Driverless cars?

[XFool]

'Self-driving' cars to be allowed on UK roads this year

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56906145

"Self-driving" vehicles could be allowed on UK roads by the end of this year, the government has said.

And the latest news is this is to go ahead, but drivers must keep their eyes on the road and this will be monitored.

'Hands-off' self-driving now legal in the UK with Ford first to offer tech

Autocar

American car maker will offer BlueCruise as a £17.99-a-month option for use on 2300 miles of UK motorway

"BlueCruise still requires the driver’s attention to be on the road, though, and is dubbed a “hands-off, eyes-on” feature – given it is not fully autonomous level three, where the car can take over entirely in certain situations. This means the driver must remain ‘in the loop’, while the car controls the driving functions."

So, my question is: What is the point of "Driverless" cars?

I can easily see the point of driverless cars as shown in science fiction films. No human driver position, jump in car, tell car where to go, ignore driving and just get out at destination - a true driverless car.

But what is the point of driverless cars that need a driver to continually pay attention to the driving and take over at a moments notice. To me, that sounds as tiring, if not more so, than simply driving the car oneself.

[88V8]

So, my question is: What is the point of "Driverless" cars?
I can easily see the point of driverless cars as shown in science fiction films. No human driver position, jump in car, tell car where to go, ignore driving and just get out at destination - a true driverless car.
But what is the point of driverless cars that need a driver to continually pay attention to the driving and take over at a moments notice. To me, that sounds as tiring, if not more so, than simply driving the car oneself.

Wossa point... I wondered that.
Sit there worrying whether the autopilot is going to cock things up.
And the temptation to fiddle with one's phone will, for some people, be quite irresistible.

Another case of gadgets for gadget's sake, methinks.

V8

[CliffEdge]

Don't worry someone will be along in the minute to tell you.

[DrFfybes]

So, my question is: What is the point of "Driverless" cars?

I can easily see the point of driverless cars as shown in science fiction films. No human driver position, jump in car, tell car where to go, ignore driving and just get out at destination - a true driverless car.

But what is the point of driverless cars that need a driver to continually pay attention to the driving and take over at a moments notice. To me, that sounds as tiring, if not more so, than simply driving the car oneself.

The point is that this is a stepping stone technology, it gets it out there and throroughly tested in the real world, gets people used to it, and gets it accepted.

It is being introduced in limited circumstances, ones where accidents are less frequent (although the consequences tend to be greater due to greater speeds), but it gets it out there and accepted. And if they can show in a few years that the 'driverless' cars on these stretches are safer than traditional ones, then that opens to door for expanding the technology, and it gives the manufacturers huge amounts of data to hone their product.

There are a lot of people who can't wait for driverless cars, and a lot who are equally opposed. But the theory is that driverless cars will be safer, they don't get distracted, fall asleep, use their phones or watch youtube at 60mph, and the safety net of a driver behind the wheel ready to take over will become less of a chore until most people aren't bothering to pay any attention to the road, and total driverless takeover becomes the norm.

I don't do as much long distance motorway driving as I used to, but when we were going to Devon each week the ability to hit an "auto" button as we reached the M54 and turn it off again 3 hours later at the end of the M5 would have been extremely welcome a lot of the time.

Paul.

[tjh290633]

Remember that this is only for approved stretches of motorway. Presumably once on the M25 you will go round in ever decreasing circles until you wake up.

Whether it can follow a route provided by Google Maps to change Motorways is another matter. Personally I find the ability to set the speed limiter at a true 70mph on dual carriageway means that I can forget about speed cameras when that is the limit. Unlike cruise control I can ease off if required, without changing the setting.

TJH

[mc2fool]

But what is the point of driverless cars that need a driver to continually pay attention to the driving and take over at a moments notice. To me, that sounds as tiring, if not more so, than simply driving the car oneself.

I think it's potentially worse than that. A number of the Tesla crashes have been blamed on the driver not paying enough attention to take over at an instant's notice, and the trouble with that analysis seems to me that the better the cars get at self driving (until they get to the no-steering-wheel level 5) the more they are going to lull the driver into a false sense of security.

I expect that for the first hour or so after most drivers first get behind the wheel of a less than level 5 car they will have their fingers poised to leap onto the steering wheel in an instant. But as the car does its thing they will naturally relax, (hey, it works!), and the longer it works without incident the more they'll let their minds and attention drift to other things. The consequent paradox here is that the "stepping stone" driver-attention-required "driverless" cars may end up in more crashes than a manual car.

[CliffEdge]

But what is the point of driverless cars that need a driver to continually pay attention to the driving and take over at a moments notice. To me, that sounds as tiring, if not more so, than simply driving the car oneself.

I think it's potentially worse than that. A number of the Tesla crashes have been blamed on the driver not paying enough attention to take over at an instant's notice, and the trouble with that analysis seems to me that the better the cars get at self driving (until they get to the no-steering-wheel level 5) the more they are going to lull the driver into a false sense of security.

I expect that for the first hour or so after most drivers first get behind the wheel of a less than level 5 car they will have their fingers poised to leap onto the steering wheel in an instant. But as the car does its thing they will naturally relax, (hey, it works!), and the longer it works without incident the more they'll let their minds and attention drift to other things. The consequent paradox here is that the "stepping stone" driver-attention-required "driverless" cars may end up in more crashes than a manual car.

Who will get the blame when the inevitable massive carnage happens?

[AF62]

But what is the point of driverless cars that need a driver to continually pay attention to the driving and take over at a moments notice. To me, that sounds as tiring, if not more so, than simply driving the car oneself.

My car doesn't have the full automated driving that this Ford does, but it does quite a long way towards this with Adaptive Cruise Control and Lane Following Assist (amongst other driver assistance), which means that on the motorway although you need to keep your hands on the wheel the car is accelerating, braking, and steering without you doing much at all - and that's an awful lot more relaxing than doing it yourself even if you do need to keep an eye on what is going on.

It is absolutely perfect in exceptionally heavy traffic as it even works down to 0mph, so the system will drive the car without you needing to do almost anything even when the traffic is stop/start.

The point is that this is a stepping stone technology, it gets it out there and thoroughly tested in the real world, gets people used to it, and gets it accepted.

Yep, show it works fine on motorways and then gradually introduce it elsewhere.

Remember that this is only for approved stretches of motorway.

The system has been mapped for 2,300 miles of motorway in the UK, which is pretty much the whole of the motorway network.

Who will get the blame when the inevitable massive carnage happens?

Currently the driver as they are 'driving' the car with assistance, but in the future for fully automated cars it will be the manufacturer - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/self ... oad-safety

"The new laws for the safe rollout of self-driving vehicles by 2025 will be brought forward when parliamentary time allows.

The legislation will build on existing laws, and state that manufacturers are responsible for the vehicle’s actions when self-driving, meaning a human driver would not be liable for incidents related to driving while the vehicle is in control of driving."

[BobbyD]

So, my question is: What is the point of "Driverless" cars?

I can easily see the point of driverless cars as shown in science fiction films. No human driver position, jump in car, tell car where to go, ignore driving and just get out at destination - a true driverless car.

But what is the point of driverless cars that need a driver to continually pay attention to the driving and take over at a moments notice. To me, that sounds as tiring, if not more so, than simply driving the car oneself.

Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out.

...also one has to assume they think it will sell cars.

There are proper level 3 systems out there, but you currently have to buy a Merc to get one, and the roll out seems to be quite slow. It would be nice for the industry to jump the level 2/3 chasm, but it's likely to take a while.

[csearle]

I wonder if they have programmed the cars to sit in lane two of three-lane motorways in order to reduce the throughput of the motorway, mimicking so many UK human drivers?

Chris

[Lanark]

If you can't fall asleep in it, it is not a self driving car.

[marronier]

Given that the speed limit in motorway roadworks had to be lifted from 50 mph to 60 mph because drivers were having heart palpitations and high blood pressure leading to a risk of cardiac arrest then driverless cars at 30 mph in urban areas is likely over time to promote an epidemic of heart attacks among fuming frustrated motorists. Imagine a world with half the cars driven by "dawdling elderly drivers".

[quelquod]

Personally I find the ability to set the speed limiter at a true 70mph on dual carriageway means that I can forget about speed cameras when that is the limit. Unlike cruise control I can ease off if required, without changing the setting.

TJH

I do too. It also has the advantage over cruise control that it doesn’t unnecessarily wear the brakes on moderate overspeeding but just allows the car to return to the limit after a minor downhill stretch.

(Sorry for the OT.)

[csearle]

A trouble is though that if a car's system ends up with its driving at 69 in the middle lane then it just pisses off all those drivers that want to drive at 70 in lane 1.

[CliffEdge]

Given that the speed limit in motorway roadworks had to be lifted from 50 mph to 60 mph because drivers were having heart palpitations and high blood pressure leading to a risk of cardiac arrest then driverless cars at 30 mph in urban areas is likely over time to promote an epidemic of heart attacks among fuming frustrated motorists. Imagine a world with half the cars driven by "dawdling elderly drivers".

In my town the speed limit is 30mph. For those who don't know, this means you are not supposed to go faster than that. This is to improve safety in an urban environment which is considered desirable by good people.

[tjh290633]

A trouble is though that if a car's system ends up with its driving at 69 in the middle lane then it just pisses off all those drivers that want to drive at 70 in lane 1.

Should not the system automatically return the car to the left hand lane, if that is empty?

TJH

[UncleEbenezer]

If you can't fall asleep in it, it is not a self driving car.

Self-driving means
(a) I can be in charge of one even if I can't drive (e.g. medical reasons, or no licence). The big liberator for many as age takes its toll on the faculties and reaction times.
(b) I can use an app to summon one to come and collect me when I need to go somewhere not served by a decent alternative.

Hopefully it'll also mean
(c) Stronger and better-enforced rules about who is fit to drive, rather than "blind as a bat by age 80 but we can't take it away" or the "carelessly killed a kid, but a ban would be excessive hardship" types of attitude.

[moorfield]

Self-driving haulage is a future industry to watch I think. Whoever can stretch or circumvent their tacho times will have the competitive advantage. And all those vehicles can stay put in lane 1 and not annoy csearle or the rest of us. Bonus points to the firms who can site distribution centres right on our major motorways and ports.

[swill453]

If you can't fall asleep in it, it is not a self driving car.

Self-driving means
(a) I can be in charge of one even if I can't drive (e.g. medical reasons, or no licence). The big liberator for many as age takes its toll on the faculties and reaction times.
(b) I can use an app to summon one to come and collect me when I need to go somewhere not served by a decent alternative.

Unfortunately we'll probably all be dead before that level of autonomy is available. It's coming, but it's decades away.

Scott.

[Hallucigenia]

If you can't fall asleep in it, it is not a self driving car.

Self-driving means
(a) I can be in charge of one even if I can't drive (e.g. medical reasons, or no licence). The big liberator for many as age takes its toll on the faculties and reaction times.

...and when going to the pub!