Autonomous Vehicles

[logan5]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Automatic train control in protected rights of way is a mature technology, but even the most aggressive systems rely on a "moving block" exclusive occupancy that guarantees enough distance for a following vehicle to come to a safe stop in the event of a failure. Yet we're somehow expected to believe that autonomous vehicles in a much harsher threat environment are going to magically be able to zip around with merely a few feet of separation and whiz through intersections in an interleaved pattern at full speed?

The distance between trains is required because of dwell times. You think Skytrain vehicles are separated by 90 seconds or more because that's how much breaking distance they need?

A virtual train of autonomous vehicles has much lower capacity than an actual train but has no dwell times to deal with. Nobody said these vehicles are going to zip full speed in an interleaved pattern through intersections where there are pedestrians. Where did you get that from?

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by logan5

The distance between trains is required because of dwell times. You think Skytrain vehicles are separated by 90 seconds or more because that's how much breaking distance they need?

A virtual train of autonomous vehicles has much lower capacity than an actual train but has no dwell times to deal with. Nobody said these vehicles are going to zip full speed in an interleaved pattern through intersections where there are pedestrians. Where did you get that from?

Autonomous vehicles are a slam dunk compared to BOTH private car ownership AND mass transit:

on-demand pickup? - check
decreased wait times / delays? - check
service at 3 am? - check
door to door service? - check
elimination of multiple transfers? - check
ability to carry extra cargo easily? - check
enhanced privacy? - check
enhanced security? - check
reduced stress of travel? - check
decreased risk of contagion? - check
increased potential for productivity? - check
ability for vehicles to be used by others between trips? - check

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by logan5

The distance between trains is required because of dwell times. You think Skytrain vehicles are separated by 90 seconds or more because that's how much breaking distance they need?

I'm not talking about train frequencies, I'm talking about minimum safe distance between trains. For example, watch the behaviour of trainsets that are returning to the OMC at the end of the day. They bunch up behind revenue trains because the revenue trains stop at stations while they don't.

The out-of-service train will gradually slow down and stop somewhere around 100 feet back from the revenue train while it stands in the station, and then it will follow at a distance which increases as the trains accelerate. That distance is governed by a the "moving block" that the automated control system places around every trainset. The block is large enough so that if the leading train were to somehow come to a worst-case abrupt stop (as trains have done in the past due to broken power pickup shoes, for example) the following train has enough room to come to a safe stop.

For a trainset operating at, say 80km/h, that minimum allowed distance between it and the trainset ahead of it is basically the same distance that a car is supposed to be following it's lead on the highway, because the laws of physics for trains are the same as those for cars - you can only stop a moving vehicle so fast in a safe manner without loosing control or causing harm to its occupants.

Skytrain equipment is professionally maintained to very high safety and reliability standards and operates in a protected right of way in which risks from random events are minimized, yet every train is required to be separated from every other train by at least the safe stopping distance. Yet we expect mass produced privately owned vehicles operating in a wide-open threat environment to run around at high speeds with mere feet separating them? There seems to be a big reality gap in there somewhere...

[logan5]

There seems to be a big reality gap in there somewhere...

Not much of a gap. Volvo's already successfully tested platooning vehicles on a public road. The safe stopping distance for 90 km/h is 75 meters. Volvo has reduced it down to 6.

Test track trials of SARTRE platooning took place at the Volvo Proving Ground near Gothenburg, Sweden and in a public road in Spain.[7] In January 2011 the first successful trial took place at Volvo's test track in Sweden, in which a single car followed behind a rigid truck. With control being taken by the truck, the driver of the slaved car was able to take his hands off the wheel, read a newspaper, and sip coffee.[5]
In January 2012 SARTRE carried out a second demonstration in a public road in Barcelona, Spain, this time with of a multiple vehicle platoon, a lead truck followed by three cars driven entirely autonomously at speeds of up to 90 km/h (56 mph) with a gap between the vehicles of no more than 6 m (20 ft). Volvo Car Corporation was the only participating car manufacturer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_Ro...he_Environment

[Genauso]

Highway driving is a strength, but don't overlook auto-valet possibilities.

It will be interesting to watch taxis, car sharing, uber, and car rental services as the consumer level products evolve.

I expect tolls will first come to major crossings, but live tracking and direct usage billing has been proposed in Oregon to name one example. But I also think there will be a much lower barrier to acceptance to live tracking/tolling in a car sharing service.

Uber today in Seattle is 40-50% the price of our taxis today. Tracked car sharing could halve even that price in the near future, if insurers offer lower prices and municipalities cooperate like they currently do. An auto valet to summon an available car a couple blocks to your doorstop would make all the difference in closing the gap with a personal vehicle.

Street parking isn't cheap, until you compare it to the surrounding price of land. If car sharing became more popular, much less space would be needed to serve the same number of people.

[Genauso]

At what prices will a fully autonomous or semi-autonomous (computer parking and highway travel, voice assisted city driving) trip compete with local transit?

For a parent getting a high school student to their after school sports.

For an elderly person to a doctor's appointment.

For a business traveler who would normally rely on a rental car and navigation by gps alone.

For a young married couple that really only need one car but can't carpool for work.

Seattle just formally approved Lyft and Uber, and it alone would seem to steal some of these trips from transit at $5 round trips, or a spare car costing maybe $10k per year at the low end.

Price and efficiency might the initial enticements, but what about the extra value for convenience and safety.

Any regional transportation plan covering more than a decade out which doesn't at least give space to state the authors have chosen to ignore autonomous vehicles doesn't deserve to be read.

I can't think of the last 30 year period without a major shift in transportation. Electric drivetrains, shared vehicles, and autonomous features are all out there today in some degree. The only question left is if some other change supersedes them in importance like remote working or if there is disaster elsewhere in the world so that the shared autonomous electric motors in Vancouver are in tuktuks to accommodate a surge of refugees and energy prices.

[Xerx]

You don't think special interests such as taxi drivers will work to keep autonomous vehicles out of the game for as long as possible? Regulations got Uber out of Vancouver and in New York City, unions have prevented the automation of the subway(which still have two people running the trains).

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by logan5

Not much of a gap. Volvo's already successfully tested platooning vehicles on a public road. The safe stopping distance for 90 km/h is 75 meters. Volvo has reduced it down to 6.

And when the tire of an oncoming vehicle blows out due to road debris and it serves into your lane and collides with that car 6 metres ahead of you, what do you think is going to happen?

I can see that kind of thing working on protected rights of way that allow only automated vehicles, and even then safety concerns may preclude them being privately owned and maintained. And by the time you're thinking in those terms then what you're really talking about is building a new kind of transit system.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

And when the tire of an oncoming vehicle blows out due to road debris and it serves into your lane and collides with that car 6 metres ahead of you, what do you think is going to happen?

I can see that kind of thing working on protected rights of way that allow only automated vehicles, and even then safety concerns may preclude them being privately owned and maintained. And by the time you're thinking in those terms then what you're really talking about is building a new kind of transit system.

What would happen if that same situation happened but you were driving and you were the average distance from the car most people drive today on highways? Still likely a crash because our reaction times are pretty bad in these situations not to mention you have all the other vehicles around you driven by humans that also have poor reaction times to the chaos. Sure in an automated world 1 car may crash or a few in the above scenario, but if all the vehicles around were autonomous then the chaos would be far less likely statistically.

But I use a key word, statistically. The whole debate doesn't seem to account for putting your lives in the hands of a computer ultimately, a computer that in today's age, can be hacked quite easily. It just takes someone hacking a few random cars to cause chaos on the roads and/or kill a lot of people. The perceived anonymity of hacking makes it more probably that someone would hack a car remotely then send it down say Granville street in the middle of the day hurtling into the pedestrians waiting on the corner of an intersection compared to someone behind the wheel doing the same thing.

Don't believe me on the hacking risk?

http://www.cnet.com/news/car-hacking...sed-at-defcon/
http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/231095
http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/News/Se...one-soon-2014/

etc.

People have already hacked google glass to the level you can install an app on the device and from up to 70 feet away just by looking at someone punching in a code on their iPad, iPhone, or any other android device, know their pass code. And I'm sure hackers are working on something similar for ATM machines.

I know humans are not perfect, but I still have more trust in humanity than computers especially when non-perfect humans build the "expected to be perfect" computers in the first place.

[logan5]

Momentum is really starting to build for self driving vehicles. Honda is bringing level 3 autonomy to the 2021 Legend sedan.

Virtually every semi-autonomous car you’ve seen on the road, even Teslas with Autopilot, uses level 2 self-driving — they may save you from steering or hitting the accelerator, but they won’t make many decisions by themselves. Honda believes it will push those boundaries, however. According to Reuters, the transportation giant claims it will be the first to mass produce cars with level 3 self-driving. While you’ll still have to be ready to take over, the cars could make important decisions like overtaking slow cars.

Honda’s first level 3 vehicle will be a version of its Legend sedan (pictured above) equipped with a Traffic Jam Pilot feature. It should arrive before the end of the company’s fiscal year, or no later than March 2021.

The feat is possible after the Japanese government gave Traffic Jam Pilot a safety certification, letting drivers look away from the road. Honda had to meet multiple standards, including promises of six months of automated driving data recording and an “automated drive” sticker.

This isn’t the first production-level car to offer claims of level 3 driving. Audi boasted that its 2019 A8L would support that level of autonomy. However, Audi had to shelve those plans after the US shifted from federal-level guidance to state-by-state rules. Honda’s approach may be the first to reach streets on a broad level. That’s a significant achievement, even if it’s a far cry from the truly hands-off driving of level 4 and 5 systems.

https://www.engadget.com/honda-to-ma...163208006.html

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by logan5

Momentum is really starting to build for self driving vehicles. Honda is bringing level 3 autonomy to the 2021 Legend sedan.


https://www.engadget.com/honda-to-ma...163208006.html

Driving in slow bumper to bumper traffic on highways is the easy part.