Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

driverless cars to hit california ( sorry!)


  • Please log in to reply
460 replies to this topic

#351 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,728 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 13 January 2014 - 05:47

It will not be a case of going out and buying the very first self driving car on the market and it will be able do everything possible.
Crawling along in peak hour traffic is probably the first place it will take over then probably freeway driving.

It will be a long time before you can drive the Birdsville Track hands free or take the drive thru at McDonalds from the passenger seat.



Advertisement

#352 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,535 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 13 January 2014 - 07:06

So who here has driven any of the enabling technologies? Lane following, auto cruise control, auto emergency braking, or parallel parking, for example? I've driven the last two, recntly, and ACC way back when it wasn't very good. The braking was literally breath taking, even against a foam target. Parallel parking was neat, in that it did wedge the car in very effectively, but slow. That is subjectively, I think objectively the robot parks faster than many humans because it has a good plan. Also, perhaps less obviously, it doesn't even try the really hard or impossible spots. Of the 3 algorithms I've heard about Toyota is the most cautious, and drives past 'easy' spots, Holden uses the highest maneuvering speeds, and supposedly Ford gets into the tightest spots (1.2m longer than the car).


Edited by Greg Locock, 13 January 2014 - 07:13.


#353 indigoid

indigoid
  • Member

  • 384 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 13 January 2014 - 07:23

So who here has driven any of the enabling technologies?

 

Only ACC, as mentioned earlier, and it was brilliant. The Golf we rented may well have had the fancypants lane stuff in it too (it seemed to have rather a lot of gadgetry in general) but I didn't think to look for it

 

Your comment about Holden's parallel parking speeds makes me wonder how it would respond to a pedestrian appearing behind the car while it was attempting to park... One would assume (hope?) that the auto-emergency-brake and auto-parallel-park can (co-)operate concurrently, but can it panic brake when it's reversing? I would hope that it works like that, as the blame for any incident should and probably would lay squarely with the driver, hands-off or no

 

edit: One thing I would really have appreciated when driving in Finland (and along the coast south of Sydney, also) is ACC that also automatically adjusted to speed limit changes, even if it only ever adjusted downwards. There were speed cameras everywhere and often a 100-80-camera-60-80-camera-100 or similar sequence with little obvious reason for it beyond revenue-raising. It really made getting around tiring, so many speed changes. After a few days I just gave up and left the cruise permanently on 80, even in faster areas. With the signpost recognition that seems to be a thing now this should be quite doable and more reliable than databases


Edited by indigoid, 13 January 2014 - 07:29.


#354 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,535 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 13 January 2014 - 23:12

The auto parking only turns the steering wheel, the driver is in control of all other functions. I don't know if anyone has autobraking in reverse, conceptually it is no harder than in forward.

 

I think that a hard wired speed limit system would be a litigation nightmare.



#355 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,364 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 13 January 2014 - 23:23

Can't see a problem with flooded roads. For example the autonomous vehicle could (would?) have 3D terrain mapping of all public roads, enabling it to calculate the exact depth of any water encountered.



#356 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 7,003 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 14 January 2014 - 09:40

Can't see a problem with flooded roads. For example the autonomous vehicle could (would?) have 3D terrain mapping of all public roads, enabling it to calculate the exact depth of any water encountered.


EXCEPT where a cow has sunk under the water or a huge pot hole has been opened up or debris has been washed across the road or...ohhhh, never mind :rolleyes:



#357 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,535 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 14 January 2014 - 18:28

I'm not sure if gruntguru was being serious, if he was, then no, they won't have the resolution.



#358 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 14 January 2014 - 20:36

Sonar? :p

 

If there is a will there is a way.


Edited by MatsNorway, 14 January 2014 - 20:38.


#359 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,535 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 14 January 2014 - 21:43

I know of one up and coming market where the ability to measure water depth before fording would be a real why-buy. At the moment they probably just throw 5 cents to some peasant and ask him to wade through ahead of them.



Advertisement

#360 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,668 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 14 January 2014 - 22:12

I know of one up and coming market where the ability to measure water depth before fording would be a real why-buy. At the moment they probably just throw 5 cents to some peasant and ask him to wade through ahead of them.

Oh come on, it may be a bit wet here in Surrey at the moment, but we haven't quite got to that point!    ;)



#361 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,728 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:20

Most car manufacturers already have a device in place that will automatically stop the engine when it enters 12" of water. 
It is done by the careful placement of the air intake behind the left hand headlight.



#362 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,364 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 15 January 2014 - 12:26

I'm not sure if gruntguru was being serious, if he was, then no, they won't have the resolution.

I was actually.

Only limited by the resolution of the terrain mapping which can easily be quite high. Car knows roughly where it is courtesy of GPS. Terrain map has the gradient info so the system can infer pretty accurately where the terrain is headed beyond the water's edge.



#363 GreenMachine

GreenMachine
  • Member

  • 791 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 16 January 2014 - 04:07

Terrain map has the gradient info so the system can infer pretty accurately where the terrain is headed

 

Last time I looked, a while back now, digital terrain models were too coarse for anything of this nature.  Gradient info is nice, but assumes a lot between the mapped points - and if the accuracy of the mapped points is not up to scratch ...



#364 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 7,003 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 16 January 2014 - 08:36

Terrain map has the gradient info so the system can infer pretty accurately where the terrain is headed
 
Last time I looked, a while back now, digital terrain models were too coarse for anything of this nature.  Gradient info is nice, but assumes a lot between the mapped points - and if the accuracy of the mapped points is not up to scratch ...


As someone who used to cross swollen rivers in the bush....all the terrain data in the world is no substitute for a fella walking a straight path across with a pole....EVEN THEN...two dopes on two strokes following me across too close, drowned their bikes because I found the submerged rock that the aforementioned fella missed :rolleyes:



#365 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,381 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 16 January 2014 - 09:11

One amusing anecdote about systems and fording deep water.

 

A Uk general newspaper had a new hybrid Range Rover on test so show it could be huge and green etc.

 

They did what you might expect a Range Rover to do and drove into a shallow ford,. the whole hybrid system apparently packed up as it's not water proof!

 

I think most hybrid cars have all the power gear up under the chassis with high voltage orange cables everywhere - not probably the best layout for large parts of the world

 

So can the auto systems analyse water depth via GPS/radar etc etc - probably yes - can you then drive through - probably not


Edited by mariner, 16 January 2014 - 09:18.


#366 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,364 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 16 January 2014 - 09:28

Fortunately the autonomous car will no doubt be programmed to not attempt the crossing in that case.



#367 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,728 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 16 January 2014 - 09:57

The autonomous car will hopefully be programmed to copy human behaviour and drive straight into the obviously flooded road.


 



#368 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 7,003 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 16 January 2014 - 10:37

Fortunately the autonomous car will no doubt be programmed to not attempt the crossing in that case.


Just lovely...miles from nowhere...and the mighty Autonomous car packs a hissy fit   :confused:



#369 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,364 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 16 January 2014 - 10:39

Hissy fit?

The human decides to take over. Drives it into the water Hissssssssss



#370 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,728 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 16 January 2014 - 10:53

Some people are expecting to sit in the back seat having a snooze while the car does all the work, it will still need someone competent in the chair to ready to take over.
 



#371 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,334 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 16 January 2014 - 11:56

That's where a possible problem could arise... take night time driving for example. If you are drowsy and struggling to stay awake at least being actively engaged in the driving will force you to stay alert and carry on or pull over and have rest. When guarding an autonomous system the temptation might be there to just let the car carry and and increase the chances of dosing off at the wheel.

 

A video I saw by an Audi employee on the subject raised an interesting question - autonomous cars may well reduce the occurrence of common driving accidents by 90% BUT it may introduce 10% of accidents that wouldn't have happened with human drivers. So, the question becomes do we accept some new accidents occurring whilst preventing more of the existing ones? Or are we happier with the self imposed collateral? Is 9 deaths caused by humans preferable to 1 caused by a computer?



#372 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,364 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 16 January 2014 - 12:20

Nope, and yet I don't think we will see fully autonomous vehicles on the market until those numbers are 99% and 1%.



#373 Dmitriy_Guller

Dmitriy_Guller
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 16 January 2014 - 13:43

Which is, of course, silly.  I don't think there are too many widows going "Well, at least it wasn't a computer that killed my husband".



#374 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 16 January 2014 - 15:55

There will for as long as i live be a demand that the potential driver can take over if something fails/breaks. So no home from the bar "driving"


Edited by MatsNorway, 16 January 2014 - 16:01.


#375 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,535 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 16 January 2014 - 22:05

I think the 90% vs 10% or 99:1 argument has been addressed previously. Most safety imrovements these days in aviation and in cars are assessed using a cost benefit analysis. So I suspect 9:1 would be enough to swing the argument. it would for me.



#376 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 7,003 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 16 January 2014 - 22:28

Human in the Loop conversation:

 

HAL9000: Do think it is safe to proceed across the flood swollen weir?

 

Drunk woken from snooze after several pints at the local: Yes (and don't bother me again!)

 

and

 

Comment re fully autonomous still requiring a "competent" human operator....they will probably need to incorporate some sort of "deadmans brake" like they have on trains...

 

and

 

where will you find competent after  a few years of autonomy? at the F1 auto (no mouse) racetracks?



#377 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 17 January 2014 - 15:13

Perhaps they make it so that the car is being able to call for an "external" driver to "step in" / take over by remote once the car calls and says it has trouble. Would feel kind of silly for the lightly toxicated passenger but hey.. can't row a small dingy either today while drunk so i guess its progress..


Edited by MatsNorway, 17 January 2014 - 15:14.


#378 JAW

JAW
  • Member

  • 225 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 18 January 2014 - 01:57

" Cant row a small dinghy either today while drunk" - is that a personal disclosure - M.N.? ..

 

Or did you mean it is now, in your neck of the woods - sanctioned as a punishable offence, if apprehended in the act? 



#379 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,364 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 18 January 2014 - 02:22

Which is, of course, silly.  I don't think there are too many widows going "Well, at least it wasn't a computer that killed my husband".

 

 

I think the 90% vs 10% or 99:1 argument has been addressed previously. Most safety imrovements these days in aviation and in cars are assessed using a cost benefit analysis. So I suspect 9:1 would be enough to swing the argument. it would for me.

 

The problem is not one of insurance or motor companies feeling confident. (not intended to be personal Dmitriy or Greg)

 

Humans have a morbid fear of dying in a crash where we have no control. Why do you think we obsess over airline crashes (500 fatalities per annum) but shrug off road accident statistics (1,000,000 + p.a.) and fearlessly slide behind the wheel on a regular basis.

 

You only have to read the rubbish on this thread and its predecessor from all the folks who would trust their own skill over an autonomous car, to recognise that the real hurdle is getting the buyer to "feel" safe about putting his life in the hands of a computer.



Advertisement

#380 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,477 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 18 January 2014 - 10:59

The problem is not one of insurance or motor companies feeling confident. (not intended to be personal Dmitriy or Greg)

 

Humans have a morbid fear of dying in a crash where we have no control. Why do you think we obsess over airline crashes (500 fatalities per annum) but shrug off road accident statistics (1,000,000 + p.a.) and fearlessly slide behind the wheel on a regular basis.

 

You only have to read the rubbish on this thread and its predecessor from all the folks who would trust their own skill over an autonomous car, to recognise that the real hurdle is getting the buyer to "feel" safe about putting his life in the hands of a computer.

 

It is far easier to teach someone to fly than it is to teach them to drive properly (my father was an RAF flying instructor, so I assume that he knew whereof he spoke), as flying has very few variables when compared driving in traffic, with the added component that there is nearly always someone available to tell you where you should be and how to get there and warn you of imminent dangers when flying - The automatic landing software for the HS146 was a 2k piece of code (I know the man responsible for it when he worked at BAe, lest you feel inclined to argue the point).

 

Last night I caught the second half of Mastermind, in which a contestant was asked "In women's tennis, what is a double bagel?" I had never heard the expression yet, without the slightest hesitation I answered "6-0 6-0". The ability of the human brain to correctly solve a problem without any a priori knowledge, only context, is what distinguishes man from computer. My brain, which is not in any way special, instantaneously connected the O shape of a bagel with the number 0 and filled in the gap, and I mean instantaneously, Humphries hadn't finished asking the question before the answer was being uttered. My wife, a class player in her time (coached by the man himself, Dan Maskell) who watches every tennis tournament that Sky televise, said that she had never heard the expression, I certainly hadn't.

 

The computers in self-driving cars really need to have the ability to deduce from context, as terrain mapping (knowledge of the topography of the locus in quo) is a very small part of the ability to drive a car, a very small part indeed, after all, we all drive down unfamiliar roads with no difficulty at all, we see and interpret, we don't need to be told that the road bends to the left, we can see the lamp standards, the hedgerows, the line of the buildings - When I was about 11, an older fellow pupil told me that he had for a long time thought that his uncle, the only car owner in the family, was a genius, after all, wherever they went in England he remembered all the places where you had to change gear...


Edited by Bloggsworth, 18 January 2014 - 11:00.


#381 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 18 January 2014 - 12:43

" Cant row a small dinghy either today while drunk" - is that a personal disclosure - M.N.? ..

 

Or did you mean it is now, in your neck of the woods - sanctioned as a punishable offence, if apprehended in the act? 

 

In my neck of woods you get a fine for not having a floatvest in the boat. (wich you do not have to use) so yea they would help you in land and take you to the station and give a fine if your over the alcohol limit.


Edited by MatsNorway, 18 January 2014 - 12:46.


#382 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 13,072 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 18 January 2014 - 19:42

It is far easier to teach someone to fly than it is to teach them to drive properly (my father was an RAF flying instructor, so I assume that he knew whereof he spoke), as flying has very few variables when compared driving in traffic, with the added component that there is nearly always someone available to tell you where you should be and how to get there and warn you of imminent dangers when flying - The automatic landing software for the HS146 was a 2k piece of code (I know the man responsible for it when he worked at BAe, lest you feel inclined to argue the point).

 

Last night I caught the second half of Mastermind, in which a contestant was asked "In women's tennis, what is a double bagel?" I had never heard the expression yet, without the slightest hesitation I answered "6-0 6-0". The ability of the human brain to correctly solve a problem without any a priori knowledge, only context, is what distinguishes man from computer. My brain, which is not in any way special, instantaneously connected the O shape of a bagel with the number 0 and filled in the gap, and I mean instantaneously, Humphries hadn't finished asking the question before the answer was being uttered. My wife, a class player in her time (coached by the man himself, Dan Maskell) who watches every tennis tournament that Sky televise, said that she had never heard the expression, I certainly hadn't.

 

The computers in self-driving cars really need to have the ability to deduce from context, as terrain mapping (knowledge of the topography of the locus in quo) is a very small part of the ability to drive a car, a very small part indeed, after all, we all drive down unfamiliar roads with no difficulty at all, we see and interpret, we don't need to be told that the road bends to the left, we can see the lamp standards, the hedgerows, the line of the buildings - When I was about 11, an older fellow pupil told me that he had for a long time thought that his uncle, the only car owner in the family, was a genius, after all, wherever they went in England he remembered all the places where you had to change gear...

 

Each approach has its upsides and downsides. The only relevant question should be: which is safer in actual practice? If autonomously piloted vehicles are objectively safer, the downsides are essentially irrelevant.



#383 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,477 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 18 January 2014 - 20:01

Each approach has its upsides and downsides. The only relevant question should be: which is safer in actual practice? If autonomously piloted vehicles are objectively safer, the downsides are essentially irrelevant.

 

If.

 

People here talk about terrain mapping - Really? The whole world mapped to the last millimetre every day of the year and contemporaneously updated? I think not. A few weeks ago I drove a route I have been using, fairly regularly since 1965, I turned off road A into road B to be greeted by hooting, the flashing of lights and much arm waving and gesticulation from taxi drivers - Overnight they had made the road a one-way street and I was going the wrong way. Would my self-driving car have updated overnight?


Edited by Bloggsworth, 18 January 2014 - 20:01.


#384 JAW

JAW
  • Member

  • 225 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 18 January 2014 - 21:12

& then there is question of blame if/when something goes wrong..

 

Functional outputs contingent on quality of data input..

 

Look at the case of the Air France Airbus that crashed into the Atlantic  - when the pilots, so used to

obeying the comprehensive automation, totally got their role wrong when the automation cut out

in the instance of basic pitot data-input failure..



#385 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,364 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 18 January 2014 - 23:18

Each approach has its upsides and downsides. The only relevant question should be: which is safer in actual practice? If autonomously piloted vehicles are objectively safer, the downsides are essentially irrelevant.

 

 

If.

 Your doubts won't count for much. It will be relatively easy to demonstrate the relative safety of any proposed autonomous system and its human controlled counterpart - before it ever gets to market. By all accounts the Google car is already safer - and these are very early days.



#386 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 22 January 2014 - 00:49

4r33.jpg



#387 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,668 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 22 January 2014 - 13:24

4r33.jpg

And this of course did in fact happen in 1959 (or whenever) as predicted..... so much for predictions.

 

What I expect to happen is the gradual combining of existing technologies.  We have cruise control on nearly everything, there is lane crossing control, and automatic braking.  Put these together, plus the auto-park function and you are well on the road to self-driving.  But still requiring a human in control.  I do not see a totally unmanned vehicle (as in the picture) any time soon, or ever.



#388 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 22 January 2014 - 13:55

And this of course did in fact happen in 1959 (or whenever) as predicted..... so much for predictions.

 

What I expect to happen is the gradual combining of existing technologies.  We have cruise control on nearly everything, there is lane crossing control, and automatic braking.  Put these together, plus the auto-park function and you are well on the road to self-driving.  But still requiring a human in control.  I do not see a totally unmanned vehicle (as in the picture) any time soon, or ever.

 

I see it happening first on turnpikes like in the illustration -- with limited vehicle access, one-way travel,  and a short, simple, rigid list of autonomous driving commands. 

 

I used to see it the other way: that driving was such a highly complicated and variable-rich activity that machines could never take the place of humans. Then I realized it is the humans that make it so complicated -- far more complicated than it needs to be. 



#389 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 6,024 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:15

If.
 
People here talk about terrain mapping - Really? The whole world mapped to the last millimetre every day of the year and contemporaneously updated? I think not. A few weeks ago I drove a route I have been using, fairly regularly since 1965, I turned off road A into road B to be greeted by hooting, the flashing of lights and much arm waving and gesticulation from taxi drivers - Overnight they had made the road a one-way street and I was going the wrong way. Would my self-driving car have updated overnight?

And look at Nuz Zealand. With their earthquakes the straight roads are now curvy,and undulating and some suburbs have succumbed to the quagmire. There is a thousand and one updates to the earths crust every hour with earthworks, floods, quakes, fires, etc etc. And many so called upmarket GPS devices send you the wrong way. In one case I know it presumed the coastline was a road! Meaning the info is out of date or wrong as it is mapped. GPS can be a great navigation AID,, to a thinking human. Not to drive a bloody car!

#390 indigoid

indigoid
  • Member

  • 384 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 23 January 2014 - 13:55



And look at Nuz Zealand. With their earthquakes the straight roads are now curvy,and undulating and some suburbs have succumbed to the quagmire. There is a thousand and one updates to the earths crust every hour with earthworks, floods, quakes, fires, etc etc. And many so called upmarket GPS devices send you the wrong way. In one case I know it presumed the coastline was a road! Meaning the info is out of date or wrong as it is mapped. GPS can be a great navigation AID,, to a thinking human. Not to drive a bloody car!

 

This is why the roadsign-reading software is a big deal. Also for handling temporary conditions like roadworks. Be as sceptical as you like, but Google's driverless cars have already been extremely successful with current technology. I doubt any of these attempts to increase autonomy in cars have an immutable dependency upon maps or probably even GPS satellites. As you say, the databases are never current.

 

If we pooh-poohed every new technology that came along, we wouldn't even have newspapers to which we could send our snarky letters about the irresponsible youth of today, written out in longhand with a sharpened feather dipped in basilisk blood. Or, for that matter, the vellum upon which to inscribe said snarky letters.



#391 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 7,003 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 23 January 2014 - 21:24

I see it happening first on turnpikes like in the illustration -- with limited vehicle access, one-way travel,  and a short, simple, rigid list of autonomous driving commands.


So Bill...was that because the Toll Roads were "privately" or "locally" owned and therefore not subject to state or federal highway codes etc ??



#392 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,364 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:37

If we pooh-poohed every new technology that came along . . . .

 

But we do - at least some of us do. I love those lists of famous quotes by nay-sayers - you know - the ones that missed the mark by about 180 degrees.

 

http://retirefund.bl...uotes-from.html



#393 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 7,003 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 24 January 2014 - 10:12

But we do - at least some of us do. I love those lists of famous quotes by nay-sayers - you know - the ones that missed the mark by about 180 degrees.
 
http://retirefund.bl...uotes-from.html


and then there were the other people who stood back a distance and said...."whhhhooooa, this can only end in tears!"



#394 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,477 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 24 January 2014 - 10:30

 

This is why the roadsign-reading software is a big deal. Also for handling temporary conditions like roadworks. Be as sceptical as you like, but Google's driverless cars have already been extremely successful with current technology. I doubt any of these attempts to increase autonomy in cars have an immutable dependency upon maps or probably even GPS satellites. As you say, the databases are never current.

 

If we pooh-poohed every new technology that came along, we wouldn't even have newspapers to which we could send our snarky letters about the irresponsible youth of today, written out in longhand with a sharpened feather dipped in basilisk blood. Or, for that matter, the vellum upon which to inscribe said snarky letters.

 

What? Signage like this on the A3 in Raynes Park?

 

article-2048696-013D7E6900001005-640_634



#395 indigoid

indigoid
  • Member

  • 384 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 25 January 2014 - 21:13

What? Signage like this on the A3 in Raynes Park?
]

Give way!

That's a nicely cherry-picked example of difficult but real-world conditions. Only the give-way and no-right-turn signs are really that important though

Edited by indigoid, 25 January 2014 - 21:19.


#396 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,477 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 25 January 2014 - 22:43

Give way!

That's a nicely cherry-picked example of difficult but real-world conditions. Only the give-way and no-right-turn signs are really that important though

 

Fairly common in the UK, here's a few more:

 

1_Sign.jpg

 

2_Sign.jpg

 

 

3_Sign.jpg

 

 

 

 

5_Sign.png

 

 

6_Sign.png

 

7_Sign.jpg


Edited by Bloggsworth, 25 January 2014 - 22:51.


#397 JAW

JAW
  • Member

  • 225 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 26 January 2014 - 01:13

Ye gods.. such clutter, & where's a bloody Dalek - when you need it?



#398 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 7,003 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 26 January 2014 - 06:29

Ye gods.. such clutter, & where's a bloody Dalek - when you need it?

article-2048696-013D7E6900001005-640_634


Didn't you notice the two observing earthly activity here? :well:



#399 JAW

JAW
  • Member

  • 225 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 26 January 2014 - 08:02

Oh dear.. yes.. thanks - well spotted indeed, & they're disguised as speed cameras too  - the bastards..



Advertisement

#400 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,381 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 26 January 2014 - 18:34

I recently went to the UK research site where the world's first auto landing syem was developed for BEA. The standard set was one failure in 10 miliion reckoned to be ten times better than a human pilot risk level.

 

That started me thinking about this thread - not the abilty or not of systems to drive cars but the operating philosohy.

 

Auto land is RATHER critical so it is well developed.Nonetheless a plane has one big advantage over a car - it can move anywhere in 3D space if needed subject to nearby aircraft so as to retry any approach.

 

A car can't to do that - it can only move slightly left or right, accelerate or stop. So in many ways its a tougher environment.

 

More fundementally the one thing a flight crew does NOT do is let the sytems land , or even fly, the plane without monitoring. You seldom see the flight crew back in the cabin as a plane auto lands at , say, Heathrow in bad visibilty.

 

Despite landing sytems with better than one error risk in ten million the airline industry still expects the "driver" to be monitoring the system ready to intervene. That is very, very different to the sales pitch for  driverless cars. " It will drive itself safer than you can".

 

However good the systems become they will fail. Then the legal reponsibility of the " driver" wil be at issue. It would not surprise me at all if the " driver" is held to be always responsible for monitoring the car just as the pilot is during auto land etc.

 

That may sound trivial or obvious but it removes two big social advantages of driverless cars - the elderly/blind and the  young will not be able to use them autonomously and thus they wont add to total personal mobility beyond current cars. Also no driver wil be able to stop watching the road ahead etc. unles he wants to drive without valid  insurance cover.


Edited by mariner, 26 January 2014 - 18:36.