I seldom open new topics but I just have to express my feelings on this one. It is of course, inspired by the recent fatal Tesla crash.

I cannot understand the fascination with "self-driving" cars. As a tech drill, such things can be interesting but do we really believe that a vehicle under control of a computer can be safe under any and all conditions which may be encountered? One example may be during rain or snow. Microwave radiation is scattered by raindrops and becomes less than reliable. Slippery surfaces handled by an autopilot? I don't think so. Will the system recognize and refuse to cross a downed power line? Can we rely on the self-driving system to make the correct decision under all conditions? I don't think so. Of course neither do human drivers.

I realize that engagement of a self-driving function is caveated by acknowledgement of when it is safe to do so but I believe that so long as it is available, it will be misused. Observe those than take attention from the road to manipulate in-car infotainment systems, nav systems, communications and even radios even though they have pressed a button that says they will not do so.

I'm not implying that a human driver is always faultless, far from it. The human driver however is just that; human. If he chooses to run over a 'possum rather than damage his car, so be it. If someone chooses to not drive, let them take a plane, train, bus or taxi. Just stay the hell out of a car on the road with the rest of us.

I can understand why: MANY people want this VERY badly.

a) the trucking company - can cut labor costs way down

b) Lyft/Uber/Taxi companies - same deal

c) soccer moms - now she can play with kids in the back and discipline them instead of threatening to pull the car over

d) safety zealots - point to the number of accidents/vehicle fatalities that occur due to driver error, and the dream(?) that a computer can remedy this. On that scale, the computer needn't even be perfect, it just has to be better than 36k(?) deaths per year in the US.
most other things that kill so many people have advocacy/improvement programs (heart disease ? now even McDonalds has calorie counts on its menu...)

e) Insurance (not sure they want this, but its going to be an interesting fight)

f) people in congestion - I've worked in the automated conveyor industry before. If you have god-like control of every car, can dictate acceleration, travel speeds and car spacing, you can easily double (or more) the amount of cars on the road at one time, or halve the transit time to get there

g) people who think they are important (everybody) - now I can read a book/run my business/make out/eat/practice yoga/read pron while driving.

Numerically - it makes a lot of sense - if the average commute is 30 mins, what would you pay to have an hour more in your day ? (people here- maybe not much, but see g) above

Lastly - the next generation. Cars consistently confound the generation that is raised with "black box"-like devices (does any one person know enough assembler, IC design, programming/coding and production to make their own smartphone ?). Why does stuff in a car need to spin and explode when the purpose is to move in a linear direction ? Why must I pay $4k for a reliable one of these when I can pay an app $40 for someone to drive me there themselves ? (and I will not be bothered with explosive fuels, maintenance cost/hassle, depreciation cost, yearly taxes in some states, inspections, cleaning, storage, larger living space, OMG carbons etc....)

I agree that technology isn't there. It isn't even close. Not sure how this hoopla got started but this is the result of "early adopting" a 4000lb piece of metal that is capable of 100mph and taking your hands off the wheel. Maybe we as a society will learn to back off a bit...but I doubt it. Whats the line about 'betting on people being stupid' ?

-John

__________________
2009 Kia Sedona
2009 Honda Odyssey EX-L
12006 Jetta Pumpe Duse
(insert Mercedes here)

Husband, Father, sometimes friend =)

and those who are truly unaware things like buried wire roadways for vehicle control have been speculated about since I was a teenager reading Mechanics Illustrated. Such an approach might be feasible but please don't ask me to share my road with them. That is just pushing the technology on the cheap instead of building dedicated roboroads. It also still doesn't address mechanical failures by roboroad users, something that is a recipe for disaster in a system when such a failure causes a pileup.

I hate to say never but there is no technology that can think as quickly, weigh a large number of options, make decisions and execute them as quickly as the human brain. The number of observations, decisions and executions one makes just backing out of the driveway is enormous and largely unappreciated. I cannot imagine sharing a high speed highway with a mix of human and computer drivers.

Not saying of course that competency among us humans is a given.

"On a divided highway, especially freeway, wrong way driving is a serious problem because of the high speeds usually involved, since the result is more likely a head-on collision.[3] In the United States, about 355 people are killed each year in crashes caused by drivers headed in the wrong direction on the highway"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrong-way_driving

That is just for wrong way drivers. Add in drunken drivers, distracted drivers and assorted idiots.......





And we have ONE fatality attributed to a "Self-driven" car. In fact, if you read the accident report, the semi-truck turned left in front of the oncoming car. I'm pretty sure, even in Florida, the law states that vehicles turning across on-coming traffic must yield the right of way.

The truck driver is being charged or at least according to one account I read.

__________________
“Whatever story you're telling, it will be more interesting if, at the end you add, "and then everything burst into flames.”
― Brian P. Cleary, You Oughta Know By Now

Mike, my post is really not about that incident although it did raise my level of awareness.
It is more about driving/non-driving. I guess my position is that if you choose to not drive, you should be riding on some form of public transportation. To sit in the driver's seat of a private conveyance implies a measure of responsibility. If you allow yourself to be distracted by in-car electronics, a good book or simply gazing out the window at the scenery you should not be in that seat.

Do you not think there could have been contributory negligence by the Tesla passenger/driver? If he was not distracted could he have avoided the accident?

There are conflicting reports about a DVD player in the wreckage, with two witnesses claiming that a Harry Potter movie was playing. Imagine there were fatalities and/or serious injuries to motorists other than the driver in question. THAT would be hard to take, say, discovering you were going to be quad for life because the driver was watching a DVD instead of the road.

While this is only one fatality from such a vehicle, the number of such vehicles being driven in full driverless mode surely must be small at this point.

Another factor referenced here is the issue of maintenance and wear and tear on components. What, would there need to be a severe maintenance and overhaul regimen enforced for the sake of public safety? Experience ought to teach us that some or many people would skimp on such things.

Full disclosure, I've been a hard-core skeptic from the beginning on this business.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

The son in law purchased a new Honda with the self steering and the auto braking. It is conceivable to me in a failure mode of the system alone might kill people.

Originally I thought the car would read the white line and the edge of the road from the outboard mirrors. Instead there is a clear lens over the lower portion of the bumper on one side.

I have not had a really good look at the car yet either. I do wonder if you would be more mentally engaged in watching what the car was doing. Than if you were steering.

It is unfortunately all too possible that some drivers might feel it is foolproof. This could easily get them killed.

Cars are among the worst things that ever happened to human beings.

Self driving cars are a half step, rearranging the deck chairs.

I have seriously mixed feelings about cars.

But it's a complicated topic. I met an older fellow, 89 this in about '79. His father had been a banker in Lincoln, Nebraska. His family owned the first auto in their county, a Buick, around 1906 IIRC. He said the auto transformed the social lives of people living in farm country. Before autos they were largely isolated, would only see their neighbors on special occasions. After it was like a Renaissance. I can see why they took off. And this is to say nothing of the portable bedroom back seat.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

One report I read claimed autopiloted cars have driven many millions of miles without a reported fatality. If so, statistically, that seems to be better than humans. An autopilot can't get drunk nor can it fall asleep. Sure it can fail, but does it fail at a greater or lesser rate than human beings? I'd like to see a richer data set that just one fatality before drawing a conclusion. There's not even any guarantee the driver would have seen the truck in time to stop the collision. People frequently die from hitting vehicles turning left in front of them.
Not that I'm getting one anytime soon for a huge variety of reasons.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

Kerry, I'll bet (can't really know) that those statistics were mainly miles on closed courses and/or on the road with a test driver on-board, alert and ready to take over. They were (probably) proof-of-concept miles, not miles with your typical dumb-ass consumer watching a DVD or texting or doing unmentionable things while on the road.

Google’s self-driving car vs Tesla Autopilot: 1.5M miles in 6 years vs 47M miles in 6 months | Electrek

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

The systems are all new. My concern is what happens to aging cars? Are they retired by mandate?

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

Brakes, throttle linkages, tires, wipers etc are all new too.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

I am not trying to promote anything but look at this video and think of how many lives could be saved if all cars had smart cruise control & lane keep assistance. Just do a Google search on " hyundai driverless car commercial " .

Notice that the driver of the front car has confidence in the system. He stays in his car.

This is not really a self drive car, just some safety features to help.

__________________
84 500 SEL (307,xxx miles)