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.

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.

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.
Obviously there are occasions when the system is very busy and it’s not always so easy for lane one vehicles to move out, but mostly it works just fine. Common sense at work for once.

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.[/quote]

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?

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmtMUpUvdFk[/video]

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.

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.

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?

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 swanky 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.

It reminds me of this system that was offered by BMW a few years ago…