"
Three pods will drive themselves on the pavements and pedestrianised areas of the city initially and, if successful, a fleet of 40 vehicles will be rolled out.
"
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
Driverless cars coming to a pavement near you(?)
(15 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
Alongside the trials in Milton Keynes and Coventry, Bristol will host the Venturer consortium, which aims to investigate whether driverless cars can reduce congestion and make roads safer.
Driving on the pavements will definitely make the roads safer.
I am not sure how they are supposed to help social inclusion though as claimed elsewhere in the article.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Three pods will drive themselves on the pavements and pedestrianised areas of the city initially "
I can't believe that.
Posted 10 years ago # -
But assuming they pass the safe pavement driving test...
Driverless cars will of course obey the correct speed limits. Imagine the frustration this will cause amongst the 'no to 20' supporters! There'll be chaos as the driverless cars actually stop at red lights etc...Posted 10 years ago # -
Carless drivers would be even safer
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Three pods will drive themselves on the pavements and pedestrianised areas of the city initially"
That way, if anything goes wrong, it's only lowlife pedestrians - rather that valuable drivers - who die.
Posted 10 years ago # -
As a cyclist, I'd be much happier with driverless cars (once the test phase is completed). There are simply too many reckless and agressive drivers out there...
A driverless car will always be fully alert and aware of other road users.
A driverless car will obey the speed limit.
A driverless car won't jump the lights.
A driverless car won't stop in an ASL.
A driverless car will give me the appropriate space when it passes me.
A driverless car won't get up to my back wheel and honk its horn at me when I'm in primary.
Basically, all the things that make so many drivers a danger to others will be eliminated.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I suspect they are testing in pedestrianised areas simply because they are testing at 'very' slow speeds. Also it will enable a good test of the tech's ability to spot really small objects. If it can avoid running over a chihuahua then it'll be fine spotting other cars, cyclists and pedestrians out on the mean streets. Oh, and they'll not yet be licensed to be put on the road by the government, this testing will form part of the necessary background work before they are allowed onto the road - not because drivers are more important or anything, but simply because once on the roads they'll be travelling at 20, 30 or 40mph, and if something goes wrong at that speed it's naturally more serious (though I suspect there is always someone sitting in it ready to take over in the case of malfunction).
But like gibbo, I welcome driverless cars! (even though I love driving, the pay-off for safety when I'm cycling and walking is immense).
Posted 10 years ago # -
Didn't someone tell us a few weeks ago that driverless cars will be programmed to break speed limits, and "keep up with the traffic"?
Posted 10 years ago # -
@cc.
I'm sure they could do something else to discourage human drivers from butting into them rather than just speed up out of their way. Perhaps the entire rear surface of the driverless car could start pulsing red/yellow whilst the car screams "STAY BACK! I'M CALLING THE POLICE!" and starts filming the offending tailgater.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I, for one, welcome our new autonomous auto mobile overlords, they'll be better than our current lot...
Posted 10 years ago # -
@wingpig how about mounting twin miniguns to the rear of the driverless car and allowing a driver behind "twenty seconds to comply" if they're exceeding the speed limit?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Didn't someone tell us a few weeks ago that driverless cars will be programmed to break speed limits, and "keep up with the traffic"?
Surely a test case against the manufacturer would solve that PDQ. If any other company sold a product that (automatically) broke a relevant law, it would be taken off sale pretty quickly.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@chug - normal reasoning does not apply to motor vehicles.
See also "otherwise law abiding motorist", tolerance of KSI, predominance of victim blaming, mystical reliance on personal protective equipment, expectation that everyone will play by the rules, etc.
Robert
Posted 10 years ago # -
do we really have no better use for all this research and development money?
We are still taking about maintaining unsustainable lifestyles, albeit trying to pretend we can reduce the impact of choices on other folks.
This whole thing is MADNESS. If half the ££s were spent in actually providing better cycle infrastructure and better urban environments generally where folks could lead positive local lives without the need to drive off 5 miles to supermarkets etc we'd really be getting somewhere.Posted 10 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
