And autonomous rides are already a failed concept as cars do not scale.
Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
361–370 of 435 posts
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#362tldr; Why not slow down when sensor range is shorter than stopping distance? It seems the basic argument is that sensor range is not always long enough to fully encompass stopping distance, but the data presented in the article shows that this is only the case at 70mph. At 50mph, it seems that sensor tech is well within requirements in all published conditions. Perhaps an autonomous truck could simply slow down when…
In many places in the US, the road system is already insufficient. Certainly completely insufficient in California. There is no space for self-truck traffic to move significantly slower than driven-truck traffic. Either self-trucks can safely reach speed parity or there is much less space for them. Another response mentions there are easy routes that could be self-trucked first. That would work.
Does driving at 50mph decrease throughput compared to 65mph? By how much? Can we overcome that with a somewhat reduced following distance between self-driving trucks, since they can coordinate braking? (or at the very least they can respond to brake lights in front of them near-instantly)
When I think of "completely insufficient California roads" I think of traffic that's already going a lot slower than 50mph.
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The only problems that making it run on roads instead of rails solves is political - [...] You say it like this is a point against autonomous trucking? Technical problems are solvable. Political and social problems are basically intractable in practice. If autonomous driving can turn 'delivering large amounts of cargo along fixed, guided pathways' from a political into a technical problem, then this would be a jack…
>No? Plenty of eg cars exceed minimum safety standards. Some brands, like Volvo, are even explicitly sold on safety. In the context you're discussing, that form of safety isn't an inefficiency but a marketable feature. That doesn't mean that safety in general is a marketable feature. Those safety standards tend to omit the safety of any pedestrians being hit - otherwise, cars would be far lighter (and with bonnets fa…
You are right. I agree that cars should be taxed (at least partially) based on weight.
However, you don't really need new regulations for this. Tightening liability for drivers, instead of letting them get away with a slap on the wrist when they kill a pedestrian or cyclists etc would probably suffice.
At the moment, we mostly do victim blaming instead. When you operate a death machine, you should be responsible for any kills, and not be able to hide behind 'it was an accident'.
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of them are. Which goes to show that money doesn't have that much of an influence in politics, despite popular opinion to the contrary.
I don't understand why you think it shows that?
The billionaires in question (I think Warren Buffet is one of them) would benefit from more and better rail infrastructure. But the billionaires don't have enough influence to make that happen.
Similar for eg more open immigration, or not shutting down the US government down every so often.
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
Freight railroads are alive and well in the US. Incidentally, it's also the side of the railroad business that is mostly deregulated and privatised. The passenger business is nationalised, and frankly a basket case.
(it's not a basket case because it's nationalised, it's nationalised because it's a basket case - thank the automotive industry - and it's a national security asset)
Freight railroads weren't always doing so well. They picked up a lot after deregulation.
Compare also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_the_privatisation_of... and see eg the share of rail in all transport.
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a rail expert, not even a casual spectator. But my unstudied impression is that the noise that penetrates the most is the ultra-low frequency rumble that comes from the diesel side of the drivetrain, with a secondary source being steel on steel squealing of bogeys around bends at the minimal range of their tolerance. But the latter doesn't have the penetrating power of the former, not by a long shot, so to elimin…
I'm probably missing something, but why would an electric train need a battery? What would the battery be used for?
The trains that make the most noise are diesel-electric, not electric; electric cross country freight trains aren't really a thing here. I don't DE engines have a battery in the conventional sense, although arguably their fuel tender full of diesel is a sort of battery. But in order for a train to be fully electric you would need to have a fully electrified infrastructure for freight rail, which we do not have and would be far-fetched as a solution compared to equipping such trains with a local battery tender when they come into town, in order to move them through the town (somewhat) quietly. after which they can switch back to diesel-electric power for the long cross country runs.
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
>No? Plenty of eg cars exceed minimum safety standards. Some brands, like Volvo, are even explicitly sold on safety. In the context you're discussing, that form of safety isn't an inefficiency but a marketable feature. That doesn't mean that safety in general is a marketable feature. Those safety standards tend to omit the safety of any pedestrians being hit - otherwise, cars would be far lighter (and with bonnets fa…
You are right. I agree that cars should be taxed (at least partially) based on weight. However, you don't really need new regulations for this. Tightening liability for drivers, instead of letting them get away with a slap on the wrist when they kill a pedestrian or cyclists etc would probably suffice. At the moment, we mostly do victim blaming instead. When you operate a death machine, you should be responsible for…
> Tightening liability for drivers, instead of letting them get away with a slap on the wrist when they kill a pedestrian or cyclists etc would probably suffice.
That really can only happen if the roads are improved enough that drivers can’t cast reasonable doubt around when an accident occurs. Like a road used as a main car route, but has lots of on street parking to obscure pedestrians and bicycles, and also has a lot of them. Yes, the car should be liable, but when the report is taken they find that the car’s view f the victim was completely obscured anyways. We have to really go Dutch on our road design before we can go Dutch on our car liability enforcement.
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm probably missing something, but why would an electric train need a battery? What would the battery be used for?
The trains that make the most noise are diesel-electric, not electric; electric cross country freight trains aren't really a thing here. I don't DE engines have a battery in the conventional sense, although arguably their fuel tender full of diesel is a sort of battery. But in order for a train to be fully electric you would need to have a fully electrified infrastructure for freight rail, which we do not have and wo…
Electric freight trains make about as much noise as diesel electrics, since the vast majority of the noise either makes is the wheels hitting the rails and going screech. I had a hotel room in Switzerland next to a rail yard and learned this the hard way.
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are right. I agree that cars should be taxed (at least partially) based on weight. However, you don't really need new regulations for this. Tightening liability for drivers, instead of letting them get away with a slap on the wrist when they kill a pedestrian or cyclists etc would probably suffice. At the moment, we mostly do victim blaming instead. When you operate a death machine, you should be responsible for…
> Tightening liability for drivers, instead of letting them get away with a slap on the wrist when they kill a pedestrian or cyclists etc would probably suffice. That really can only happen if the roads are improved enough that drivers can’t cast reasonable doubt around when an accident occurs. Like a road used as a main car route, but has lots of on street parking to obscure pedestrians and bicycles, and also has a…
What do you mean by reasonable doubt? If you are in a car and you hit someone, it should be your fault.
If the road is bad, you should drive slow enough that it's not dangerous.
If you can't see anything, because there are cars parked, perhaps you shouldn't drive, or only drive very slowly. It should be your responsibility as a driver to only drive when the view ain't obscured.
When I'm eg running around with a knife, or discharging a gun and injure someone, I don't get to make excuses like the above either. Why should drivers be allowed to blame the victim or circumstances?
Re: Autonomous trucking is harder than autonomous rideshare
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
> two trucks in tandem, and later perhaps more. Or we could put them on tracks and physically attach them to one another.
you mean like a .. train
or like a … road train https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_train