Slashdot Mirror
"Road Trains" Ready To Roll
clickclickdrone writes to mention that "road trains," a system linking vehicles together via wireless sensors, could soon be rolled out in Europe. The system is designed primarily for cutting fuel consumption, travel time, and congestion. "Funded under the European Commission's Framework 7 research plan, Sartre (Safe Road Trains for the Environment) is aimed at commuters in cars who travel long distances to work every day but will also look at ways to involve commercial vehicles. Tom Robinson, project co-ordinator at engineering firm Ricardo, said the idea was to use off-the-shelf components to make it possible for cars, buses and trucks to join the road train."
If this catches on in America some gear heads are going to explode.
That you can check the professional driver's safety record before joining the train.
-mkb
Ah ah !
20% less fuel for the vehicles following the main vehicle..
(they forget to mention the *EXTRA* fuel expense for the leading vehicle that is basically towing the others..)
Basically, no one will ever want to be in front (look at cycle races.. it only works if people take turns at being the 1st in line..)
--Ivan
A better application of technology would be to cut the need for travel via telecomumting, telepresence, etc.
the big problem is that management doesn't have that much of a clue as to how to measure job performance and "manage people" w/o the presence of warm bodies, and when we come up with real metrics and methods, most managers would quickly become redundant.
The plan is called "Sartre". My first reaction: What if there's No Exit?
I am officially gone from
Well, if you take a train then need a car at your destination, you need to rent one or spend money on cab fare. If you have too much stuff to take in the train (e.g. moving house a long distance), a train is not an option whatsoever. There are also places with existing roads where building new heavy rail would be impossible or impractical or incredibly expensive.
-mkb
This seems like it could be pretty bad if there was an accident.
You're handing control over to another driver, who may very well decide not to brake and cause a five car pileup, or worse. Also, there's no way to know the mechanical status of the vehicle -- what if one of them blows a tire, or runs out of gas, or the engine seizes?
What you should do is create a dedicated lane that is controlled entirely by computer, and you program your exit/entry point at that time, and let the signal and control computers handle traffic management. If an unauthorized vehicle enters the lane, sensors will immediately detect it, alert nearby drivers (and disengage), and send the police to go catch captain speedy pants and send him to a pants-down facility. Computers also do a much better job of fuel consumption and control... I mean, it'd basically be a packet-switched network, but with cars instead of pieces of data. It's a relatively benign IT problem.
As well, vehicle breakdowns would be handled a lot better because the system would be tied directly to the onboard computer and navigation systems: Just like lorries/semi-trucks operating on the road today. Having spoken to a commercial truck driver, I can tell you that the computer often knows about mechanical problems before the driver does, and their systems are pre-programmed to alert a dispatcher, who will send a rescue/repair vehicle out in situ.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
If this thing is as reliable as my wireless router, there will be a lot of accidents
You can already get this tech if you splurge for an S-class Mercedes:
http://www.benzinsider.com/2008/06/distronic-plus-and-brake-assist-plus-reduce-rear-end-collisions-by-20/
It would be a cool DIY project, too. Don't tell your insurance company.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
FTA: Each road train could include up to eight separate vehicles. [...] The lead vehicle would be handled by a professional driver who would monitor the status of the road train.
This sounds like a major obstacle to me. One professional, presumably paid, driver to every eight vehicles sounds expensive and pretty impractical. What are they going to do, have you queue up somewhere waiting for one of these lead drivers to come along? I think that's taking the whole "train" analogy too far, one of the reasons I like driving is that I don't have to wait for a damn train. For this kind of thing to really work, I'd have thought the ideal would be not to have a lead driver at all, but to form ad-hoc trains. I.e. vehicles interrogate each other to find out if they're going on the same route, and automatically join the "train". I'd assume that cars with this sort of technology would be speed limited, at least while leading a train, so that shouldn't be an issue.
Mr Robinson speculated that those joining a platoon or road train may one day pay for the privilege of someone else effectively driving them closer to their destination.
And a further kicker. As far as I'm concerned, these road trains would be a very diminished driving experience. I expect to pay less in return for helping the environment and reducing road congestion, not more. Give me a reduction in my road tax or something in return for participating, and I might be interested.
Oh no... it's the future.
A generic couple were standing by the side of road, which was basically a piece of flat pavement cut into the side of a mountain. They were watching a garage inventor/scientist type explain his latest invention, a motorized luggage carrier. Sort of a motorcycle sidecar or luggage unit for people who didn't want to change the visual impact of their motorbike. It was an independent unit, had its own motor and fuel, and required only a slight modification to the motorcycle in the form of a radio transmitter. After that, it basically mimicked the motions of the "master" motorcycle.
Garage inventor gets on his bike, fires it up, and drives off. Sure enough, the other device (which I recall looking a lot like a large cooler on wheels) fired up by itself and followed. A few minutes later, the garage inventor loops back and drives by. Getting cocky, he waves at the couple. Unfortunately, he hits a rock and with only one hand on the handlebars, can't recover. He loses control, and drives off the side of the cliff. An unpleasant "crunch" is heard below.
Moments later, the motorized luggage holder comes along and dutifully throws itself off the cliff as well. A second "crunch" is heard.
The couple look down at the carnage and then leave.
I agree that this is a monstrosity that no one in their right mind would ever want to use.
But it does seem like a step in the right direction. Instead of carpool lanes which are a stupid waste of time, I'd like to see a major US city devote a lane of all their highways to something interesting like this, only more flexible and safer and automated and efficient and economically beneficial, obviously.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Maybe there should be car-carrying trains. Or stop building sprawl. Anyway, actual trains are far more efficient than this could ever be.
I believe the reason this will never catch has nothing to do with technology and everything to do with legal liability. Who is going to want to be the front car of the train, when they will obviously be responsible for any accidents? What company is going to want to supply this system and open themselves up to massive lawsuits whenever somebody finds a way to defeat the system and cause an accident?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
You could, you know, drive your car onto the train.......
If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
Why is my first thought of someone playing 'crack the whip' on one of these long trains??
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I'm wondering if this is a workable step to an autopilot for cars? I would pay a lot to be able to hook up to a platoon and sleep a good portion of the trip. But it would seem like this might be workable as an interim step to an in-road sensor system.
The real trick would be making sure the driver was awake before releasing the car from the platoon. And what about the cars behind them? Also don't see how this prevents someone from cutting in between cars in the train.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Yeah, think of all the new 'convoy' sequels that we will have to listen to on the radio...
*shudder*
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
how about the moving van? Ever move a family of four in a house? or hell either of my grandmothers.
All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
... on I-94 to Minneapolis, but I fell asleep and missed the exit by 150 miles.
Have gnu, will travel.
Maybe there should be car-carrying trains.
There already are. What makes you think there aren't?
Or stop building sprawl.
And the sprawl that already exists? Face it, its not going anywhere, so you'll have to deal with this issue. Trains aren't really going to work, unless perhaps they make them incrediblly fast.
Anyway, actual trains are far more efficient than this could ever be.
Since it's not even deployed, perhaps you should wait before passing judgement.
OK - imagine this scenario: a train is driving along, and something happens to car number 2/8. Hit by another car, flat tire, accidentally leans on the joystick, whatever. The car veers out of control, unlinking cars 3-8. So now you have six cars being manned by people who were sleeping/reading/eating/daydreaming 10 nanoseconds ago.
I'm just sayin, I don't think you could pay me enough to get in one of those trains. Mythbusters did an interesting piece on saving gas by drafting. You could save a great deal of gas, but at great expense to safety.
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
Albert Einstein
Its been done. On some smaller roads connecting towns in Austria, I've seen them prohibit truck traffic. In each town, they drive the trucks onto railroad flatcars and haul them between towns.
Have gnu, will travel.
Now the distracted drivers can have their twitter/text/calls/lipstick/ etc and not get pulled over for it.
Reply to That ||
Theory: Sartre
Implementation: Kafka
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
On/off loading is too hard/slow and train stations (at least here in the UK are often in a terrible location for car traffic). In theory it's a great idea but in practice it costs too much to set-up for businesses to bother. It has been done in France (probably subsidized, but hey i'm a dirty socialist and think government spending money to reduce CO2 emission is needed) but the cars are moved on separate trains so it's no good for everyday travel.
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
How would they expect this system to work at highway Merges ? Another fun thing is inclement weather and curves on the highway. My car can take curves at a much higher speed than a panel truck during high winds.
I can see where this would be useful on long straight highways, but otherwise very dangerous. Each car would also need a "safe return to park" capability which would
cause the cars to park themselves to the side of the road if the central control was lost, and the driver did not respond within a few seconds.
Include a gps unit that would alert people that their turn is coming up, and have the professional driver thing only be for testing , and add that capability to general car system.
Sounds a lot like this idea: Train-of-cars that was posted more than 4 years ago. Note that means certain elements are therefore in the Public Domain and cannot be patented.
Naw, killing the young is both a better deterrent to overpopulation, and easier because the ignorant good-for-nothing whippersnappers won't even see it coming.
...a luxury coach, with family compartments, toilets, DVD players, all that stuff, and stick a six- or eight-car trailer behind it.
We can do that today.
Here in Europe, we already use these trains during rush hour. They can reach lengths of many kilometers.
We call them traffic jams. And we don' need no stinkin' wireless link.
I've seen this in operation already.
There was this camper with bicycles attached to the back, towing a car, towing a trailer full of moterbikes and canoes. If that isn't a road-train, I don't know what it should be called.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
You're handing control over to another driver, who may very well decide not to brake and cause a five car pileup
The following cars are electronically linked in, they would also brake and the whole train would come to a stop. As long as each car (including the lead) was restricted to brake at the same rate as the car with the worst stopping time no collision would ever occur. Besides, if the distance between the cars is small enough, even a discrepancy in braking power that wasn't compensated for would only cause a slight difference in velocity before a collision occurred. The impact would be minimal unless the last vehicle was a truck with failed brakes; but TFA states that trucks would be at the front.
At the end of the day, we all put our lives in the hands of every other driver on the road anyway. Same thing if you ever get on a bus. As long as the systems were reliable I doubt it would add too much extra danger.
Eventually we'll get reliable remote control from the highways themselves though and then travel will be *awesome.* I envision a system where traffic light controlled intersections are replaced by precision timing. Cars would be staggered by about two cars lengths as they approached the intersection and would be timed such that they could pass through the intersection at full speed without colliding. Of course, the drivers would have to be removed from the loop entirely and every vehicle would have to be completely reliable. If it did work though, could you imagine passing mere meters from other vehicles travelling perpendicular to your vehicle all at a couple hundred km/h? Of course by then we'll all have jet-packs anyway, right? Right?!?
So if this is the future...where's my jet pack?
So of course the question that would keep anyone from joining this... who pays for damages to your car if the professional driver crashes YOUR car??
"aimed at commuters in cars who travel long distances to work every day"
I have a better idea. Hook those road trains up to their houses, and move the houses closer to work. That will save a LOT of fuel, not to mention wear and tear on the infrastructure.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
This has been done before, and better, in California. See Demo 97.
There's considerable military interest in follow-the-leader systems for convoys. The military routinely drives trucks around in big groups. The US Army has a system in test where the lead vehicle (usually armored) leads a group of driverless trucks. That's to reduce casualties, not labor.
The fundamental problem with most automated driving schemes is that they address driving on freeways, which people don't mind all that much. Automatically retrieving your car from a parking garage or lot and bringing it to you would actually sell.
Exactly, this is a quick and dirty optimization for commuters. By just linking up on the fly and on the highway that's already being driven, any properly equipped cars can hop in instantly and follow the route they normally take. Loading onto an actual train takes time on both ends and requires the drivers to board/depart only at train stations, making it more effective for long distance (3-8+ hours). It also allows this to go all along the freeway you travel, rather than just along the rail lines, meaning more people would use a system tied to just the highway.
Of course, I can guarantee this system would limit travel speed to the legal speed limit, so this wouldn't catch on with the majority of commuters. Most cities, if traffic isn't moving 15mph, it's going 15mph faster than the speed limit.
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
This will give an entirely another meaning to the expression "L'enfer, c'est les autres".
So you need one professional driver for every 8 cars to do the driving. How is it saving fuel if for every 8 cars your new train system has to have 1 more car burning fuel? You're adding 12.5% in fuel to save a few mpg.
Except that with this system, they don't need to be jammed. If everybody in the train presses the accelerator at once, knowing that the car in front of them will as well, everybody gets to move. You're not as limited by the following distance required by an unpredictable human driver and the unpredictable circumstances ahead.
Reducing inter-car distance reduces the amount of road you need because you put more cars on the same amount of pavement, and the same highway functions as a much larger road. But it only works if you get the humans out of the loop.
Of course it also provides opportunities for truly spectacular failures.
Note that means certain elements are therefore in the Public Domain and cannot be patented.
Sounds like a challenge.
Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
Hmmm. That doesn't quite work for me. What if we called them, say... CONVOY!
No worse than usual. Where I come from this would space the cars out slightly ... but their behaviour would be more predictable.
Of course, I can guarantee this system would limit travel speed to the legal speed limit, so this wouldn't catch on with the majority of commuters. Most cities, if traffic isn't moving 15mph, it's going 15mph faster than the speed limit.
Or maybe the lack of speeding would remove the revenue incentives for having stupid speed limits, and the limits would get raised to something sane.
They seem to be assuming some idealistic world where everything goes as they plan.
I mean, how will the system react to motorcyclist merging into the middle of it to pass to the other side? What about a car trying to merge into the middle of it? Proper driving distance requires enough space for that to happen after all. Do they really expect to have an 8 car merging dead zone?
If they're in the left lane then they need to get into it somehow and I also doubt every car can drive at the speed limit (or above it rather) so the left is out. An eight car no merging zone would annoy a lot of people so every other lane is out as well.
That's not even getting into people who have malicious intent and try to make such a beast crash by, for example, running a specifically broken transmitter.
Ya I've seen this too. It was just North of North Battleford Saskatchewan and there was this car pulling a trailer and behind this was a nice boat. The problem is the car was in the ditch. Their road train started to fish tail. They were going down a hill. The trailer swung around and wiped out both back fenders of the car before it tore the hitch off. Then it headed into the ditched and did a couple summersaults. Since the boat was hooked to the trailer it also did a summersault as it broke the tie downs and left the trailer.
I would say the mess was something like 250-500 feet. The driver and his wife were sitting in the ditch with their heads in their hands. There was stuff like pillows and bedding and dishes scattered all over the place!
Too bad I didn't have my camera! BTW I was also towing my brand new boat but I knew better than to try to run a road train. I think to do this successfully you actually have to have brakes on the trailers.
Is this where I put in the "In Soviet Russia" joke?
And the sprawl that already exists?
Well, the nuclear powers are talking about reducing their warhead stockpiles. Maybe we could solve two problems at once.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
What happens when one of the vehicles in the "road train" has a blowout, or something like that?
Proverbs 21:19
More likely you pay a fee, so you get to use the "road train" and go faster. How's that for your revenue incentive?
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Ah ah !
20% less fuel for the vehicles following the main vehicle..
(they forget to mention the *EXTRA* fuel expense for the leading vehicle that is basically towing the others..)
Basically, no one will ever want to be in front (look at cycle races.. it only works if people take turns at being the 1st in line..)
--Ivan
Presumably, the efficiency comes from the lack of stop-and-go (and other variations in speed) not from "drafting" behind the lead car.
Drafting requires extreme proximity between vehicles...we're talking like 6ft/2m or so for vehicles of typical size. At even moderate highway speeds (60mph/100kph) that leaves about a twentieth of a second between vehicles, which is probably too much for even a computer to manage effectively, given the limits of the mechanical systems involved. And at lower speeds, the advantage of drafting is negligible.
This morning, I drove about 20 miles in extremely dense traffic. "Bumper to bumper", and about 15 miles below speed limit. I could see the lead vehicles at every curve in the road. They were side by side, matching speeds. In front of them, there were no cars (none!) on the road, as far as the eye could see.
"Drafting" might help fuel economy, but the only way it could reduce congestion or travel times would be if we can also get some of the idiots off of the road.
Ahh yes, truely narcissistic attitude. Nuke those that dare build somewhere I disgree with.
I've been toying with some of the same ideas while driving the New York State Thruway over the past year or two. There are similar concerns to those mentioned here, along with a few others, and a few ideas to mitigate them. My working title for the idea, with due to Samuel L Jackson, has been "Snakes in a Lane."
One little variation worth mentioning... The density and length of such trains (or snakes) would have to be managed so that regular traffic could manouver around them. I would also suggest giving them a 5-10 mph speed boost, given that they're already getting a mileage boost from drag reduction, and to induce drivers to join a train. I suspect one very real requirement is a computerized vehicle health self-check, to make sure it's fit to participate.
It's a fun idea to play with while driving.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
The only thing that worries me is that they talk about mixing cars and trucks. Taking humans out of the loop can't overcome differences in the way vehicles handle. The only way I can see is to limit the deceleration rate to that which a truck can achieve. As a motorcyclist, I appreciate the value of as short a stopping distance as possible.
Is 1563649 a prime number?
Designate the leftmost lane the "train lane." Hit a button on your dash, and it signals the train to make an opening for you, hand off driving control to the "conductor" and you get to cruise at 15mph above the posted speed limit--legally. When you approach your exit, it signals you to leave the train, and you resume manual control to get the rest of the way to your destination.
Sounds workable to me.
I've seen things when they get busy around here. I'd much rather go 70mph (or even 45mph) than the maybe 10 you can average during congestion.
To say nothing of cities with bigger traffic problems like DC, San Fran, or LA.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
As usual, mother nature is way ahead of us.
War as we knew it was obsolete
Nothing could beat complete denial
- Emily Haines
except at 55-75 mph there's that much less room to react when the tire of the car in front of you blows out...
Unless you're building in sensors that can check for each and every possible change to the front vehicles ability to maintain speed and safety.
An automated roadway seems a better bet than semi-autonomous 'trains' on an uncontrolled road. The 'trains' would by their definition need to interact in real-time with humans driving cars the old fashioned way. Trying to get a computer to react properly to independent human behavior at that speed in unknown conditions seems a steep steep hill to climb.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
I would indeed pay for that ability, especially on long haul drives (100+ miles).
Why am I really scared by the idea that every car will be remotely controllable via a wireless connection? Of course there's no risk. It's completely inconceivable that someone will figure out how to hack into the control system, bypassing whatever authentication is required and taking control of random cars as they drive down the road. We all know things like that could never happen, since of course these cars will have unbreakable security.
"I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
if brake of one car automatically brakes all following cars, there is no great danger.
That's kind of a big "if". In theory, it works out great. In practice, it takes only one car to malfunction to cause vast damage.
There's also the fact that you can't rely on braking to be perfect: any piece of junk on the road or worn tire has the potential to interfere with one car, with domino effects to every car behind it.
They do say that the lead car of the train would be driven by professional drivers. of course that won't really help if a car in the middle of the train does something unexpected.
I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
In the southern hemisphere there already Road Trains.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_train
I call Shenanigans!
Facts are otherwise and here they are.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Just though i would point out that the ability for a motorcycle to brake faster than a car or truck is a myth. If you have a car or truck setup with the same quality tyres and brakes as a performance motorcycle you will find they stop in the same or less distance (Due to certain circumstances where a larger contact patch is benificial such as braking on dirt etc). (I am a motorcyclist also =p).
I agree with Glen Beck - Don't let the government take away our freedom to drive!! Say no to Obamatrain.
>>>Source: Australian Greenhouse Office.
Yeah I trust them..... about as much as I trust Minister Conroy's claims that the internet needs to be universally-filtered by the government. I see with my own eyes the Washington D.C. metros running late at night, barely any passengers on board. That's a lot of wasted energy to run ~100,000 pound trains, with frequent stops and starts, and virtually nobody on board. A 2000 pound car would be more efficient.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
What you should do is create a dedicated lane that is controlled entirely by computer...
If you had bothered to RTFA, you might have noticed this statement:
We're looking at what it would take to get platooning on public highways without making big changes to the public highways themselves.
They're not claiming this is the best or only way to do this. They're specifically looking for a solution that would work on existing highways.
And the sprawl that already exists?
Those areas will urbanize over time, assuming that our population continues to increase. It's crazy to continue development without any urban planning.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
It could keep you stuck to the train unless you acknowledge the disengage warning.
Where's my patent?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
They're looking for that old film from one of the proving grounds. You know which one I mean.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
GM did this "car train" thing as an advanced research project back in the late 1970's in Cincinnati, OH.
Couldn't find a link, but remember reading about it.
The article never says that such a system "could soon be rolled out in Europe." What it says is that the European Union is doling out grant money to researchers to study such a system, and that they might try some live experiments. It's pretty clear that this is still a research project, with many technical, regulatory, and societal hurdles to clear before we see it in action.
Not sure why this got modded down, it seems plausible to me.
25 years driving - I've never had one, neither has my sis, nor brother, nor Mom, nor Dad, nor best friend, etc. That's just 0 in 200 years driving experience
Found a few flat tires when I've left my car overnight, from a nail picked up though.
..........FULL STOP.
ever notice the cars that do have problems on the road?
It's pretty frequent, as in a *daily* occurrence. If any of those cars were near or in the trains, it's just something that has to be dealt with and accounted for.
Modern cars are pretty good on average, but the law of averages always catches up eventually. Steering rods, brakes, alternators...lots of potential problems. Hell I've even seen someone's wheel literally come off at highway speeds; as in the lug nuts were either rusted through or they didn't tighten them properly. That's the type of thing that a 'train' would have to deal with.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
except at 55-75 mph there's that much less room to react when the tire of the car in front of you blows out...
Yes, if that happens you hit them! But, you don't hit them very hard because they haven't had time to decelerate very much and your autopilot slammed on the brakes the millisecond they started to slow.
In the worst case, if the lead car suddenly loses a tire or something, the whole train probably collides, rather gently and then comes to a stop as a mass. Might scratch some paintwork, but unlikely to kill, or even hurt, anybody.
On a totally automated road system you would have trains like this separated by gaps big enough to ensure that even if one train is brought to a sudden halt (say by hitting a falling tree or a rogue motorist) the one behind has space to do a controlled stop.
IMHO the engage/disengage part is the tricky part!
They probably have solved the 'train lane' part (easy) but I wonder how you can engage/desengage safely in this kind of the 'train', especially as the lane next to the 'train lane' is used by manually driven cars..
Taking humans out of the loop can't overcome differences in the way vehicles handle.
On the contrary, that's exactly what a computer can do - and more reliably than a human (think of autopilots and fly-by-wire). The system would need to know the performance curve (especially braking performance) of each vehicle involved, but we understand physics pretty well and these things are easily quantifiable. If designed properly, the system would be constantly measuring and updating its model of the vehicle's performance in real time, and would take account of weather, road surface, etc.
I've seen things when they get busy around here. I'd much rather go 70mph (or even 45mph) than the maybe 10 you can average during congestion.
To say nothing of cities with bigger traffic problems like DC, San Fran, or LA.
That's the other problem. How do you get across 3-4 lanes of stop-and-go DC beltway traffic to the 'fast' train lane (presuming not everyone will have a capable car) to the far left lane which is traveling 70mph and enter safely? Probably will require two lanes, one as a merge lane only during rush hour. But again, good luck convincing city planners to give up 2 lanes, and preventing accidents with manual-drivers interfering with the train.
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
Many, many years ago I vaguely remembering a discussion between some relatives of mine about drafting to get better milage. I seem to recall one potential problem that was mentioned was that trailing cars might not get the airflow for cooling the engine that was expected by the designers. None involved in the discussion were experts. I wonder if there's anything to that line of thinking...?
Just put three small lights in the center of the rear bumper:
Green - accelerating
Yellow - feet off pedals, engine is dragging
Red - braking (redundant)
Maybe make both yellow turn signals come on for feet off pedals.
"Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there" - Will Rogers
In a hundred more years, they'll do more math, and discover that efficiency will increase greatly with reducing friction, creating straight lines, predictable, computer-monitored and guided paths. They'll make steel roads, steel wheels. Flat, straight, and long, with soft curves. Perhaps with two parallel steel guides, perhaps with one overhead guide. They'll plot the locations of the guides and trains on maps and computers. They'll allow the the cars to simply lock onto one another, and travel as one big element. Most likely unlocking from each other to stop individually at their streetss, or stations, whatever. But none of this will be coordinated by a public group, much less a goverment, all will be privately owned and sold by public corporations, ten generations of mass-produced technologies, all built, bought, tested, crashed, and discarded, one by one, paid by you.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
I had a tire that was patched by a plug, completely explode when traveling at 65mph.
I've seen tires explode on semi's barreling down the highway too.
Anything can happen.
The goal of computer science is to build something that will last at least until we've finished building it.
PRT - Private Rapid Transit is old, has lots of different companies, solutions, implementations, and tests, and works great! The only problem as usual, is that it's too efficient - it doesn't waste and crash lots of cars and break lots of parts, require constant maintenance, insurance, fuel, roads, service stations, parking lots, resellers, etc, "generating" millions of jobs, and make lots of money for lots of companies. It just gets built once, requires only a few maint guys, and just works. So when we invent a new form of economy, not socialism or capitalism, maybe we'll have it. Till then, plod along at 35mph in a 120mph-capable steel box, surrounded by amateur drivers in their own private steel boxes, consuming 30% of the average salary and killing a couple users once in a while.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
THIS is a road train. =]
True, but not feasible any more these days. Work and living areas are separated: there are no houses at walking distance from most offices. Or they are very expensive. On top of that transportation is cheap. Fuel is cheap - also in Europe. And for anyone who doesn't believe that, ask the question: have you ever left your car and used alternative transportation (walking, bicycle, public transport) instead because you find the fuel too expensive? I bet the answer is "no".
On top of that it would almost always mean moving home when you change jobs. That's no fun either. Or what about if both husband and wife work, in different companies, and still want to live together.
People like to live in open, green space while many businesses prefer the convenience and availability of all kinds of services of central and business districts. We'd better live with that, and try to make the commute as fast, ecological friendly and safe as possible.
If you don't acknowledge the normal alarm you could have it drift your car over to hit the rumble strips along the side of almost every interstate.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
I missed that part I guess. That seems to be even less likely to succeed. Now you need a professional driver going primarily where you're going as well? Obviously on well traveled routes such as commuting this might work, but carpooling does much the same thing without any added risks.
Someone mentioned handling characteristics of different cars. A good point if the lead car has to make emergency maneuvers...how does the tail end of the train react?
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
When traveling at speed even minor bumps can greatly affect the handling of a car.
If you're hitting a car that now has a blown tire, I imagine it's that much worse.
My original post was mostly that this was *not* an automated roadway; these 'trains' would be traveling on open roadways with 'regular' traffic. A fully automated system would be better I think because you'd have the 'swarm' type of reactions with computers rather than mixing human and computer decision making with split second requirements.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
I remember seeing a demo of this on the old TV show 'Beyond 2000' back in the late 90s.