Hands Free/Self Driving Cars

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

[*]Providing transportation options for people who cannot drive due to infirmity (blindness, paraplegic, nervous disorders), are too young to drive, or too old or ill to drive
[*]Allow for re-purposing of the "family car". An owner could drive themselves to work, then send the car home to take the kids that are too young to drive, to school. Same thing picking up after school
[*]Allow family car to perform errands while the owners are otherwise occupied. Take elderly parents to doctor's appointments, pick up dry cleaning, etc
[*]Allow the driver to relax on long trips where the car is capable of interacting with the road, highway signs, and other vehicles in order to arrive at a destination safely

Originally Posted by MrChrisLS3

Sounds like you've bought the sales pitch hook, line and sinker. lol

No. Actually since I retired from GM I am self-employed as an automotive analyst and consultant. One of the areas I consult on is autonomous vehicles. So basically, I am paid to understand this stuff.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by samman11

I think he means that you implied that your NON-Computer driven Camaro is dangerous to the public, since you are driving it and not a computer. Why should we, the public, be put in danger because YOU decided to drive your own Camaro and not let the SAFER computer do the driving for you. After all, progress is progress. Therefore, with such stated progress, it is logical to assume that one day, a law will be passed BANNING all self-driven vehicles. What a world. I guess going out for a Sunday drive just got real boring. Soooo, be the first one to put your money where your mouth is and sell your NON-COMPUTER DRIVEN CAMARO!

It is logical to assume that some people would want to see that happen. I've actually spoken to more than a few who think that way. They are in the minority. It is also logical to understand why that cannot happen in our grandchildren's life times.

• The GLOBAL automotive market is somewhere around 100 million new vehicles coming into the world every year.
• The US accounts for 15 - 17 million new vehicles per year
• The US car "parc" (vehicles in service) is around 260 million and growing
• A ban on self-driven vehicles would have to factor in the ability to replace the entire car parc on top of keeping up with natural sales growth
• It would take almost 20 years to accomplish that, assuming that all vehicle production sold in the US was directed towards producing only fully autonomous vehicles
• Even if all of THE WORLD'S automobile manufacturing capacity was focused on replacing the cars on the road in the US, it would take more than a solid two years of doing nothing but that to replace the US car parc. Other than the fact that nobody could ever get that to happen, you'd then have to do the same thing for all the countries that were neglected for product during that 2+ years.

Not a likely scenario. Add to this the fact that, as I previously mentioned, there are 5 levels of autonomy, three of which REQUIRE a capable human in front of a steering wheel, and one allowing for the person in front of the steering wheel to decide for themselves whether they want to drive or want the car to do it for them. Similar to an A8 letting you decide whether you want to shift or you want it to shift itself.

Level 1: Adaptive Cruise Control with Front Collision Mitigation (will bring the vehicle to a complete stop, even if the driver never touches the brake pedal). Available today in too many cars to list here. Notably, you can include 2018 Mustang in that list. Should be required content for Cars & Coffee

Level 2: Adaptive Cruise Control with Front Collision Mitigation, Lane Keeping and Automated Steering. Same as above, but now car is capable of maintaining its lane, even around curves. Car communicates to driver whether they are in a geographical area where the car can safely provide these functions. Car also pre-alerts driver if they are approaching an area where it cannot perform these functions. For example, the Cadillac CT6 can operate in this mode on pretty much all of the US Interstate system. Once the car is positioned to exit an interstate, the car signals the driver that they will need to resume control. Some systems (Tesla, Infiniti) require driver to maintain physical contact with the steering wheel, even if the car is doing the steering. Cadillac does not. I do not recall if that is the case with Volvo. Tesla, Cadillac CT6, Volvo XC90, Infiniti QX50. Coming to a bunch more cars in 2018 and 19.

Level 3: Car is deemed capable of driving autonomously in most, maybe all geographic areas (highways, city streets, backroads). Car may require human to assume control under some specifically defined circumstances (construction zones, GPS identified "no-fly zones", weather conditions that compromise system capability to read and understand road conditions)

Level 4: Car is capable of driving autonomously 100%, but still provides option for human to drive. Has steering wheel and pedals. Human decides what the operating mode will be. This is the description that best fits the Uber Volvo vehicle at the center of the Tempe, Arizona incident, although it was more than likely geo-fenced to only allow for autonomous operating mode in certain specified parts of the area.

Level 5: Car is capable of driving autonomously 100% of the time. There is no provision for human to directly drive the vehicle (no steering wheel, no pedals). Provision will likely exist for human to indirectly drive the vehicle remotely.

I think a lot of people hear "Autonomous" and immediately gravitate to Level 5. That is so not the case.

[Norm Peterson]

Thanks, James.

I'm sure that there are many situations where some level of autonomy would not only be appropriate, but necessary. My Dad certainly would have benefitted even though he still drove locally during the daytime.

What I suspect most enthusiasts are uneasy about isn't necessarily the threat of being forced into some Level 5 transportation module, just into something a level or two beyond what they might be comfortable with. That everything might eventually gravitate toward Level 5 is really a more distant concern (probably beyond my lifetime, too).


Norm

[MrChrisLS3]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

No. Actually since I retired from GM I am self-employed as an automotive analyst and consultant. One of the areas I consult on is autonomous vehicles. So basically, I am paid to understand this stuff.

Sorry, that comment was a little snarky. I hadn't had lunch yet, perhaps I should've had a snickers bar before I posted that.

I will say that I do think driver assist features are great technology. It is unrealistic to think that everyone is suddenly going to put their phones away during their commute, or that anyone can be 100% aware of everything around them all the time.

I will stand that I am skeptical on completely autonomous vehicles.

On your list, I don't pragmatically see anything over a level three being put into production, at least not in my lifetime. But then who knows? Though come to think of it, we have had autonomous transportation before. Now it was about a hundred years ago, and the vehicles were grain fed. lol

[CrazyRED]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

It is logical to assume that some people would want to see that happen. I've actually spoken to more than a few who think that way. They are in the minority. It is also logical to understand why that cannot happen in our grandchildren's life times.

• The GLOBAL automotive market is somewhere around 100 million new vehicles coming into the world every year.
• The US accounts for 15 - 17 million new vehicles per year
• The US car "parc" (vehicles in service) is around 260 million and growing
• A ban on self-driven vehicles would have to factor in the ability to replace the entire car parc on top of keeping up with natural sales growth
• It would take almost 20 years to accomplish that, assuming that all vehicle production sold in the US was directed towards producing only fully autonomous vehicles
• Even if all of THE WORLD'S automobile manufacturing capacity was focused on replacing the cars on the road in the US, it would take more than a solid two years of doing nothing but that to replace the US car parc. Other than the fact that nobody could ever get that to happen, you'd then have to do the same thing for all the countries that were neglected for product during that 2+ years.

Not a likely scenario. Add to this the fact that, as I previously mentioned, there are 5 levels of autonomy, three of which REQUIRE a capable human in front of a steering wheel, and one allowing for the person in front of the steering wheel to decide for themselves whether they want to drive or want the car to do it for them. Similar to an A8 letting you decide whether you want to shift or you want it to shift itself.

Level 1: Adaptive Cruise Control with Front Collision Mitigation (will bring the vehicle to a complete stop, even if the driver never touches the brake pedal). Available today in too many cars to list here. Notably, you can include 2018 Mustang in that list. Should be required content for Cars & Coffee

Level 2: Adaptive Cruise Control with Front Collision Mitigation, Lane Keeping and Automated Steering. Same as above, but now car is capable of maintaining its lane, even around curves. Car communicates to driver whether they are in a geographical area where the car can safely provide these functions. Car also pre-alerts driver if they are approaching an area where it cannot perform these functions. For example, the Cadillac CT6 can operate in this mode on pretty much all of the US Interstate system. Once the car is positioned to exit an interstate, the car signals the driver that they will need to resume control. Some systems (Tesla, Infiniti) require driver to maintain physical contact with the steering wheel, even if the car is doing the steering. Cadillac does not. I do not recall if that is the case with Volvo. Tesla, Cadillac CT6, Volvo XC90, Infiniti QX50. Coming to a bunch more cars in 2018 and 19.

Level 3: Car is deemed capable of driving autonomously in most, maybe all geographic areas (highways, city streets, backroads). Car may require human to assume control under some specifically defined circumstances (construction zones, GPS identified "no-fly zones", weather conditions that compromise system capability to read and understand road conditions)

Level 4: Car is capable of driving autonomously 100%, but still provides option for human to drive. Has steering wheel and pedals. Human decides what the operating mode will be. This is the description that best fits the Uber Volvo vehicle at the center of the Tempe, Arizona incident, although it was more than likely geo-fenced to only allow for autonomous operating mode in certain specified parts of the area.

Level 5: Car is capable of driving autonomously 100% of the time. There is no provision for human to directly drive the vehicle (no steering wheel, no pedals). Provision will likely exist for human to indirectly drive the vehicle remotely.

I think a lot of people hear "Autonomous" and immediately gravitate to Level 5. That is so not the case.

Martinjlm,

I just want to say a huge thank you for taking all the time to write out these extremely informative posts. I really appreciate it.

It's always better to get information straight from the horses mouth as I feel more comfortable about spreading the information.

Thank you again.
Mike

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by CrazyRED

Martinjlm,

I just want to say a huge thank you for taking all the time to write out these extremely informative posts. I really appreciate it.

It's always better to get information straight from the horses mouth as I feel more comfortable about spreading the information.

Thank you again.
Mike

I appreciate the compliment. Ironically, it didn’t take long to put this together. I had a conference call with clients today on this very subject. Just cut and pasted some of my notes and tweaked it a bit. Biggest difference is, they paid me for telling them this. You guys got it for free. Not even a beer for me.

[weSS1LEy]

After seeing the dash cam video of that Uber crash, I don’t see how it could have been avoided. Let’s just cross a 6 lane highway in pitch black not at a crosswalk and see what happens

[cornerspeed92]

Unfortunately stupid keep breeding and there seem to be no consequences for anyone's actions, someone always seems to make excuses. In the animal world the slow, stupid, and lame get eaten! Time to thin out the heards and let the losers of the world die and stop protecting them.......are you kidding me, self driving cars!!!most cant drive as it is!

[CamaroFred]

Originally Posted by weSS1LEy

After seeing the dash cam video of that Uber crash, I don’t see how it could have been avoided. Let’s just cross a 6 lane highway in pitch black not at a crosswalk and see what happens

The car was exceeding the speed limit. It was not a highway, it was posted at 30MPH. In an area were pedestrians outnumber motor vehicles.

Did the Uber know that there were pedestrians who just didn't GAF when they wanted to cross the street? How about some who would be happy to file a lawsuit and intentionally step in front of a moving vehicle?

A human would reduce their speed when they can't see far enough ahead to stop.

I have driven streets in the city were I drove so slow the old mechanical speedometer didn't even come off the stop because of the number of pedestrians.

EDIT:
I don't believe for one instant that there is a street so dark in Tempe that that you can't see someone 100 feet away. We all know that videos can be doctored (what do they call it these days? redacted?) and if the Uber could not see 100 feet ahead it should have stopped.

[Royal Tiger]

Self and assisted driving cars are something not needed, increase carelessness, and throw money at a problem already created by the lazy & incompetent. I can’t wait for the “what about the children” lame a$$ rallying cry.

[MrChrisLS3]

Originally Posted by weSS1LEy

After seeing the dash cam video of that Uber crash, I don’t see how it could have been avoided. Let’s just cross a 6 lane highway in pitch black not at a crosswalk and see what happens

After watching, I would argue that it could've been avoided. Which brings up, what to me, is the biggest danger. The video showed in car footage of the driver/operator of the uber car. They were paying absolutely no attention to the road. Operator was looking down the entire time up until the moment of impact. If they were watching the road they could've taken control of the vehicle and taken evasive action.

Distracted driving is already a large and urgent issue on the roads today. If people have this false sense of security when the car is on "auto pilot", the distraction will be even worse. We may even see people taking a nap on their way to work.

There also must have been a fault in the vehicle's programming that it did not sense/"see" the obstacle in it's path. The ability of an autonomous vehicle to sense and respond to emergency situations is of upmost importance if the program is to succeed.

[JLSuperfly]

Where is the link to the video?

[Russell James]

Originally Posted by weSS1LEy

After seeing the dash cam video of that Uber crash, I don’t see how it could have been avoided. Let’s just cross a 6 lane highway in pitch black not at a crosswalk and see what happens

I'd disagree. Just my personal opinion, but I consider it a major failure of autonomous technology. The theory and sell to the public is they are safer than a human driver because of all this high tech stuff. Lidar, sonar, night vision cameras...all those things working together are suppose to be scanning the road and the surroundings for hazards.

Being dark or shadows or not on a crosswalk... should have been meaningless to all those high tech systems. Does Lidar only detect crossing obstacles during the day on crosswalks?...no. Could a very attentive experienced driver with good night vision, good headlights have seen the hazard...possibly.

When I see reporters say - that was unavoidable...just strikes me as a broad brush over assumption. I've avoided some weird stuff at night.

What strikes me when watching that video is the "driver" was paying zero attention. When the technology is less than perfect...they may want to stress to the "drivers" to pay attention. They are there to react in emergency situations. This driver's reaction was a failure. Why all the forward seeing systems couldn't see that hazard was on a collision course...I'm not buying the dark and shadows excuse. If dark and shadows is troublesome for autonomous... yikes. Just my personal opinion.

[Jayjellyfish212]

Back in the day: mail box baseball.




In the future: Autonomous car baseball.