old and infirm for speed and conditions
 the driver is [fill in another situation here]
Human driving is dependent on a single integrated package of sensors (the driver)
of indeterminate quality and capability. A sensor package with an indeterminate life
span and with known probability of unexpected partial or full fail. 90% of accidents
are completely or partially caused by human drivers! (See: Human error as a cause of
vehicle crashes)

Fully autonomous Self Drive Vehicles (“faSDVs”) will have many independent
sensor subsystems attached to a strong computing system that will be alert 24/7 and
not prone to failure. And despite this effective engineering and design, there will be
catastrophic failures of faSDVs.

Nothing is perfectly safe. We cannot expect perfection. We need to expect that

‘improvements’ are true improvements … that the ‘new’ is in some important way
‘better’ than the ‘old’. The introduction of the faSDV is expected to reduce (in the
USA) traffic fatalities, injury and damage: “…Widespread embrace of self-driving
vehicles could eliminate 90% of all auto accidents in the U.S., prevent up to $190
billion in damages and health-costs annually and save thousands of lives, according to
a new report by consulting firm McKinsey & Co…” (WSJ:Self-Driving Cars Could
Cut Down on Accidents, Study Says).”

From the answer that Ricard says. we can check to few criteria :

a. Are the answer is clear (To the purpose)?

Yes. About Autonomous Vehicle’s malfunction and it’s affect to humans

b. Are the answer is logical?

Enough. Since human error was the most cause traffic accidents.
c. Are the answer is opne minded?
Yes.

d. Are the answer have Valid Infromation?

Yes.