A Robo-Car Just Drove Across the Country

Press2ToContinue writes with this news from Wired: Nine days after leaving San Francisco, a blue car packed with tech from a company you've probably never heard of rolled into New York City after crossing 15 states and 3,400 miles to make history. The car did 99 percent of the driving on its own, yielding to the carbon-based life form behind the wheel only when it was time to leave the highway and hit city streets. This amazing feat, by the automotive supplier Delphi, underscores the great leaps this technology has taken in recent years, and just how close it is to becoming a part of our lives. Yes, many regulatory and legislative questions must be answered, and it remains to be seen whether consumers are ready to cede control of their cars, but the hardware is, without doubt, up to the task." That last one percent is a bear, though.

Comments

I wonder

[justthinkit]

I wonder what long distance truck drivers are thinking right about now.

Re:I wonder

[DrunkenTerror]

"I bet no one will miss that ugly pale one. Damn, she kinda looks like a man. She'll do."

Re:I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

That they'll get plenty of sleep for 90% of the trip, until they need to hit city streets.

Re:I wonder

[slack_justyb]

Most truck drivers already know the writing is on the wall. The older ones could not care less, they'll be off the road for good before there is enough states stitched together to make any usable routes. The younger ones don't care either, they barely like their job to begin with and anything that makes their life less stressful all the better.

And all of that cycles around the fact that it'll be a long time before someone in some state's capital let's 80,000 pounds just roll down the road unsupervised. Most truck drivers are pretty convinced that their jobs will just turn into watching a machine roll down the road, and sign the paperwork when that machine runs into something.

Also, besides the obvious state law stuff that needs to get passed. Security will need to be addressed as well. There already is a problem with semis that are not automatic and they have a human watching the goods for a majority of the time. Imagine a semi just rolling down the street and someone decides to flatten the tires with a spike strip. Yeah, an alarm might go off, but the thieves will be long gone with the goods by the time anyone gets to the disabled machine.

Re:I wonder

[ShanghaiBill]

That they'll get plenty of sleep for 90% of the trip, until they need to hit city streets.

It would make more sense to have a separate driver for the few miles of city streets on each end of the route. Or if the route is usually the same, just ask Google to map it and put it into their navigation database.

Re:I wonder

[Giant Electronic Bra]

Yeah, its hard to believe fixed routes won't be entirely mapped soon. Aren't there city buses that can already do that? I believe so. Because its a small fixed route it can be completely mapped and analyzed to the point where there aren't any surprises except what normally isn't there, you can pick it all out, you already know all your navigation decisions, etc. It will still take a couple more decades for the whole thing to get routine. I doubt truck drivers are losing TOO much sleep yet.

Re:I wonder

[Moridineas]

America is criss-crossed by a lot of Interstate highways. If any state drags their feet too long, the trucks will be routed elsewhere, and that state will lose revenue and jobs.

What revenue and jobs? I thought that was kind of the point of driverless trucks?

Besides, with no need for humans in the cab, the fundamentals of trucks can be redesigned. No need for bunk space, windshield, driver seat, etc. Change the design of the cab to dramatically increase aerodynamics. Program convoys of 3–4 (so as not to be a nuisance) trucks to draft off of each other going down the highway to dramatically increase mileage. I'm betting driverless trucks can be a lot more fuel efficient than your average driver by method too, so gas tax revenue from trucking may not be as high.

But, the real answer to your question is what governments do with ANYTHING new--tax it.

Re:I wonder

[0123456]

The guy with his nose in the mud is often not the best guy to ask what is coming over the horizon.

True. The real story is that by the time a real, mass-market driverless car with no manual controls is possible, teleprescence and 3D printers will have made trucks and cars pretty much obsolete.

Re:I wonder

[Anubis IV]

Well, there are a few problems that crop up if you don't have someone along for the bulk of the ride:
1) Who refuels it?
2) Whose job is it to prevent the cargo from being stolen?
3) Who ensures that the cargo remains properly secured?
4) Who is legally responsible if the cargo is unsecured?
5) Who answers questions at weigh stations?
6) Who gives the okay to start driving again after someone crashes into it?

Some of those can obviously be dealt with easily, others not so much, especially when it comes to questions of legal liability and providing sufficient (dis)incentives to ensure the public's well-being.

Re: I wonder

[pitchpipe]

I think you forgot: Slashdot Troll. Since this site has fallen out of favor, they are an increasingly endangered species. Let's try to nurture them.

Re:I wonder

[ShanghaiBill]

1) Who refuels it?

The folks at the truck stop, who have a contract with the trucking company.

2) Whose job is it to prevent the cargo from being stolen?

Two people are responsible: The guy who puts the padlock on the back of the trailer, and the guy who checks the cameras when a breach is detected.

4) Who is legally responsible if the cargo is unsecured?

The insurance company

5) Who answers questions at weigh stations?

The guy at the other end of the phone call.

6) Who gives the okay to start driving again after someone crashes into it?

After a collision, I think a human would show up to deal with the situation.

Re:I wonder

[CODiNE]

Short term solution: experienced driver in the lead truck responsible for the 2-5 following him. Much simpler driving for the automatic ones, and a real human there for taking care of problems.

Re:I wonder

[Anubis IV]

So, I want to be clear about my intent here. I'm not trying to suggest that driver-less trucks are infeasible. On the contrary, I agree with what I would assume is your belief as well: that driver-less trucks will be the future. I'm merely pointing out that the problem is much harder than you're giving it credit for. Moreover, your latest response is trivializing a complicated situation by suggesting that a handful of trite answers are sufficient to address it.

For instance, we currently lack a nationwide network of stations that offer full-service for your trucks. It's certainly doable, but so far as I know it's not currently in place, and that's one of the simpler problems to address.

Your notion that a padlock and camera is sufficient to deter theft falls apart when we consider all of the flatbed trailers out there, or the fact that we live in a world where bolt cutters and masks exist. As it is, I see flatbeds loaded with lumber, steel pipes, and all manner of other material go by regularly, with the only things stopping me from stealing them being a trucker and my sense of what's right.

And I wasn't talking about who pays for lost cargo when I asked about unsecured loads (yes, that would be the insurer). I was asking who gets charged with manslaughter when the aforementioned steel pipes come loose and impale the passengers in the car following your truck. My family once had to swerve around one of these tires after it came loose from a flatbed. Trucks are pulled over all the time for violations in properly securing their loads, and that's despite the fact that the driver is currently held legally responsible for it. Heaven help us if it's a corporate drone three states removed who may or may not be traceable.

And what phone numbers would the folks at the weigh station call? Do we require trucking companies to register themselves in a national database, or do we just let them paint it on the side of the truck? Who do they call if the paint has faded? How do they tell the truck to pull off to the side of the weigh station while they wait for a human to arrive to deal with any problems that can't be answered over the phone?

Again, I agree that all of these issues are solvable, but suggesting that your trite answers are sufficient is doing a disservice to the people working on the technological, political, and economic issues surrounding the subject.

Re:I wonder

[Paradise Pete]

You're right, it will be more difficult than it appears at first glance. In my experience, this is true with every non-trivial endeavor*.
It's also inevitable. I don't think the issues you've raised will be major impediments. If there are any, and there always are, it will be something else that hasn't yet occurred to anyone.


*even when you take into account Hofstader's Law (heh).

Re:I wonder

[Jack Griffin]

This whole "who prevents cargo from being stolen" argument is moot in my opinion. If a someone wants to steal cargo, they can threaten driver with a gun.

Armed robbery, possibly murder if the driver puts up a fight could see you in jail for life or even the death penalty. Blocking a driver-less vehicle onto the road in the middle of nowhere and helping yourself to free stuff is the equivalent of a misdemeanor in most places. To think the two are the same thing is pretty misguided.

Re:I wonder

[bruce_the_loon]

There is a continuum of behaviour in play here. Most people would be unlikely to proceed with stealing cargo if killing someone was required. That's why having a bloke leaning against the van when you're unloading it keeps the yobbos from running off with your cargo.

Add a firearm to the bloke and you block another section of people who'd try threats and low to mid-end violence from taking the risk in the first place.

The sense of what is right might encompass nicking a crate of beer off an unattended van, but not hurting someone to do it. And I'd suspect that group is much, much larger than the group who would kill someone over it.

Re:I wonder

[ColdWetDog]

Ah, you've just invented ... a train.

Also happened in 1995

[Anonymous Coward]

CMU had a car drive itself across America in 1995, 98% autonomously:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tjochem/nhaa/Journal.html

Re:Also happened in 1995

[jaak]

The 1995 CMU vehicle was sponsored by Delco Electronics which, two years later, became part of Delphi (which engineered the car in this story).

Re:Also happened in 1995

[ShanghaiBill]

And in all that time they still cannot make a car that can drive itself in inclement weather

Not everyone has weather. I live in California. It doesn't snow here, and a few years ago, it stopped raining as well.

When hype turn to Tripe.

[jklovanc]

Lane following is one of the simplest things for vehicle technology to do. All it does is follows the lane lines and keeps a speed/ or minimum distance from the vehicle in front. I bet every time they had to change highways the driver took over. Also notice it was not raining heavily, snowing or recently snowed in the trip. Current technology has problems in those cases. Comparing lane following to autonomous driving is like comparing algebra to calculus.

Re:Do you know

[0123456]

Most humans drive fine in 'conditions they're already prepared for'. It's the other fraction of one percent where most of the accidents happen.

The last 1% is nothing to worry about

[khchung]

IF, and that's a big pessimistic if, eventually autonomous car is deemed unable to navigate local city streets, then what you will see are large parking lots springing up around highway exits, where robo-cars will park itself when it leaves the highway.

There, either the human driver takes over immediately and go away, or more likely, the car alert the sleeping driver to wake up. The driver, after sleeping all the way since he got on the highway, gets off and have a meal and refresh himself, then drove off.

OR, the passengers don't even know how to drive. Some other driver drove to the lot next the highway, get off, the car take over to get on the highway, reach the lot near destination, and some other driver came and drive the car to the destination. Think kids of divorced parent, or kids going to visit grandparents.

Same approach applies much more easily to trucks. Now truck drivers only need to go round and round between the last leg on both sides, letting the truck drive itself over the long haul. That means cheap transport, no need for long tiring trips away from home, and fewer accidents.

JUST automating the highway portion is going to give huge benefits, there is no need over worry about the last 1% of the trip.

Disagree

[Giant Electronic Bra]

Most drivers accidents are in places they are familiar with. Its not entirely clear if this is simply due to mostly driving in such places, but it is commonly asserted that over familiarity often leads to inattention. I know this is true for me, and so presumably for many others. The fact remains, human drivers have a high error rate, and so far all the automated driving systems being tested in the US fall far below that number, even given that they drive in controlled circumstances.

Remote drivers for last mile

[Overzeetop]

Fit the truck with two way communications and let a remote operator in a remote location take over. One driver could service 10 or more trucks, driving only last-mile areas.