CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

"UK to allow driverless cars on public roads"

(116 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. sallyhinch
    Member

    Regarding junctions, it would be interesting if Google brings its self-driving cars to the UK, takes one look at the mess of some of our city streets - and then demands a bit of a design rethink before it will consider letting them loose on our roads (after all Google knows fine well that if there's a fatal accident involving one of its self-driving cars before they're established then it will be game over for them).

    As a thought experiment, would it be easier to design a self-driving car for the Dutch roads? The principles of sustainable safety and self-explaining roads should presumably compensate for the many more pedestrians and cyclists they would have to cope with

    Posted 9 years ago #
  2. wingpig
    Member

    "...and to make reasonable progress, ie not hold up other traffic unnecessarily."

    Fine, as long the the reasonable and unnecessarily are judged against safety, not the implied desires of other traffic's drivers. "No undue hesitation" is in the non-advanced test.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  3. Smudge
    Member

    As I say, a sample of one, but my experience was that safety was the primary consideration above all else.
    I encountered one instructor with ego issues, the rest were safety minded and very good.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  4. neddie
    Member

    I'm pretty sure that driverless cars will be a disaster in terms of congestion.

    Why? Because they will create all sorts of new journeys that weren't possible before. e.g.

    • driving to, from & between the pub(s)
    • driving to the airport then 'sending the car back' empty to avoid long stay parking charges (result 4 journeys to the airport instead of 2)
    • as above, driving into town
    • sending the kids to school at a separate time to the work commute
    • sending the car empty to your holiday destination in advance, then flying there in comfort
    • delivering a package to a friend using an empty car
    • pretty much any other one-way journey you can think of where the car would be sent back empty

    Posted 9 years ago #
  5. wingpig
    Member

    Hopefully an empty car on a return journey can be programmed to be infinitely patient until its next task becomes imminent, resulting in it being happier to go a long way round or use something identified as a low-congestion alternative in the live traffic data I naïvely assume they'll be monitoring.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  6. neddie
    Member

    However, I will be buying 2 driverless cars:-

    One to travel empty in front of me, and one to travel behind, to protect me while cycling ;)

    Posted 9 years ago #
  7. duncans
    Member

    Creates an interesting new concept of a 'denial-of-service attack'. Send your car (+1000 from random internet contacts) to target location at designated time.

    Or someone else's car, if you guess their password. As if!

    Or just send the car to 'pick someone up' at barnton in the rush hour.

    There is so much scope for deniable malicious use, as well as 'go drive round in circles' to avoid parking charges, that I can't see them as viable without road charging at a high cost, and very punitive cost if the vehicle is empty.

    The law of unintended consequences will apply in a big way to driverless cars.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  8. cc
    Member

    Are driverless cars not more likely to be rented by the journey, rather than bought outright? Won't they basically be taxis without taxi drivers?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  9. Snowy
    Member

    Absolutely, if you view your transport in a utilitarian way, rather than as a display of taste and consumption.

    Could be ideal really - essentially a city car club on every street.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  10. chrisfl
    Member

    Driver less cars do potentially help solve the parking problem - if the rent out model takes off.

    This may help politically with removing car parking spaces for dedicated cycling space.

    Also I expect that a driver less car will leave sufficient room when overtaking.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  11. gibbo
    Member

    While I don't think the UK should be a guinea pig for this - that should be the country that makes these things and where the company pays tax - I'm generally in favour of them.

    Imagine, for example, cycling along Duke's Walk while surrounded by driverless cars. No narrow passes at 30mph.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  12. wingpig
    Member

    I wonder if their onboard computers will be able to automatically phone the police?

    A Googlecar is on a road. It is joined by a normalcar driven by a human, which approaches it from behind. Normalcar's driver deems Googlecar's adherence to the speed limit to be an affront to their basic human right to steam along as they see fit drive to the conditions, so the human driver, knowing the Googlecar's computer seeks to avoid collisions, speeds up, triggering the Googlecar's emergency speed-limit-breaking protocols which allow it to 'keep up with the flow of traffic'. The human driver keeps increasing his speed, continually forcing the Googlecar to speed up to avoid being shunted. At what point would the Googlecar either call for help from enforcement-constables or just attempt to slow down/pull in/stop, at the risk of the naughty human driver fulfilling their threat to butt them in the rear?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  13. PS
    Member

    if the rent out model takes off

    I can't remember where I heard this, so treat it as an anecdote, but apparently BMW are developing a subscription model that means that, rather than own a beemer the punter owns the right to use a beemer and can chop and change the model to suit their needs as required. Seems to me a model that could work well in a large urban area.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  14. fimm
    Member

    @PS City Car Club already does this - there are two sizes of car and the smaller one costs less (actually I think you might be able to pay more again and get an estate), and then there are a few vans.

    Similarly when boyfriend and I hire a car we usually go for a smallish one if it is just the two of us, but may go for something bigger if we need it, for example, if we are going camping for 10 days and want to take bikes too.

    Edited to add:
    Now I have looked it up (here) there are actually 5 categories; small, medium, large, 7 seater and van.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  15. PS
    Member

    @fimm True, and it's a very sensible model, but if consumerism and status are key concerns for car-ownership then a status-heavy brand like BMW moving towards this model would indicate a shift in the market.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  16. fimm
    Member

    @PS ah, I hadn't understood that that was the point you were making, my apologies.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  17. neddie
    Member

    I hope the rent-out model will have cars available that are pre-loaded with child car seats, buggy & a boot full of beach gear ;)

    Posted 9 years ago #
  18. dougal
    Member

    Someone on Reddit who cycles around them regularly is doing a little Q&A on /r/bicycling forum. Seems generally pretty positive!

    Posted 9 years ago #
  19. Kim
    Member

    We already have driver less cars on our roads, according to the media every time someone gets run over, it was the car that did it, never the driver...

    Posted 9 years ago #
  20. chdot
    Admin

    "

    The four English locations picked to test driverless cars have been named.
    Greenwich, in south-east London, and Bristol will each host a project of their own, while Coventry and Milton Keynes will share a third.

    "

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-30316458

    Posted 9 years ago #
  21. neddie
    Member

    British-based auto-firm Delphi has completed a journey from San Francisco to New York with its self-driving car. The trip, announced in March, covered nearly 3,400 miles (5,500 km) and took nine days. Delphi says it is the first US coast-to-coast trip ever taken by an automated vehicle.

    http://www.gizmag.com/delphi-drive-completed/36859/

    and

    http://delphi.com/delphi-drive

    Posted 8 years ago #
  22. neddie
    Member

    Google's driverless car is so boring...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34423292

    ...it was much more "fun" when there was a bit of risk involved, a bit of danger, a bit of Russian roulette, living on the edge... (not from the article)

    However, in the article:

    But just because it's safe doesn't meant it won't be massively frustrating - particularly if you're desperate to get to work or in any other kind of hurry that required a bit of (legal) urgency on the road.

    Legal urgency? Yeah right.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  23. acsimpson
    Member

    "It won't ever cut corners, or do that tiny burst of speed to nip through the lights as they change."

    Perhaps the American highway code doesn't have "stop if it's safe to do so in it".

    Posted 8 years ago #
  24. chdot
    Admin

  25. slowcoach
    Member

    from report at RoadSafetyGB "Drivers of Google’s self-driving car had to intervene 13 times in order to stop the vehicle from crashing ... an average of once every 1,560 miles."

    seems that car would have crashed a lot more than most humans so far

    Posted 8 years ago #
  26. acsimpson
    Member

    @Slowcoach, That's not what the article says, the full section is:

    "Drivers of Google’s self-driving car had to intervene 13 times between September 2014 and November 2015 in order to stop the vehicle from crashing.

    The figures are revealed in Google Self­ Driving Car Testing Report which was requested by California’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).

    The report also shows that during the same time period, Google’s autonomous car recorded 272 disengagements (where the driver was forced to take over following a detection of a failure of the autonomous technology) over a distance of 424,331 miles, an average of once every 1,560 miles."

    So they were interventions every 1,560 miles but they would only have crashed once every 32,640 miles. Which may seem high until you look at Google's breakdown of the 13 incidents. 2 of these were where there would have been contact with an traffic cone. In 3 of these instances it was the driver of another vehicle which would have caused the collision, the Google car would simply have failed to avoid being crashed into.

    Looking at the monthly breakdown only 5 of the probable contact incidents occurred in 2015 despite almost 90% of the mileage being done. This equates to 74179 miles per avoided crash (including ones which weren't the cars fault).

    I don't know the figures but would guess that is better than most humans achieve.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  27. UtrechtCyclist
    Member

    Drivers have 185 crashes per 100 million miles driven in the US (one crash per 5400 miles) http://www.caranddriver.com/features/safety-in-numbers-charting-traffic-safety-and-fatality-data . Surely not long before driverless cars are much much safer than those with drivers.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  28. crowriver
    Member

    "Surely not long before driverless cars are much much safer than those with drivers."

    It sounds as though they already are.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  29. Min
    Member

    And are the cars fitted with something that can immobilise them after a collision or is the human in charge able to drive away afterwards before anyone can get the number plate? That facility would make them better just on its own.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  30. acsimpson
    Member

    The sums aren't quite right there. 185 crashes per 100 million miles is 540,000 miles between crashes in the US, although elsewhere I've seen this quoted as the figure for the best 80% of drivers.

    I can't find the UK figures anywhere but suspect they are similar and presumably don't include unreported incidents such as traffic cone collisions or the many other scenarios where drivers don't involve police/insurance. Given that the regulations will require a driver to be present and ready to take control they are already safer having driven 1.3million miles without causing a single collision.

    Posted 8 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin