View Full Version : Self driving XC 90 !!



Shopaholic
02-20-2015, 01:13 AM
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-volvo-self-driving-cars-20150219-story.html

What next?

goVolvo
02-20-2015, 05:21 AM
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-volvo-self-driving-cars-20150219-story.html

What next?

My next wish is, a flexible body metal sheet that could change its shape slightly, to be muscular or soft rounded on your choice. Of cource, color can be changed too, which is relatively easier.

Bmo Pete
02-20-2015, 12:37 PM
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-volvo-self-driving-cars-20150219-story.html

What next?

Perhaps higher insurance rates to cover the risk of system failure or ineffectiveness in all avoidance scenarios. It's one thing for your car to recognize an obstacle at 22 mph and slam on the breaks just in time, missing it by inches. It's quite another for the car to handle all the driving duties, recognizing all potential hazards and react quickly and appropriately at higher speeds.

Here's an example: just today on my way to work, a VW Touareg raced out from an entrance ahead and on my right hand side, attempting to cross two lanes of 45 mph traffic (in front of me), to go the opposite direction. The VW driver did not see me at all and accelerated straight for my V60's passenger side, giving me a split second to react! My options were 1) slam on the brakes and hope to stop in time to avoid getting "t-boned", but I certainly would not have been successful at our converging speeds on loose salted asphalt, or 2) make an extreme evasive maneuver to scoot around the front of the VW, though putting me momentarily into the on coming traffic's lane (over the double yellow line). My reaction/decision: I took a snap look and saw no oncoming traffic, then did a snap left than right slalom around the front of the VW without braking. The result: the Touareg just narrowly missed hitting my right rear corner (it never braked), but missed just the same. My concern about self driving cars: If I'm chilling-out reading the morning news or making tea while my car manages my commute automatically, what would have been the result?

My opinion: Drive your car, have someone else drive you, or take public transportation! If you're too lazy and driving is too much for you, or you're very tired, or maybe you just need to do be doing something else at that time, SIMPLY DO NOT DRIVE! :)

goVolvo
02-20-2015, 01:10 PM
Perhaps higher insurance rates to cover the risk of system failure or ineffectiveness in all avoidance scenarios. It's one thing for your car to recognize an obstacle at 22 mph and slam on the breaks just in time, missing it by inches. It's quite another for the car to handle all the driving duties, recognizing all potential hazards and react quickly and appropriately at higher speeds.

Here's an example: just today on my way to work, a VW Touareg raced out from an entrance ahead and on my right hand side, attempting to cross two lanes of 45 mph traffic (in front of me), to go the opposite direction. The VW driver did not see me at all and accelerated straight for my V60's passenger side, giving me a split second to react! My options were 1) slam on the brakes and hope to stop in time to avoid getting "t-boned", but I certainly would not have been successful at our converging speeds on loose salted asphalt, or 2) make an extreme evasive maneuver to scoot around the front of the VW, though putting me momentarily into the on coming traffic's lane (over the double yellow line). My reaction/decision: I took a snap look and saw no oncoming traffic, then did a snap left than right slalom around the front of the VW without braking. The result: the Touareg just narrowly missed hitting my right rear corner (it never braked), but missed just the same. My concern about self driving cars: If I'm chilling-out reading the morning news or making tea while my car manages my commute automatically, what would have been the result?

My opinion: Drive your car, have someone else drive you, or take public transportation! If you're too lazy and driving is too much for you, or you're very tired, or maybe you just need to do be doing something else at that time, SIMPLY DO NOT DRIVE! :)

I remember seeing an Intellisafe animation or illustration of driving around the front of a crossing car at intersection to avoid collision. Not sure how fast it reacts. But a computer can be faster than human most of time.

Here is the illustration:
http://www.gizmag.com/volvo-360-car-truck-safety/34147/
http://images.gizmag.com/inline/volvo-360-5.jpg

cedarholm
02-20-2015, 04:02 PM
Perhaps higher insurance rates to cover the risk of system failure or ineffectiveness in all avoidance scenarios. It's one thing for your car to recognize an obstacle at 22 mph and slam on the breaks just in time, missing it by inches. It's quite another for the car to handle all the driving duties, recognizing all potential hazards and react quickly and appropriately at higher speeds.

Here's an example: just today on my way to work, a VW Touareg raced out from an entrance ahead and on my right hand side, attempting to cross two lanes of 45 mph traffic (in front of me), to go the opposite direction. The VW driver did not see me at all and accelerated straight for my V60's passenger side, giving me a split second to react! My options were 1) slam on the brakes and hope to stop in time to avoid getting "t-boned", but I certainly would not have been successful at our converging speeds on loose salted asphalt, or 2) make an extreme evasive maneuver to scoot around the front of the VW, though putting me momentarily into the on coming traffic's lane (over the double yellow line). My reaction/decision: I took a snap look and saw no oncoming traffic, then did a snap left than right slalom around the front of the VW without braking. The result: the Touareg just narrowly missed hitting my right rear corner (it never braked), but missed just the same. My concern about self driving cars: If I'm chilling-out reading the morning news or making tea while my car manages my commute automatically, what would have been the result?

My opinion: Drive your car, have someone else drive you, or take public transportation! If you're too lazy and driving is too much for you, or you're very tired, or maybe you just need to do be doing something else at that time, SIMPLY DO NOT DRIVE! :)

Yep. I just don't understand the benefits of a self-driving car.

goVolvo
02-20-2015, 05:21 PM
Yep. I just don't understand the benefits of a self-driving car.

... until you try and are surprised. :)

adp
02-20-2015, 05:31 PM
My concern about self driving cars: If I'm chilling-out reading the morning news or making tea while my car manages my commute automatically, what would have been the result?



The computer/camera/radar/etc. would have spotted the Touraeg long before you apparently did.

People need to understand that this IS going to happen. There WILL be driverless cars, and soon. The complaints are just like people's complaints about mobile phones...or fax machines...or automobiles. It's coming. Technology moves forward and there is nothing you can do about it.

Yes, you can choose to not have a mobile phone. Yes, you could have chosen to not use a fax machine. You could have stuck to riding your horse to the office. Of course.

I'm not worried about driverless cars five years from now. I'm worried about the transition phase - these semi-driverless cars, I call them. I think the current situation is a recipe for disaster. Then again, maybe the new cars will avert those disasters.

It will be interesting to watch the next 24 months with what Volvo is rolling out, and what Tesla has already rolled out. We are way beyond self-parking, that's for sure.

goVolvo
02-20-2015, 05:34 PM
There are autonomous cars / prototypes from Audi, BMW, Cadillac as well. It's a matter of time some of them will go to the market. Now that Volvo set their time to 2020. I bet someone else will jump out and offer such cars before 2020.

adp
02-20-2015, 05:37 PM
Yep. I just don't understand the benefits of a self-driving car.

My in-laws are getting too old to drive home after Thanksgiving. I'd love it if their car had driverless capabilities.

I commute 20 miles in bumper to bumper traffic for an hour. There is very little "driving" involved. I could easily turn over the wheel to a robot. And if I could use that time productively, imagine how much time I'd have for something productive to society, like helping my kids with homework, helping my neighbor do some yard work, or the billion other things many of us can't do enough of because we spend two hours each day on something that adds NO value to anyone's life (commuting).

PLUS, my taxes won't have to go through the roof to pay for new road capacity. With driverless cars we can fit a lot more cars onto the same roads. That is worth thousands of $$ to every one of us.

at the same time, I am 100% OK with a person not buying a driverless car. I'm guessing that will be permissible for 20 years or so. Maybe the transition will happen faster.

adp
02-20-2015, 05:40 PM
There are autonomous cars / prototypes from Audi, BMW, Cadillac as well. It's a matter of time some of them will go to the market. Now that Volvo set their time to 2020. I bet someone else will jump out and offer such cars before 2020.

Tesla will be self-driving the soonest, I am guessing. Of course, there's also Google, so....

The new P85D has the capability built in, I believe.

MorrisonHiker
02-20-2015, 05:53 PM
Yep. I just don't understand the benefits of a self-driving car.

No accidents due to driver error or poor driving skills.

adp
02-20-2015, 07:30 PM
I have to admit, given how easy it is for a hacker to take control of an automobile (see Darpa Dan segment on 60 Minutes), I'm worried about driverless cars.

Of course, the cars being controlled by DARPA were not "driverless" so the we should all already be anxious about this.

I have said for years that main beneficiary of driverless vehicles are the banks. If you miss a car payment, your garage will simply open and your car will simply drive away.

Hey, you have nothing to be afraid of if you just make your payment on time

Con_The_Don
02-23-2015, 02:59 AM
Volvo had said they had the technology for self driving cars in 2012/2013 and the main problem was with road laws. I thought it was pretty cool when i saw it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO6JtncrY08
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lpe6PqRXcc
http://www.fastcompany.com/3030911/most-innovative-companies/heres-an-early-look-at-volvos-self-parking-driverless-car-due-to-h

GrecianVolvo
02-23-2015, 02:17 PM
Yep. I just don't understand the benefits of a self-driving car.

I am sure the Wright Bros could never fathom the concept of automated flying and/or automated landing in thick fog...

cedarholm
02-23-2015, 02:22 PM
I am sure the Wright Bros could never fathom the concept of automated flying and/or automated landing in thick fog...

True.

I tried boating in the fog once. I didn't believe my chartplotter and returned to the dock. Freaky experience.

kevinG
02-23-2015, 04:10 PM
I would expect only driverless cars allowed on major thoroughfares in 15 years. For all the reasons described above. On an aside, I recall my Dad telling me stories about his horse - it could get him home at night on his own. This was 100 yrs ago. Back to the future?


Sent from my iPhone

MorrisonHiker
03-05-2015, 02:55 PM
Yep. I just don't understand the benefits of a self-driving car.

Study: Self-Driving Vehicles Could Eliminate 90% Of Car Accidents In United States http://consumerist.com/2015/03/05/study-self-driving-vehicles-could-eliminate-90-of-car-accidents-in-united-states/

pattyweb
03-05-2015, 03:11 PM
I am sure the Wright Bros could never fathom the concept of automated flying and/or automated landing in thick fog...

There's a big difference between your plane examples and automated cars. Even without any automated systems there was already a system for the planes to coordinate with each other. The planes follow rules, the pilots communicate with a control tower, etc. That plane landing on auto pilot in the fog isn't suppose to need to worry about some other pilot trying to cut him off.

I for one, will welcome self driving cars when they get here, assuming I'm still around.

And for that inbetween phase of self driving cars that can be put on manual so you drive yourself, I wouldn't be surprised that as car black boxes improve, that maybe one will have a different accident insurance deductible depending on whether they were driving themselves or the car was in autopilot mode.



I tried boating in the fog once. I didn't believe my chartplotter and returned to the dock. Freaky experience.

I will not boat in the fog. Too many idiots out there like the one below that was supposedly busy looking at his gps screen trying to figure out when to turn right (which happens to be right in front of that beach):

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2127010!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_970/beached25n-4-web.jpg


Even boating on a clear night can be bad with so many that run without any lights.

adp
03-05-2015, 03:17 PM
I wouldn't be surprised that as car black boxes improve, that maybe one will have a different accident insurance deductible depending on whether they were driving themselves or the car was in autopilot mode.

.

I think that is pretty much guaranteed, once the data proves the case.

I certainly HOPE so. Our rates should be based on statistical analysis, not some nonsense like, "I'm a better driver than any computer"

GrecianVolvo
03-05-2015, 05:35 PM
There's a big difference between your plane examples and automated cars. Even without any automated systems there was already a system for the planes to coordinate with each other. The planes follow rules, the pilots communicate with a control tower, etc. That plane landing on auto pilot in the fog isn't suppose to need to worry about some other pilot trying to cut him off.

I know you enjoy a good argument (I think it's your favorite past time, not that I should complain since I enjoy that as well) but you think in the Wright Bros era there was such infrastructure or do you think the Wright Bros envisioned communication via radio and/or tower control? Hardly. We are in the infantile stages of something that are kids (when they will be adults) will find routine and expect.


I for one, will welcome self driving cars when they get here, assuming I'm still around.

Ditto.


And for that inbetween phase of self driving cars that can be put on manual so you drive yourself, I wouldn't be surprised that as car black boxes improve, that maybe one will have a different accident insurance deductible depending on whether they were driving themselves or the car was in autopilot mode.

You can be certain of that.

tmpruitt
03-05-2015, 10:04 PM
Blah, the "entheusiasts" can pooh-pooh all they want, but when a driverless volvo becomes available, I will be the first one signing up! I love cars... but driving? Not so much. It's a burden and it's tedious. I'd love to kick back on my ipad getting ahead on emails. Or clipping my fingernails because I forgot to the night before. Whatever. In today's 24/7, work is just an email, iphone text, and laptop away from stealing what little time should be yours world, time is the most precious comoddity.

adp
03-06-2015, 01:59 AM
http://observer.com/2015/03/self-driving-cars-will-be-in-30-u-s-cities-by-the-end-of-next-year/

pattyweb
03-06-2015, 11:23 AM
but you think in the Wright Bros era there was such infrastructure or do you think the Wright Bros envisioned communication via radio and/or tower control?


I agree, they did not. I took your comment in the wrong context.

Bmo Pete
03-06-2015, 02:50 PM
No accidents due to driver error or poor driving skills.

..and this only applies if every vehicle is self-controlled, and is in proper operating condition, and the travel network does not malfunction or otherwise go down. When your iphone or laptop loses connectivity or craps-out, it usually won't kill you and others. ;)

The last I read, there have been only a half dozen special drivers licenses issued globally to test these cars. The driver has to be competent, capable and ever vigilant to be able to take over control of the car immediately. Now on your daily commute next time, take notice of all the flakes driving around you, and then tell me the kind of fail safe systems and network needed to autopilot these folks. Because you know, they'll be snoozing or fixing their hair or watching videos eating popcorn in the back seat the moment their less than well maintained vehicle malfunctions.

Btw, the autopilot function in aircraft has been known to malfunction on new sophisticated million dollar aircraft, this is why the necessary training and strict licensing remains required of every pilot, and why at least one pilot must remain ever vigilant and at the ready of the controls. Auto-piloted trains still collide or run off the tracks due to system malfunction with a driver sitting there looking at the controls. Just picture the sheer complexity of thousands upon thousands of vehicles, of all shapes and sizes, zooming at speed around each-other, relying on systems that are ultimately designed, installed and maintained by a very imperfect human.

I think these self-driven cars will be exclusive to smaller confined locales that were built with this infrastructure from the beginning. Something like the "Smart Cities" in India or the "Ghost Cities" in China where you can start from scratch and regulate on a manageable scale. Existing in a vacuum is one thing, spreading to the pre-existing travel network will be quite a challenging, costly and long undertaking...current world events and legislative politics aside. Btw, I'm still waiting for that Mag-Lev train to happen in Maryland. I believe the cost is now $100 million per mile. What are the odds of getting the funding for that passed so we can truly move masses of people from town to town quickly and cheaply? What about higher priorities like modernization of our energy delivery network (powerplants), our highways, bridges and tunnels, our public education system, etc. Where's that damn levitating skate board from Back to the Future 2?! ;) Sorry, but mass utilization of this technology is still silly Utopian sci-fi to me. Just because we can make a self-driven car, doesn't mean we can realistically use it to any great benefit to society.

adp
03-06-2015, 04:35 PM
..and this only applies if every vehicle is self-controlled, and is in proper operating condition, and the travel network does not malfunction or otherwise go down. When your iphone or laptop loses connectivity or craps-out, it usually won't kill you and others. ;)

The last I read, there have been only a half dozen special drivers licenses issued globally to test these cars.

Pete - articles have been linked here. Reading those articles is a good start, I think. I believe most of your assumptions are out of date. This is happening.

Of all the tests I have read of, not one is in a locale that was "built with this infrastructure from the beginning."

Almost every assumption lay people have made has been proven to be faulty. "Tyey're gonna need to put special markers on the lanes, so the cars know where the lanes and roads end." Of course. Except, nope. Etc. etc.

I had not thought of using our nation's enlisted men as the guinea pigs, but that should be no surprise. It seems that those vehicles will be running on public roads, but that was not clear. I believe the vehicles at Stanford's SLAC will be running on private roads, but not sure about that. Funny to think of the SLAC visitors as "guinea pigs." That is not a controlled environment, afaik (other than inside the buildings, of course). But maybe they will only operate "behind the gate."


The Internet of Things is here.

pattyweb
03-06-2015, 05:27 PM
Of all the tests I have read of, not one is in a locale that was "built with this infrastructure from the beginning."

Almost every assumption lay people have made has been proven to be faulty. "Tyey're gonna need to put special markers on the lanes, so the cars know where the lanes and roads end." Of course. Except, nope. Etc. etc.


That depends. At one point last year Volvo was testing on special roadways with embedded magnets.

Volvo self-driving car tests use road-embedded magnets (http://www.slashgear.com/volvo-self-driving-car-tests-use-road-embedded-magnets-11320337/)

But is it feasible?

Sorry, Volvo. Magnetic roads for self-driving cars are a pipe dream. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2014/03/18/sorry-volvo-magnetic-roads-for-self-driving-cars-are-a-pipe-dream/)


What's not clear is if this next 2017 round of Volvo self driving tests (limited to just 30 miles of road) is using magnets or if Volvo has shifted away from magnets.

adp
03-06-2015, 06:45 PM
There is nothing in the latest articles about special magnets

So, how many of you guys have opinions about this without reading the articles I have been linking?

adp
03-06-2015, 06:46 PM
That depends. At one point last year Volvo was testing on special roadways with embedded magnets.

Volvo self-driving car tests use road-embedded magnets (http://www.slashgear.com/volvo-self-driving-car-tests-use-road-embedded-magnets-11320337/)

But is it feasible?

Sorry, Volvo. Magnetic roads for self-driving cars are a pipe dream. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2014/03/18/sorry-volvo-magnetic-roads-for-self-driving-cars-are-a-pipe-dream/)


What's not clear is if this next 2017 round of Volvo self driving tests (limited to just 30 miles of road) is using magnets or if Volvo has shifted away from magnets.

You just quoted two articles that are A YEAR OLD

get with the program and stop wasting my time

this area has been undergoing very rapid change. An article from a year ago might as well be from the stone age.

adp
03-06-2015, 06:48 PM
I don't see "technology" as the limiter on this. I see hacking as the limiter. (Hacking is the behavior, not the technology)

pattyweb
03-06-2015, 07:48 PM
You just quoted two articles that are A YEAR OLD

get with the program and stop wasting my time

this area has been undergoing very rapid change. An article from a year ago might as well be from the stone age.

You made the statement


Of all the tests I have read of, not one is in a locale that was "built with this infrastructure from the beginning."

I included a link to Volvo actually having done tests in a special location that was modified with infrastructure to support the test.

adp
03-07-2015, 11:21 PM
You made the statement



I included a link to Volvo actually having done tests in a special location that was modified with infrastructure to support the test.

I'm sorry for my pissy attitude, yesterday

I had linked newer articles that didn't say anything about special roads.

This is a fascinating and fast-moving area. Should be very interesting.

tmpruitt
03-08-2015, 09:51 AM
I'm sorry for my pissy attitude, yesterday

I had linked newer articles that didn't say anything about special roads.

This is a fascinating and fast-moving area. Should be very interesting.

Definitely fast-moving. It's exciting to be on the cusp of a technological leap, not yet able to see where things will lead us.

Bmo Pete
03-09-2015, 02:48 PM
I don't see "technology" as the limiter on this. I see hacking as the limiter. (Hacking is the behavior, not the technology)

Using this technology in controlled environments and pre-determined limited routes for public transportation is little more than what we have now with our metro mass transit systems. They've just taken away the tracks and saved a few bucks by firing the bus and shuttle drivers. Disney Land (theme parks), or a scratch-built contained smart cities are the perfect environments to tinker with auto piloted vehicles.

Behavior is the main point of my previous comments. Look at all the knuckleheads driving around you... Don't "waste my time", until you consider the scale of the change management exercise associated with this! Do you recall how long it took people to use seat belts? And that was an obvious benefit to society, you know, like not smoking. Current drivers: Half won't fix a headlight or change the oil until they're pulled over or something starts going wrong. More won't check tire pressures and how many can't find it within their means to use a turn signal or turn their headlights on when it's raining (even when they could use their auto headlights)? No one knows or cares about the friggin existing regulations anymore. What about the growing percentage of elderly drivers on the road? So many of them don't know what planet they're on while driving. You think the self driven car is the answer to overcome all the horrible drivers on the road, where I see just the opposite. I see people who won't manage this technology to the extent required for safe use on public roads.

Most won't be able to afford to buy these cars and maintain them as strictly as necessary. Are my tax dollars going to be used to subsidize purchase of these cars like electric cars are now? Who will be tasked to design, build, and maintain this system of roads and support peripherals? The sort of folks responsible for installing Obamacare.com? The guys who gave us the B2 bomber at $4 billion a copy? Have you read about the F35 program lately? These programs involved the brightest minds on earth. Who will manage this program after installation, the MVA/DMV? DOT? Are you kidding me?! Who will repair the failed systems in the cars? The guys that took three tries to fix my power mirror? Guys like the techs at Audi that over-filled my oil and caused me expensive engine issues? They took two weeks to figure out why my brake lights were staying on, and that's while working with engineers in Germany. What about exploding airbags and failing breaks with Honda, GM and Toyota? These scientists, engineers and techs can't handle the technology in the cars now. I know I sound pessimistic, but you're not being realistic and looking at the details, the associated complexity and scale of this undertaking.

Finally, you'll only see a worthy benefit of this technology if it's adopted in mass. At it's best and in the relative short term for the personal self-driven car, this is a reality for a percent of a percent of the population. Installing the necessary infrastructure/systems will certainly not meet the expenditure justification for large scale implementation. You still have no answer for the behavior question. Behavior of the builder, behavior of the maintainer, behavior of the users and behavior of the government. The flying car technology was proven in the 1950's.

adp
03-09-2015, 03:23 PM
When cars were introduced, they were much more complicated than horses. And somehow we are no longer knee deep in horse poop. (but we do have far more people killed by/in cars, today, than we ever had by/on horses)

I appreciate your cynicism. It's hard to imagine that these systems will be safe. But I think it is a lot closer than we all think.

There is nothing "special" about a bus. It has to deal with the same issues that an individual car does. I don't think a "controlled" environment is really any different than a public street. We think it is "different" because we see all the variables on a public street, and it's hard for us to process all that info. I doubt a computer systems feels that a public road is any more complex than a private road. To a computer, the difference between handling 100 variables and 1,000 variables isn't even noticeable, though it boggles our tiny minds.

I do hear you re cost and repairs/maintenance, and complexity. Just looking at the Volvo video, with graphics showing all the various systems, it's hard to imagine the costs of ownership being reasonable.

Unlike safety belts, there are real market incentives to making this work, IMO.

adp
03-09-2015, 05:18 PM
hmm, looks like the Mercedes autonomous vehicle is on the streets of San Francisco

http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/243751

someone posted that the one in SF is NOT self-driving, but the article isn't sure

Bmo Pete
03-10-2015, 12:59 AM
I remember seeing an Intellisafe animation or illustration of driving around the front of a crossing car at intersection to avoid collision. Not sure how fast it reacts. But a computer can be faster than human most of time.

Here is the illustration:
http://www.gizmag.com/volvo-360-car-truck-safety/34147/
http://images.gizmag.com/inline/volvo-360-5.jpg

The view of the car pulling out on me was obscured by another car, in the right lane next to me but slightly ahead, until the very last minute when that car turned off and the VW pulled out the same time. An automated system would have to do a lot fast recognition and decision making. I garantee you it would try to slam on the brakes and stop in time..but wouldn't. Crunch with airbag burns or worse then looking for a new car.

This example shows an obstacle in full view ahead of the vehicle's systems. My near miss had the approaching vehicle shielded and not moving from a stop until the last second when the driver floored it heading at me.

Bmo Pete
03-10-2015, 01:23 AM
When cars were introduced, they were much more complicated than horses. And somehow we are no longer knee deep in horse poop. (but we do have far more people killed by/in cars, today, than we ever had by/on horses)

I appreciate your cynicism. It's hard to imagine that these systems will be safe. But I think it is a lot closer than we all think.

There is nothing "special" about a bus. It has to deal with the same issues that an individual car does. I don't think a "controlled" environment is really any different than a public street. We think it is "different" because we see all the variables on a public street, and it's hard for us to process all that info. I doubt a computer systems feels that a public road is any more complex than a private road. To a computer, the difference between handling 100 variables and 1,000 variables isn't even noticeable, though it boggles our tiny minds.

I do hear you re cost and repairs/maintenance, and complexity. Just looking at the Volvo video, with graphics showing all the various systems, it's hard to imagine the costs of ownership being reasonable.

Unlike safety belts, there are real market incentives to making this work, IMO.

Hmm, a horse pulling a buggy at 10 mph vs a steam powered buggy at 15 mph.

The bus or shuttle would be traveling on the same closed course in the same right hand lane as any bus does now. You'd have some enhanced recognition and avoidance capability beyond what we have today with ACC, but nothing like the intelligence and quick reflexes required by a car moving from lane to lane, street to street while accounting for 360 degrees of dynamic variables. Now add in a system glitch, stumble, processing delay (like any computerized system any of us use) at the wrong moment while your attention is essentially off-line to react.

Regardless, the technology can be perfected (at a cost) but the necessary infrastructure and regulation will severely lag behind. There are much higher priorities in this deteriating world.

adp
03-10-2015, 04:06 PM
Hmm, a horse pulling a buggy at 10 mph vs a steam powered buggy at 15 mph.

The bus or shuttle would be traveling on the same closed course in the same right hand lane as any bus does now. You'd have some enhanced recognition and avoidance capability beyond what we have today with ACC, but nothing like the intelligence and quick reflexes required by a car moving from lane to lane, street to street while accounting for 360 degrees of dynamic variables. Now add in a system glitch, stumble, processing delay (like any computerized system any of us use) at the wrong moment while your attention is essentially off-line to react.

Regardless, the technology can be perfected (at a cost) but the necessary infrastructure and regulation will severely lag behind. There are much higher priorities in this deteriating world.

I do hear you re competing priorities, though I don't think the marketplace cares about this, at all. You and I may have other priorities, but the market doesn't care about that. If people think there is money to be made, it doesn't really matter if you and I want more attention to be focused on ISIS, for example. And the market is capable of addressing ALL priorities, not just those that are "most important" - whether you or I like this, or not, the concept of autonomous vehicles is moving into the marketplace. The only question is "when" and "how much will it cost"

I think you are selling the self-driving vehicles short. They won't simply rely on physical observations (ie, radar). When my self-driving car is driving down the road, it will "know" the driving "tendencies" of every vehicle in front of it, to the side of it, that could impact it. It will know that BMOPete is up ahead, and that BMO Pete is not in an autonomous vehicle, and that BMO Pete typically waits for the light to turn full green before he enters the intersection/or that BMO Pete always jumps the green and is likely poking his nose out right about now. All that info will be known by all the vehicles on the road. That's way more info than drivers have now.

Something that many seem to be missing, is that these vehicles will not operate like conventional vehicles. Unlike conventional vehicles which have eyes and ears pointed frontward (and nowhere else, really), autonomous vehicles will have eyes/ears/ESP pointed in ALL directions. So they will KNOW about an erratic driver who is not even on the planned route. They'll know about the bicyclist tootling along a side road who is tipsy from too much booze. (the cyclist's smart watch/phone will have more then enough data about the cyclist's performance). Yes, this seems scary if you are the bicyclist who wants his privacy. But this is GREAT if you are an autonymous vehicle that doesn't want to hit that cyclist (and if you are that cyclist and you don't want to get hit)

I realize autonomous vehicles has a strong dystopian feel to it, but so does getting hit by a car driven by a person. There is nothing utopian about riding your bike through a city's streets and getting hit by a dope who couldn't see you because he didn't put his sunglasses on.

I know we all think it is obscenely complicated, but...is it, really? There are millions and millions of cars on the roads, and bikes on the roads and people on the roads, and how can a computer possibly keep track of them all? Well, obviously, the computer doesn't need to keep track of all of them. The computer only needs to keep track of the ones which are likely to matter, and that isn't really all that many pieces of info.

My father-in-law's perspective was interesting. I asked him if he'd even buy an autonomous car, and he said, "well, I'm an engineer, so as soon as they offer them for sale, I will look at the price and make my decision." He had total faith that the market will not allow an unsafe product to be sold. But he then added, "But I'll never buy one sold by Apple"

:)

He's an engineer, but he's biased like the rest of us!!

12Ounce
03-10-2015, 04:21 PM
Here's a variation I wish all new tractor-trailer rigs had to have. Makes me nervous when I've no space to move into and one of those beasts is inches off of my rear bumper.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2015/03/09/subaru_s_eyesight_technology_could_make_self_drivi ng_cars_possible.html

adp
03-11-2015, 12:04 AM
The first “wave” of autonomous technology, a system that allows cars to negotiate stop-and-go traffic without driver intervention, will launch next year. It will be followed in 2018 by a system that enables autonomous highway driving and lane changing, and a third wave building on that.
-Renault-Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn

http://ecomento.com/2015/03/09/nissan-ceo-apple-electric-car/

so much for the world having other priorities. Maybe we will have solved the crisis in the Middle East by 2018....

Tostik
03-12-2015, 11:02 PM
Actually, Volvo is ahead of everybody in self-driving cars, including Tesla;

https://www.youtube.com/embed/4OOicnvL7Ko

Jekecy
03-12-2015, 11:56 PM
That's just a promo video. Practically useless until it actually gets tested on the road.

Tostik
03-15-2015, 11:59 PM
That's just a promo video. Practically useless until it actually gets tested on the road.

I think that's what they're doing, even as we post.

adp
06-02-2015, 08:35 PM
I am big fan of self-driving cars, BUT http://observer.com/2015/06/self-driving-cars-will-cause-motion-sickness-often-to-always-study-finds/

For adults, motion sickness will be more of an issue in self-driving vehicles than in conventional vehicles. Some are expected to experience motion sickness often, while others may actually feel sick every time they’re riding in an autonomous vehicle, a study by researchers at The University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute revealed.

goVolvo
06-02-2015, 08:41 PM
I am big fan of self-driving cars, BUT http://observer.com/2015/06/self-driving-cars-will-cause-motion-sickness-often-to-always-study-finds/

For adults, motion sickness will be more of an issue in self-driving vehicles than in conventional vehicles. Some are expected to experience motion sickness often, while others may actually feel sick every time they’re riding in an autonomous vehicle, a study by researchers at The University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute revealed.

Why don't they feel sick riding in car driven by a human?

Oh well, let's don't dig this topic out until 2017, or 2020 for U.S. :)

JOHN T SHEA
06-03-2015, 11:02 PM
Hopefully, the self-drive system will NOT be designed by the same engineers who designed the keyless system described in Citivas' thread.

adp
06-04-2015, 03:41 PM
Why don't they feel sick riding in car driven by a human?

Oh well, let's don't dig this topic out until 2017, or 2020 for U.S. :)

natural question

but did you read the article?

I think it's due to two things:
1) the activities people plan to engage in. Maybe you aren't as likely to text message when you are a passenger with a friend driving, but more likely when you are in a taxi or in a car with no driver.
2) I think they said the acceleration and deceleration and lane changes will not be the same as with a human driving, so it's more prone to causing motion sickness (but it seems that that could be adjusted)

12Ounce
06-04-2015, 09:37 PM
There seems to be some enthusiasm for self-driving cars. OK. I hope we all realize that Big Brother will have to approve before anything is put in place. Yes? And one thing that BB will surely dictate is the speed that we will drive. How do we feel about that? Who drives within the "speed limit" now? If not, perhaps you should ... just to get ahead of the process. (LOL!)

goVolvo
06-04-2015, 11:36 PM
I'd call it computer aided driving. Self-driving is very different in terms of driver's responsibility. As long as the industry mandates driver is fully responsible for the driving, either driving by throttle and brake or driving by switch and wire and computer, it is not hard to accommodates Drive-Me cars on the road. Self-driving ones like google cars are much more different in responsibility.

adp
06-05-2015, 12:33 PM
There seems to be some enthusiasm for self-driving cars. OK. I hope we all realize that Big Brother will have to approve before anything is put in place. Yes? And one thing that BB will surely dictate is the speed that we will drive. How do we feel about that? Who drives within the "speed limit" now? If not, perhaps you should ... just to get ahead of the process. (LOL!)

I am sure that self-drive will be an "option" on a car; you can select for the car to self-drive or you can select for yourself to drive. That's the most likely scenario. So when I am tired, for example, I likely won't care too much if I am being chauferred ONLY at the speed limit, since that will be better than me driving tired but faster.

the black boxes in the car already log mph. If the government wanted this data, they could have it without much effort. Plus your mobile phone data could be used.

Plus, using self-drive while in bumper to bumper traffic would allow me to get all my morning email done on the way to work. Not much of an opportunity to drive faster than the speed limit when all the cars are going 5 mph.

There are tons of benefits to a self-driving car. Sure there are downsides, but focusing only on the downsides is naive. Autonomous cars WILL happen, so it's probably smart to get on board.

We used to only ride horses (if you were lucky enough to have the $ to own a horse). Everyone said cars would kill people, so we should stick with horses. Cars DID kill people. LOTS of people. But we don't ride horses, anymore.

adp
06-05-2015, 12:39 PM
I'd call it computer aided driving. Self-driving is very different in terms of driver's responsibility. As long as the industry mandates driver is fully responsible for the driving, either driving by throttle and brake or driving by switch and wire and computer, it is not hard to accommodates Drive-Me cars on the road. Self-driving ones like google cars are much more different in responsibility.

We already have "computer-aided driving." We will have cars capable of driving without a driver, very soon.

Yes, the liability scheme will need to catch up. But adoption of the technology will happen before the liability scheme is all worked out. That is how things work.

It's not perfect, but neither were mobile phones when they were first adopted. Same with the internet. Same with airplane travel. Same with the transition from horses to cars. Tech transitions happen long before the law is clear.

I don't think Henry Ford was wringing his hands when people said, "But what if...."

He built his cars and counted his millions before the courts and legislatures had it all figured out.

Yes, the first car accident cases probably didn't go very well, and likely one party got screwed. But that is how life works. And eventually it works out (provided you live in a reasonably democracy).

JOHN T SHEA
06-05-2015, 08:36 PM
But if my self-drive Volvo kidnaps me I might get Stockholm syndrome...