Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ahh yes the safety aspect. That is why every elevator has to have an operator just standing there in case the elevator controls should fail.
Trucks and cabs are obvious big payoffs for the technology. And they will not have drivers.
The biggest payoff will in fact be safety. They simply will not run into each other as often. The economic pay off is in commercial vehicles...those drivers cost a bundle.
Cars have hundreds, if not thousands of more conditions and needed inputs than an elevator. An elevator does not have to worry about weather, road conditions, other drivers, animals, people, stop lights, stop signs, caution lights, turns, corners, varying speed, miles of use, etc.
Even on the simplest driverless systems, accidents happen now;
And this is with a full support staff monitoring the system at all times, and ready to respond at all times to any problem. There is no way this kind of support can be made for millions of cars.
The most logical of driverless systems, trains, are not even here, let alone cars.
It would be safer than all those planes that will be falling out of the sky.
More seriously you harden electronic to a degree that losing them is unlikely. And then you design such that the failure if everything dies is to stop...that is you must have an operating processor or the car pulls its plug.
Those airplanes are built at much higher requirements than the average car can be, even now they cannot get cars perfectly down, look at the recalls, for example the ignition switch, really? An ignition switch, a very simple item, caused some accidents and deaths, yet you think for some reason the sophisticated controls for a driverless car, both internal and external to the car, are going to be infallible? Except the disaster that results from those systems will be far more severe.
It's not just the controls. Won't their proximity sensors (if that's what they're called) be affected? Wouldn't those cars rely on GPS satellite's, which are much harder to protect? I'm sure there could be other issues that I can't think of right now.
Cars have hundreds, if not thousands of more conditions and needed inputs than an elevator. An elevator does not have to worry about weather, road conditions, other drivers, animals, people, stop lights, stop signs, caution lights, turns, corners, varying speed, miles of use, etc.
Even on the simplest driverless systems, accidents happen now;
And this is with a full support staff monitoring the system at all times, and ready to respond at all times to any problem. There is no way this kind of support can be made for millions of cars.
The most logical of driverless systems, trains, are not even here, let alone cars.
Did you read the report? Human error yet again. If the humans had followed their own procedures it would not have happened.
Autonomous will certainly not avoid all accidents. There will still be things like a general brake failure or a wheel falls off. It happens. But you will get rid of most of the accidents where judgement fails.
There are a number of fully automated rail systems working today.
Those airplanes are built at much higher requirements than the average car can be, even now they cannot get cars perfectly down, look at the recalls, for example the ignition switch, really? An ignition switch, a very simple item, caused some accidents and deaths, yet you think for some reason the sophisticated controls for a driverless car, both internal and external to the car, are going to be infallible? Except the disaster that results from those systems will be far more severe.
There is not a whole lot of difference. Semiconductor physics does not change when it flies. And while airplanes have more sophisticated shielding and sometimes higher redundancy they are also in a much worse environment. Lot more particles at 40,000 feet than at ground level.
The controls need not be infallible but simply a good bit better than a human...and that is not a very high standard. And the controls are mainly internal to the car...external stuff will be mostly advisory.
Did you read the report? Human error yet again. If the humans had followed their own procedures it would not have happened.
Autonomous will certainly not avoid all accidents. There will still be things like a general brake failure or a wheel falls off. It happens. But you will get rid of most of the accidents where judgement fails.
There are a number of fully automated rail systems working today.
No, not human error, the response to the indicators may have been human error, but the report clearly states it was a mechanical error that was the root cause of the accident.
But the origination of this was not automated cars, it was that I stated "operators will still be required in case of an emergency".
There are very few driverless trains in the world, and the degree of it being driverless varies, and there is a huge support staff for these driverless trains more so than cars will ever have. You are talking about a few trains on predictable routes, and trying to compare to millions of cars with numerous different routes.
It's not just the controls. Won't their proximity sensors (if that's what they're called) be affected? Wouldn't those cars rely on GPS satellite's, which are much harder to protect? I'm sure there could be other issues that I can't think of right now.
GPS is reasonably robust particularly as the Russian and European systems come on line. And it will be joined to inertial systems to keep things running when GPS goes away. These systems can make reasonable estimates of how accurate their position measurement is and simply park if it gets too wide.
Same with the sensors. If not operating at the required level the car stops.
There is not a whole lot of difference. Semiconductor physics does not change when it flies. And while airplanes have more sophisticated shielding and sometimes higher redundancy they are also in a much worse environment. Lot more particles at 40,000 feet than at ground level.
The controls need not be infallible but simply a good bit better than a human...and that is not a very high standard. And the controls are mainly internal to the car...external stuff will be mostly advisory.
There is a lot of difference, even the basic QA standards are much different for aircraft than for a car.
Anyway, you seem to be stretching for any thing to back your claims, but you have not provided any actual proof of your claims. You have not addressed the numerous recalls, the numerous electrical screw-ups that happen to older cars, the accidents that happen even with simple rail systems, etc. You are trivializing the driverless car system, ignoring all the faults that even happen currently (like the ignition switch fiasco).
You also did not address any of the legal issues involved, like who will be responsible for a wreck, will different states be allowed to have different requirements, will a certified operator still be required, what level of legally mandated maintenance will be required, etc.
As of now, electronic devices are rather finicky as is, whether it is Sirius dropping off, cell phones dropping reception, a car going into the shop for the third time because of an airbag light, having to have a flash to a car for the fifth time, corrupted firm ware on a router, etc. While all computerized products have these issues, the ones that can cause issues, like aircraft, have an extensive, and very costly support staff to ensure the aircraft stays maintained; there is no way cars can have this kind of support staff and still be cost effective.
GPS is reasonably robust particularly as the Russian and European systems come on line. And it will be joined to inertial systems to keep things running when GPS goes away. These systems can make reasonable estimates of how accurate their position measurement is and simply park if it gets too wide.
Same with the sensors. If not operating at the required level the car stops.
Sop basically, you are all for cars stopping everywhere over the littlest sensor issue, instead of just having a driver that can take manual control of the cars? You realize how many cars even now have sensor issues? Do you know anything about cars? As in have you worked on them, know people in the repair business, etc?
Do you have any experience actually working with GPS and inertia systems? Or is this just stuff you read somewhere? How much you think these things are going to cost? Along with the required by federal/state law maintenance, and the support staff required?
There is a lot of difference, even the basic QA standards are much different for aircraft than for a car.
Actually the aerospace industry uses devices which are much better known than commercial devices. That though does not say that they are in fact more reliable...just better known. And the downside is you basically have to deal with obsolescent or obsolete parts. Aerospace is often packaged at a level that commercial cannot approach but overall is old art and unlikely to perform as well as commercial stuff.
Quote:
Anyway, you seem to be stretching for any thing to back your claims, but you have not provided any actual proof of your claims. You have not addressed the numerous recalls, the numerous electrical screw-ups that happen to older cars, the accidents that happen even with simple rail systems, etc. You are trivializing the driverless car system, ignoring all the faults that even happen currently (like the ignition switch fiasco).
This is a theoretical discussion. I cannot possibly cite reality as it is not there yet.
Virtually all of the accidents that occur tend to come back to human error when running remote equipment.
Recalls are going to occur just like they do now. And there will be recalls of the autonomous systems. And if GM or someone decides to screw around with a fault they can probably do it.
The creation of an autonomous vehicle is a substantial undertaking with a huge number of issues to be dealt with. But none of them appear likely fatal. I think as far as the personal car is concerned we will evolve into it with semi autonomous vehicles eventually giving way to fully autonomous. I think trucks will follow a different path and will reach hard and fast for autonomy...the payoff is very high. And there may be some autonomous vehicles in between...the googlemobile used for taxi service in NY or Las Vegas.
Quote:
You also did not address any of the legal issues involved, like who will be responsible for a wreck, will different states be allowed to have different requirements, will a certified operator still be required, what level of legally mandated maintenance will be required, etc.
That all works out over time. I would think in general the manufacturer is responsible if the car is used properly.
That law is presently unfolding. We have cars on the road with advanced cruise control and are about to have many more. That will set the standard. If it all works out well the insurance companies may well be happy to pick up a lot of the cost...if it works badly the insurance companies will get even.
Quote:
As of now, electronic devices are rather finicky as is, whether it is Sirius dropping off, cell phones dropping reception, a car going into the shop for the third time because of an airbag light, having to have a flash to a car for the fifth time, corrupted firm ware on a router, etc. While all computerized products have these issues, the ones that can cause issues, like aircraft, have an extensive, and very costly support staff to ensure the aircraft stays maintained; there is no way cars can have this kind of support staff and still be cost effective.
Well designed electronics are very, very reliable. And these systems are of the sort where the manufacturers will try very hard to get it right. And the systems will be well supported. You can afford a reasonable support staff when you sell a million or more copies. I would think these systems will be loadable though I would not allow it on line. So a fix can often be quickly distributed when it is ready.
I would think the most dangerous thing is car guys will take chances to save manufacturing costs. Managing that in this area will be a challenge.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
