Driverless Cars Begin 8,000-Mile Trek

apoc.famine writes "Driverless technology from the University of Parma's VisLab was deployed in a real-world test on Tuesday. Two driverless chase vehicles will attempt to follow two lead vehicles across multiple continents, from Italy to China, over the course of three months. The journey will cover over 8,000 miles, (~13,000 km) as the chase vehicles use lasers and cameras to navigate hazards along the way. The team expects to collect about 100 TB of data, which requires a hefty electronics and battery load — the scale is such that the cars can only run for about three hours before needing 8 hours to recharge the batteries. This journey is being billed as just a test, and far from a real-world application. The vehicles don't go more than about 35mph, and need a person behind the wheel to take over at a moment's notice. 'What we are trying to do is stress our systems and see if they can work in a real environment, with real weather, real traffic, and crazy people who cross the road in front of you and a vehicle that cuts you off,' said project leader Alberto Broggi. The goal is not to produce just road vehicles, but to improve the technology so it can be used in military and agricultural roles as well. The team hopes to have helped mature the technology within the next 10-20 years to the point that it can be used on the road."

Comments

The future

[ceraphis]

While I can't wait to see how this pans out, I still wouldn't like to be so close to the bleeding edge of the future that I get run over.

Re:BIG WOW?

[adtifyj]

"Not only the vehicles are unmanned, but they run on electrical power and the whole electronic pilot is powered by solar energy, making this trip unique in history: goods packed in Italy will be brought to Shanghai on an intercontinental route with no human intervention and without using traditional fuel for the first time in history."

Re:BIG WOW?

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

So, basically, they have a compost heap in the trunk. Dude, Dr. Emmett Brown has sooooo much "prior art" on this thing.

vinith98

[vinith98]

This is amazing, if it is a success it would completely change the face of transportation.

Digital Driver

[Dr Max]

I can't wait for this to be on sale for the public. No need to park your car in the city to go to work just have it drop you off at the front door, park somewhere free, avoid the parking police, then when your finished for the day call it up to come and get you. That’s just on a weekday can you imagine the fun you could have on the weekend knowing you have a computer driver ready to take you to the next pub, or get you back to the flower garden next to your driveway.

Re:Digital Driver

[Nialin]

I'd love if it went and got itself serviced while you're still at work.
Or heading off to the grocery store to pick up pre-ordered goods at the full-service "delivery" window (must tip the kind shop keep).
How about going home and parking itself to charge, while the other one goes and pick the kids up from school and drops them off at soccer practice.

Ah, the future. I wonder what people used to think of ~70 years ago...

Re:Digital Driver

[zarzu]

they thought of flying cars... and we still don't have them.

Re:Digital Driver

[urusan]

The only problem is when it goes in to get serviced and the mechanic convinces it that it needs a bunch of expensive repairs...

Re:Digital Driver

[shyampandit]

So we would end up with tons of empty cars searching for parking spots everywhere and clogging up roads instead?

Re:Digital Driver

[Aeternitas827]

Would unmanned cars still honk their horns obnoxiously when one of their counterparts takes their sweet time escaping a parking spot?

They'll never make it..

[Mr_Miagi]

.. starting from Italy?!

They'll most likely be barged off the road by the hand-waving angry Italian motorists!

Major differences

[JanneM]

* The car can park itself anywhere, get service or pick up stuff while you're working. Less need to use valuable city real estate and street area on parking. And as people no longer park along the streets they get effectively wider, with more space for traffic but also for bicycle lanes.

* A two-car family may only need one, as the car can go by itself to pick up family members as they need it.

* A family may in fact own no car. Car pooling becomes much more effective when you can call up a car from the pool to your front door at any time.

* No need for a license. People with dementia, or taking medication, or with severe disabilities, or underage can still get around, no problem.

* The cars will be scrupulous about obeying traffic laws and speed limits. But even with a small part self-driving cars, they will act as pace cars and slow and smooth traffic for everyone. Even more so, as they'll be recording everything happening around them, and other drivers know it. Pace will be slower, but people will arrive sooner.

* Life becomes tough for taxi drivers. Taking a taxi would become the same as short-term car rental in practice, and cheaper than taxis as there's no drivers salary to pay.

* Point to point transport becomes cheaper too, with driverless vans and trucks shuttling between shipment centers.

* Driverless drive-ins means you can send a car to do a lot of your errands.

Re:Major differences

[dargaud]

The cars will be scrupulous about obeying traffic laws and speed limits. But even with a small part self-driving cars, they will act as pace cars and slow and smooth traffic for everyone. Even more so, as they'll be recording everything happening around them, and other drivers know it. Pace will be slower, but people will arrive sooner.

I agree with everything else you wrote but the above. Some experiments have shown that a few outliers (read, poor drivers: too fast or disregard of others) can actually better the flow of traffic. One example: you have an intersection in complete deadlock; the asshole who drives on the sidewalk to escape can actually free a spot that will end the deadlock. If everybody follows the rules in this case, nobody comes out. There are other cases.

The other point is that driving slower doesn't necessarily always make it safer: I've fallen asleep and gone off the road while following a long unpassable line of 'just a notch under the speed limit' cars. Driving off the road doesn't meet the definition of 'arriving sooner' but I eagerly wait the day when I don't have to waste concentration at the tedious and dangerous task of driving.

Re:Major differences

[JanneM]

True to some degree. But many, even most, of those trips (go charge somewhere, transports) would happen with or without self-driving cars. And it's not clear to me that a car going directly to a somewhat distant parking garage is actually using any more energy than a car circling for fifteen minutes looking for a convenient nearby spot.

The smoother, slower ride of an unhurried automatic car will use less energy than the jerky stop-and-go of impatient human drivers. And as they act as pace cars there'll be a positive effect on all drivers, not just on the automatic cars.

So while your point is something to be concerned about I suspect the actual impact would be much less than you'd think at first.

Re:Major differences

[Krneki]

* New taxes to replace all the lost ones.

Re:Major differences

[rolfwind]

* The cars will be scrupulous about obeying traffic laws and speed limits. But even with a small part self-driving cars, they will act as pace cars and slow and smooth traffic for everyone. Even more so, as they'll be recording everything happening around them, and other drivers know it. Pace will be slower, but people will arrive sooner.

I don't know what you're smoking, but when I was in Germany, the blitz camera (for speeding) in my part of town didn't cause people to go slower except in the very spot it was in. It caused enough rage that it was actually shot at night on multiple occasions.

In America, I live near a highway still marked an antiquated 55 mph, and everyone goes at least 70 mph. In my experience, there is nothing magically special or wise about the arbitrary speed limits, except they are set way too low in order for the cops to generate revenue on demand.

Your little do-good buggy will a) in fact slow me down on the highway causing me to get there slower and b) cause road rage in someone that will drive that little piece of shit off the road, taped or not.

As for you pace car idea, here is the execution in real life:
http://green.autoblog.com/2007/08/25/what-happens-when-highway-drivers-are-forced-to-go-55-mph-its/

Re:when you lack talent...

[zr-rifle]

When you are unable to provide insight or interesting arguments to a discussion, you blindly criticize, troll in other words. Let's hope that at some point of time we will find some real expert in the field to RTFA, and write something that's actually worth reading.

Re:BIG WOW?

[stealth_finger]

It is unmanned......apart from that guy.

Child process

[JustOK]

do while NOT there
  print "Are we there yet?"
loop

Re:BIG WOW?

[wisdom_brewing]

is it confidence in the technology or legal requirement?

Re:BIG WOW?

[MoeDumb]

Baby you can't drive my car.

Re:Careful what you wish for

[Zerth]

Oddly enough, this is an issue I'm willing to hand the Feds a glove and say "go for it".

While I enjoy a good road trip, I consider commuting a complete waste of time and would much rather spend my drive sitting in the passenger seat doing something useful while Robo-Jeeves does the work for me.

I would feel slightly bad for the elimination of taxi drivers, but robot taxis would actually reduce the impact of car non-ownership on those that can't afford one.