[Closed] "Driverless" trucks

I'd like to see one that doesn't have an iPad constantly streaming Pron whilst the drivers "driving"

Any chance ?

I was thinking about this while cycling round Canada wierdly -just thinking about career moves mostly .

What will be the biggest hurdle in automated vehicles.

It'll be the unions and legislation of course.

Just look at the trains. In theory trains should be the easiest thing in the world to automate or at least run remotely . Unions and legislation have then unable to do so.

Most drive pretty close together already and if it stops some of them taking three or four miles to overtake, then I'm all for it.

Roads too busy? Well why not try three in the morning? Don't move the stuff at peak times. Surely if it's using the motorway network these town/cities are mainly covered by the rail network work. Instead of roadtrains why not tracktrains?

Imagine the tailbacks caused by one "train" overtaking another with a speed differential of 0.25mph as seems to happen now.

Because our country insists on a train every 3 minutes to everywhere our lines are as congested as our roads and a majority of the freight handling lines and areas are gone/minimised as they were in prime retail and residential space in the middle of town.

Certainly what's happened up here.

Why is it a crap idea?

Less prostitutes getting murdered in truckstops too.

Having spent a lot of time driving on shared roads with enormous terrifying autonomous mine trucks I reckon convoys on motorways is probably easier. Wouldn't surprise me though if initially it's one driven truck with others slaved to it plus autonomous safety systems.

It's called Platooning and it's being promoted by Peloton Technology (cheeky theft of a name there). It looks pretty sensible, you can see it explained here. It's no worse than what truck drivers already do to save fuel: https://peloton-tech.com/

Love the laconic lift of the fingers at the moment of separation.

Do the standby drivers in the following trucks have to be ready to react and step in immediately to prevent an incident?
I couldn't imagine staring at the back of another truck for 4 hours primed and alert just in case and then being able to react in time. I'd probably be day dreaming about something completely unrelated and only notice when my face in in the back of the truck in front.

t's called Platooning and it's being promoted by Peloton Technology (cheeky theft of a name there). It looks pretty sensible, you can see it explained here. It's no worse than what truck drivers already do to save fuel: https://peloton-tech.com/

Thats fine so why is the UK tax payer stumping up £8.5m to trial it rather than the haulage companies who stand to benefit from it.

Autonomous drivers can only make trucks safer. I've no objection if a lorry driver wants to follow another truck with a six-foot gap, but HGVs tailgating other cars must be the most dangerous thing you can see on the motorways.

Even at a GPS-indicated 55mph in a 50 zone you'll find a lorry sat on your bumper in lane one, full beams on in encouragement to go faster. It's not as if they're not watching TV / porn / movies / the microwave / newspaper etc in the cab already.

I suggested a while a go on another thread that driverless trucks would be more widespread than cars initially. Makes loads of sense, safer, more fuel efficient, reduce congestion (night time running), 24hr running no rest stops, less likely to be hijacked pulled over at night. Lorry driver is not a career to be considering moving into today.

Do you remember at school, being taught the relationship between rabbit and fox populations? Well truck driver and prostitute populations are the same. If the truck driver levels drop, there will be nothing keeping the hooker count down, and before you know it, they'll be everywhere, the country will be knee deep in brasses.
Don't say you haven't be warned.

They call them trains...

I'm all for it. Although the footage on the news this morning still showed some big gaps between trucks, bigger than the human drivers seem to leave at the moment! Surely the more efficient implementation would be to actually couple the trucks together and link the engine, steering and braking systems electronically to keep them going in a straight line? I.e. more like trains.

Only problem is junctions, longer "platoon's" are going to block slip roads as they pass?

Although I'd be more in favour of solving that by of putting an actual 55mph speed limit on the 'slow lane', banning overtaking on slip roads and install CCTV cameras to catch the shittiest drivers who feel the need to floor it/stand on the brakes to make the slip road cutting up the other traffic rather than just merging with everyone else.

My concern is people joining motorways with 3 trucks sat in the inside lane. See way to many people joining 'bunched up' already. when they realise there's 3 hgvs where thay want to be it'll be chaos.

Instead of roadtrains why not tracktrains?

majority of the freight handling lines and areas are gone/minimised as they were in prime retail and residential space in the middle of town.

Southampton (UKs 2nd busiest container port) residents have rejected a rail freight depot because of noise. Even if you hadsomewhere to unload the containers they can't load any more.

Look at the video I linked above. It's actually no different from what executive cars can already do if they are equipped with "follow me" cruise control. The government is wringing the last bit of capacity out of our roads with smart motorways, which use exterior stimuli to encourage drivers to bunch together so it won't be long before all cars are using follow me technology in heavy traffic in the same way as those trucks. It makes complete sense.

The main benefit is fuel saving for the operators but its being sold as an enviromental benefit

You will need to explain why it can't be both at the same time.
I'm not getting it.

...and it's a crap idea anyway

Why ?

The argument that truck drivers have for overtaking another truck at 0.25mph more is usually something to do with the gearing and load combinations being so fine. Does this debunk that or will one of the trucks in the train always be in the wrong gear?

If the distance it leaves is more than a driver currently leaves cars will cut in to that gap and the gap will get bigger and bigger until the truck behind is no longer 'connected' to the one in front. My car has active cruise control and even set to the closest following setting (which is scary when your foot is not it it's normal position next to the brake) other cars continually cut in to the gap, my car them slows and re-establishes the gap, another car cuts in .......

Automated trucks and cars are the future and I'm looking forward to when they all are, the transition will be messy though.

[img] [/img]

[quote=globalti ]Love the laconic lift of the fingers at the moment of separation.

I'm expecting slightly different gestures with the fingers if they do it in the UK.

Most drive pretty close together already and if it stops some of them taking three or four miles to overtake, then I'm all for it.

Oh this!

I've been thinking a lot recently about roads, transport and the environment - I still believe we could reduce traffic massively by letting people work from home, but that needs a big shift in thought.

I've spent a lot of time on the motorway this week, everyone moans about the standards of driving in the UK (and most have a point) but it's always someone else - at peak times there's typically 20 cars in a long snaking queue in lane 3 at 60-80 constantly accelerating and braking because 1) the guy in front is taking the piss 2) if you don't someone will cut you up.

The "don't hog lane 2" law that passed a few years ago hasn't really helped - I believe there's been a single conviction in 4 years. but I think we could do something by stopping lorries passing each other at 0.001 mph faster - I originally thought about allowing them a sort of DRS system - a button to lift the limiter to 65mph for 2 mins to make a quicker pass, but as most are set at 56 by the owners to limit fuel use, it seems unlikely.

I'd enforce a 'no pass' rule during peak times - enforced by sniper on over-passes. Honestly it's horribly anti-social, and it causes the sort of "if I don't do him, he'll do me" thinking that makes our motorways such hell to drive on. You're there to do a job, you're limited to 56, the next one is limited to 56 - don't pull out (cutting people up as you go) for the 15 seconds you're faster than him because he's carrying more weight uphill because you shuffle everyone else into lane 3 and cause big jams.

I one spent more than 7 hours driving from Sheffield to Cardiff which should take half that, because every stretch of 2 lane motorway was jammed with truckers taking the piss.

[quote=cheers_drive ]If the distance it leaves is more than a driver currently leaves cars will cut in to that gap

I'm expecting this will mostly (exclusively?) be used on motorways and DCs in the UK. How many cars tend to cut in close behind a truck on the motorway?

Seems an eminently sensible idea to me if it can be done properly - in fact exactly the sort of thing I've always thought adding automation to vehicles should enable. Benefits in fuel economy (hence cost to the operator and environmental benefits) and in terms of road capacity. Sure there are some issues such as trains of lorries passing slip roads - maybe you just have to increase the gap after every 2nd lorry when passing a slip road to give joining vehicles a gap, maybe you have detect joining vehicles and open a gap if necessary.

I one spent more than 7 hours driving from Sheffield to Cardiff which should take half that, because every stretch of 2 lane motorway was jammed with truckers taking the piss.

I'm expecting this will mostly (exclusively?) be used on motorways and DCs in the UK. How many cars tend to cut in close behind a truck on the motorway?

Have you ever seen a motorway?

er, yes, they're where most car drivers don't bother using the left lane (not if there's a truck less than half a mile in front) - what's your point?

er, yes,

Then you'll observe some tit in a 3 series/A4/X5/RR-Sport at seemingly every junction slam on the brakes in the outside lane, cut across the other two lanes and chevrons and barge his way into the queue of traffic on the sliproad.

Probably doesn't cause too many accidents at the moment because no one has time to react to him. Imagine the chaos when a computer tries to avoid him.......

Even without the loonies, leave a 2second gap on the M4 at rushour and before you can lift off from the last one, someone else will have pulled into the gap.

I'm expecting this will mostly (exclusively?) be used on motorways and DCs in the UK. How many cars tend to cut in close behind a truck on the motorway?

As someone who drives a 44 tonne artic I can assure you plenty cut in front of trucks on motorways.
Best one so far this year? Rushour on the M61 I'm in the inside lane,at the very last second some idiot in a Merc comes flying across to go down the slip road.Unfortunately for him the slip road is queuing back up to the motorway carriageway.There was no way he could stop in time,there's a load of dust flying in the air & he ended up on the slip road hard shoulder in front of 3 queuing cars.That's the most stupid one,I can recall a few more...

Usual turd polishing idea by companies & road lobby favouring politicians who are looking to make money out of it.

They call them trains...

Trains and sensibly located distribution centres - a bit like the integrated goods distribution system that the country used to have before the road lobby got their agenda through.

at the very last second some idiot in a Merc comes flying across to go down the slip road

That happens to car drivers too.

How does the driverless truck get from the narrow back road, along the A roads and multiple traffic lights to the nice utopian motorway?

I know even having mates following in their car its often too easy to get split up at traffic lights and roundabouts. Does the first truck decide to pull out when clear/on green light, and then the other 2 trucks just think **** it and pull out too ?

You can see some pretty spectacular crahes happening too on dual carriage ways where people try and slot in betweeen the lorries.

How often will three trucks need to go to the same destination. Krispy Kremes for the local police station apart.

On the motorways they can travel in convoy, but what happens when one needs to turn off?

I've always called it elephant racing as it reminds me very much of it.
What I don't understand is when a truck pulls out to overtake there isn't a gentleman's agreement in place that means the driver on the inside "yields" by lifting off the gas for a few moments to then get back in the slipstream of the one that they've just let in for a bit of a tow. Rather than the general situation where there's 0.14mph difference between them and it takes 1-8 miles to execute the maneuvre.

Still waiting to see what will happen with driverless vehicles in towns and cities once pedestrians and cyclists realise they can reclaim the streets coz automated vehicles will be programmed not to mow them down 8)

[quote=zanelad ]On the motorways they can travel in convoy, but what happens when one needs to turn off?

One turns off. What do you think the problem with that is?

Similarly getting onto the motorway in the first place - they don't need to do that in convoy, the "peleton" forms when the trucks are on the motorway, and not necessarily with trucks which started from the same place (or are going to the same place).

The whole point is that they form up in an ad-hoc fashion between trucks which are just sharing part of the journey. Anybody would think that some people didn't bother watching the video in the original link...

Thats fine so why is the UK tax payer stumping up £8.5m to trial it rather than the haulage companies who stand to benefit from it.

1. An individual haulier is not going to invest the money to help all his competitors - its better that they all get it rather than it be exclusive to the one who invests.
2. There is a potential environmental and economic benefit
3. The process requires legislative/regulatory support - supporting one haulier over another would introduce a bias, whereas supporting the neutral TRL does not
4. Investing in new tech that makes our roads safer, more efficient, environmentally better, etc is exactly what government should do - especially when the projects are at stage where the return on investment may not be well enough proven to convince commercial enterprises to lead it - its called innovation and is a key element of economic prosperity.

I couldn't imagine staring at the back of another truck for 4 hours primed and alert just in case and then being able to react in time. I'd probably be day dreaming about something completely unrelated and only notice when my face in in the back of the truck in front.

this isn't a pop at truck drivers btw, I trust them more than the goons in an pointlessly powerful car with poor judgement

Other countries have already done HGV convoy trials, and there are quite a few other Automated Vehicle trails already taking place in UK.
At first glance it may seem quite simple, but fine tuning the system and making sure everything is done safely involves a fair bit of work.
For example when the lorries approach the crest of a hill the 2nd and 3rd lorries need to lift off their throttle before the lead lorry due to the drafting effect, and the optimisation algorithms have quite a few variables, road profile, wind speed, lorry load etc.

Another reason why haulage is a good use case for early adoption of Autonomous driving is it is easier to absorb the cost of the Autonomous Driving system against the capital cost of an HGV, vs a car. As time goes on the cost of sensors will drop and the systems will be more intelligent and be able to operate safely with fewer and cheaper sensors.

So far the only companies who are cooperating on this in the UK are DAF, DHL and Ricardo. They have far-sighted management.

Not deliveroo??

Is disappoint..

it's a good point, IIRC Ford have ditched all their landtrain/driver aided tech research in favour of full autonomous vehicle development, personally I'd rather we all focus on the end state (full autonomous vehicles, properly integrated transport, better distribution) and then the 0.1% of the population that bustaspoke describes can be dealt with appropriately

Yep http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2017/02/21/442437.htm

I met two people (driver and passenger) a while back who fell asleep while their Tesla was in "autopilot" on the way home. It is not an autonomous car.

[quote=twisty ]At first glance it may seem quite simple, but fine tuning the system and making sure everything is done safely involves a fair bit of work.
For example when the lorries approach the crest of a hill the 2nd and 3rd lorries need to lift off their throttle before the lead lorry due to the drafting effect, and the optimisation algorithms have quite a few variables, road profile, wind speed, lorry load etc.

Of course it's not simple - though strangely enough the things you mention are relatively simple - they're all fairly predictable and not really any different to solving any other control problem. Where the real complexities arise are the interactions with other road users, which aren't at all predictable. None of these problems are insoluble though in the way some people on this thread seem to think, and it's certainly a lot, lot more straightforward than fully autonomous driving.

The article there about Ford highlights a big safety critical issue with highly automated vehicles and a human in the loop. If the vehicle "hands over" a difficult situation to a human the human has to have an immediate high situational awareness and a quick reaction......if they have spend a fair amount of time in a car that has a high degree of decision making they probably wont have that situational awareness as they'll be dozing, not paying attention, surfing on Singletrack - so crash...dead baby robins everywhere. In that case it makes sense to let automated car make all the decsions...but then where does legal liability lie if the person in the car is not the "driver"

In the case of robot systems like eg - DLR I can see that legal responsibility for an incident there could ultimately be laid at the foot of the DLR operator, as it owns the track and the trains and essentially has a high degree of control over everything - the corporate entity itself is the controlling mind. Not so sure though where the accountability is on the 2 tonne robot car that comes down my street to deliver krispy kremes to the neigbour - is it with the manufacturer? the operator? the owner? the licencing authority?

Although I'd be more in favour of solving that by of putting an actual 55mph speed limit on the 'slow lane', banning overtaking on slip roads and install CCTV cameras to catch the shittiest drivers who feel the need to floor it/stand on the brakes to make the slip road cutting up the other traffic rather than just merging with everyone else.

You know that its not the "slow lane" right? Its the lane everyone should be in unless they are overtaking. When its busy this isn't always possible but most of the times traffic could stay in lane 1 for a lot of the journey. If you make the speed limit 55mph then no one would ever drive in this lane so you effectively reduced the carry capacity of the motorway for non freight traffic.

Also if its a genuine 55mph limit in lane 1 then you create an unnecessary and dangerous speed differential between traffic moving lanes.

Slip roads? If its a two lane slip road why wouldn't traffic that can accelerate faster not overtake slower traffic on the other lane of the slip road otherwise they just arrive at the end of the slip lane together.

If its a single lane you can't overtake anyway

My concern is people joining motorways with 3 trucks sat in the inside lane.

What will be the biggest hurdle in automated vehicles.

Public acceptance.

I couldn't imagine staring at the back of another truck for 4 hours primed and alert just in case and then being able to react in time. I'd probably be day dreaming about something completely unrelated and only notice when my face in in the back of the truck in front.

It'll be a month before a trucker goes "right, I'm here for the next two hours, I'm going for a nap."

Less prostitutes getting murdered in truckstops too.

I'm shocked, disgusted and appalled by this comment.

It's "fewer."

HGVs tailgating other cars must be the most dangerous thing you can see on the motorways.

They're easily dealt with. Lift off for a few seconds and then accelerate back up to speed again. Once you start causing them to throw five pound notes out of the window they soon get the message.

Although I'd be more in favour of solving that by of putting an actual 55mph speed limit on the 'slow lane', banning overtaking on slip roads

Also if its a genuine 55mph limit in lane 1 then you create an unnecessary and dangerous speed differential between traffic moving lanes.

This. Plus daily I see folk who think that the ideal speed to enter a motorway is 40mph. I really don't want to be behind them. Coming out of service stations, I'll quite often dribble down a sliproad at walking pace to let the Micra in front of my disappear off into the distance before standing on the loud pedal so that I can merge at a speed relative to the traffic. Really not sure how that'd work in rush hour.

Automated trucks and cars are the future and I'm looking forward to when they all are

Sounds bloody tedious to me. If you don't want to drive, take the bus.

If you've ever done any motorway driving at all, then you'd know that the accepted practice is for vehicles in lane one to move out into lane two to allow joining vehicles to do so cleanly, and generally it works very well.

It's far from "accepted practice" and it contravenes The Highway Code. It does work well in light traffic, but when it's busy it just displaces the problem into other lanes as people doing 50mph try to dive into the 70mph lane 2 at the last second in order to avoid the 40mph lane 0.

The best approach would be for the first lane traffic to allow sufficient distance between themselves and the vehicles in front to allow for zip merging, but that would mean folk lifting up their right foot slightly. Dogs and cats, living together.

Please dont expect me to move from lane one, you can find your own space.

did someone mention my favourite film of all time?

the technology has already been tried on crash trucks, to move the operator to the lead vehicles. Folks will get used to seeing these types of applications long before the adoption of platooning of truck on major roads.

It's a lower speed application of the tech and has the clear advantage of reducing risk to the operators of getting injured/ killed by a fatigued driver.

[quote=Cougar ]It'll be a month before a trucker goes "right, I'm here for the next two hours, I'm going for a nap."

Maybe with a fully autonomous system, but that's not what's being proposed here. It's fundamentally a more sophisticated cruise control - the driver still has to steer, and it's not actually a huge amount different for them compared to the current situation where they sit on the speed limiter.

You know that its not the "slow lane" right? Its the lane everyone should be in unless they are overtaking. When its busy this isn't always possible but most of the times traffic could stay in lane 1 for a lot of the journey. If you make the speed limit 55mph then no one would ever drive in this lane so you effectively reduced the carry capacity of the motorway for non freight traffic.

Also if its a genuine 55mph limit in lane 1 then you create an unnecessary and dangerous speed differential between traffic moving lanes.

It must be nice to live in a version of the Matrix where the highway code actually works.

Have you ever been on a motorway and not seen all three lanes being used with the other two lanes just being people overtaking the 55mph lorries at ~65mph, and the 3rd lane people 'overtaking' those at ~75?

If the rules actually worked you would only need 2 lanes, as no one would break the 70mph speed limit rule, and there would be no reason not to be doing 70 in the 2nd lane.

It's been a long time since I've driven a truck but for a lead driver to plan the movement and control of multiple other vehicles would be some achievement. High and cross winds catching anyone of the convoy which would normally be dealt with by steering into the wind, lifting off the throttle or any combination of small adjustments depending on if it's the tractor or trailer affected.
Having driven in military convoys for many years keeping them together and moving is hard work with actual drivers with years of experience of doing so.
It will be good to see if this comes off but a much easier option is to ban trucks overtaking on uphill sections like a lot of Europe and use more night time trunking and deliveries.

[quote=thisisnotaspoon ]Have you ever been on a motorway and not seen all three lanes being used with the other two lanes just being people overtaking the 55mph lorries at ~65mph, and the 3rd lane people 'overtaking' those at ~75?

Yes, almost every time I'm on the motorway. Don't imagine that the traffic on all motorways is the same as what you experience.

If the rules actually worked you would only need 2 lanes, as no one would break the 70mph speed limit rule, and there would be no reason not to be doing 70 in the 2nd lane.

er, what about those people who want to travel at 65mph. Which lane do you think they should be in?

[quote=craigxxl ]It's been a long time since I've driven a truck but for a lead driver to plan the movement and control of multiple other vehicles would be some achievement.

They don't - the computers do it for them. The lead truck just sits there at a steady speed most of the time, which doesn't seem terribly difficult. It's actually a lot easier for computers to do convoys than real drivers.

Maybe it wouldn't work in high winds or crosswinds, but does that mean it shouldn't be implemented the rest of the time?

er, what about those people who want to travel at 65mph. Which lane do you think they should be in?

You've gone full circle back to my original point that you tried to argue against. They end up in the middle lane perpetually overtaking the 55mph traffic in the 1st lane, and being overtaken by the 75mph traffic in the 3rd lane.

Well, no I haven't, it's a separate point - in fact I'm not sure that you're not arguing against yourself here! Because if the motorways do work in the way you seem to think they always do, then you do need 3 lanes even if the rules do work. If the motorways work the way they often do IME (and I'm sometimes the one doing 65) then you still need 3 lanes so that the driver doing 65 can overtake trucks without holding up other people wanting to do 68 or 70.

Maybe with a fully autonomous system, but that's not what's being proposed here. It's fundamentally a more sophisticated cruise control - the driver still has to steer, and it's not actually a huge amount different for them compared to the current situation where they sit on the speed limiter.

Ah, I didn't realise that. So it's an adaptive cruise control like the ones we've had in cars for a few years? Bit of a non-story then unless I'm missing something, that's hardly "driverless trucks."

They don't - the computers do it for them. The lead truck just sits there at a steady speed most of the time, which doesn't seem terribly difficult. It's actually a lot easier for computers to do convoys than real drivers.

Unlike cars a truck driver will be looking at the traffic, bends and gradient of the road before positioning and selecting the appropriate gear all based on experience not a set program. Doing the same for a convoy of trucks that may having varying loads of solids or liquids, I would still edge my bets of an actual driver getting it right.

eh? You think a computer will be unaware of bends and gradients? Traffic would appear to affect all equally - if the lead truck has to slow down, they'll all slow down. If the traffic is heavy enough then there's no benefit to the system and it will stop operating.

Though I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here - that such systems will be useless all the time because you've come up with some relatively unusual situations where they might not work that well?

Do you lot live in the real world? It's 77mph (70mph + yer 10mph grace), straight up the middle lane. Slow Lane is for trucks, mergers and those with issues. Fast lane is for German cars 80+

My 998cc VW Polo falls into the latter category.

10%+2, plus speedos overread by 5-10%, I'm good for about 85mph gerroutofmywayslowcoach!!1!

The 10% thing is an ACPO guideline which is a) a guideline obvs and b) I don't think applies any longer?

jambourgie - Member

Do you lot live in the real world? It's 77mph (70mph + yer 10mph grace), straight up the middle lane. Slow Lane is for trucks, mergers and those with issues. Fast lane is for German cars 80+

My 998cc VW Polo falls into the latter category.

TBH given that today my M5-M6 Observation of cars either doing silly things or broken down.
Apart from 1 White Audi A3 driving like knob the worst were Vauxhall Zafira's with no sense of lane discipline & a worrying amount with smartphones/satnav's stuck right in their field of view.

The broken down on the hard shoulder was not so good for the German marques though 1 VW Polo 61 plate, 1 5 series BMW 59 plate, 1 E class Merc private plate, 2 LR Discos 12 plate and a 17 plate! On Recovery trucks 1 MKV Golf & just north of Tewkesbury a Ferrari 😮

Can you tell I was bored?

and this morning we have a arrested drunk lgv driver and another arrested lgv driver, who have killed 8 people in a minibus on the M1 .

http://news.sky.com/story/several-dead-in-major-crash-on-m1-near-milton-keynes-11006052

I can't quite see how this works in practice. Will the driver of the first truck be paid more? They will have most of the driving decisions to make, given that the drivers of trucks 2 and 3 won't be able to see, and most of the responsibility too.

Will the drivers of 2 and 3 suffer with reduced concentration levels and be more accident-prone?
Who is responsible if an automatic system fails? Is it the driver who knows that they are following too closely or the manufacturer of the system?

Who/what co-ordinates the peloton joining up? Who sorts out the differential in fuel costs? I can't see small companies doing this; especially if company A is always followed from the industrial estate by companies B and C, who save 12% on fuel costs and undercut company A

The wee small hours ^^^ are when many collisions happen, e.g. 3am, because of our body rhythms (and again around 3pm) so some operators will want to avoid this despite their being fewer vehicles around

Use HS2 budget to improve the existing rail infrastructure, civil engineering, etc will still benefit

Seems like a logical idea to me, but will be hard to implement on our busier motorways.

The trucks, or indeed cars, that are part of some convoy system, whether fully integrated between vehicles, or just some sort of s****y cruise control, need to have a way of indicating to others that they are in such a mode.

Maybe this will make other drivers adapt their driving to suit, ie, overtake quickly, pull in behind sooner etc. I know there are plenty of knobbers allowed to control vehicle, but I'm open to the idea that most are not wanting to piss off other road users.

Gap fillers are my biggest gripe when driving. You're trundling along with a nice safe gap to the vehicle in front, roughly similar speed, cruise control on, then some dope decides they have overtaken you, so filling the gap is fine, even if they then choose to slow down. Grrr. I try not to be an angry person, but this makes me one.

What happens when two convoys overtake each other? Wont someone think of the poor stw hamsters, you lot will go into full metdown mode.

I'll just suggest that all trucks are required to be fitted with identical speed limiters.

Not quite sure whether cooperative adaptive cruise control is the same thing as driverless trucks. Seems that there's a vast gulf between that peloton video and huge robotic autonomous convoys thundering up and down the country. It's not the middle bit of the journey that the driver earns his keep, it's the nadgery bits at each end. That's going to take something vastly more clever than the cruise control demo above to computerise.

That was part of my original point, its being clickbaited as driverless but it seems they will still have drivers not least because once off the motorway they will need driving.

Which leads to my second point, since this is just active cruise shouldnt it be for the manufacturers to develop and could we have trucks with cabs that drivers can see out of first.

[url= ]It reminds me of this system[/url] that was offered by BMW a few years ago...