Slashdot Mirror


Daimler Tests a Self-Driving Truck On the Autobahn

Engadget reports that Daimler has tested an autonomous truck in one environment guaranteed to put stress on any car: the German Autobahn. While the Mercedes Actros truck was guided with a mix of "radar, a stereo camera array and off-the-shelf systems like adaptive cruise control," there was a human crew on hand, too, just in case. From the article: This doesn't mean you'll see fleets of robotic trucks in the near future. Daimler had to get permission for this run, and the law (whether European or otherwise) still isn't equipped to permit regular autonomous driving of any sort, let alone for giant cargo haulers. Still, this could make a better case for approving some form of self-driving transportation.

28 of 130 comments (clear)

  1. About damn time by Z34107 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article's a bit short on details, but this is where I expect autonomous driving to take off first--long-haul trucking. Controlled-access highways present fewer complications like pedestrians, four-way stops, and the like, and I imagine automating that would take care of 80% of the driving. Even if you still needed a human driver to reel 'er in at the warehouse gates or even the city limits, it still strikes me as a huge improvement.

    Laws and liability are going to be the biggest limiting factor to commercial deployment, especially if they boil down to "a human must be ready to intervene at any time," but I think there are fudges around that. You could have one human operator in a remote control center "driving" multiple trucks, kind of like a cross between drone pilot and remote ICU monitoring.

    Not that even a human sitting in the seat with hands on the wheel would be likely to intervene effectively should something go wrong after eight hours of idle monotony. But, having a human somewhere supervising in some capacity would soothe the more irrational fears that also serve as part of the reason we still keep human pilots flying planes, while still yielding the benefits that come with automation--self-driving trucks are much less compelling if each one still needs a full-time human driver to comply with laws.

    --
    DATABASE WOW WOW
    1. Re:About damn time by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The article's a bit short on details, but this is where I expect autonomous driving to take off first--long-haul trucking

      Our trains aren't autonomous yet, which seems like a much easier problem to solve.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:About damn time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The article's a bit short on details, but this is where I expect autonomous driving to take off first--long-haul trucking

      Our trains aren't autonomous yet, which seems like a much easier problem to solve.

      "Our" trains for the most part are, the engineer just sits there to make people feel good.

      Which country are you talking about?

    3. Re:About damn time by Z34107 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's harder than you're probably giving it credit for, especially for miles-long freight trains, where a hill can mean one segment of the train is accelerating while another is decelerating. We're just about there, though, insofar as we have software that automatically drives throttle, brakes, and other controls. Link:

      Norfolk Southern, an American rail operator, now pulls roughly one-sixth of its freight using locomotives equipped with "route optimisation" software. By crunching numbers on a train's weight distribution and a route's curves, grades and speed limits, the software, called Leader, can instruct operators on optimum accelerating and braking to minimise fuel costs. Installing the software and linking it wirelessly to back-office computers is expensive, says Coleman Lawrence, head of the company's 4,000-strong locomotive fleet. But the software cuts costs dramatically, reducing fuel consumption by about 5%. That is a big deal for a firm that spent $1.6 billion on diesel in 2012. Mr Lawrence reckons that by 2016 Norfolk Southern may be pulling half its freight with Leader-upgraded locomotives. A competing system sold by GE, Trip Optimizer, goes further and operates the throttle and brakes automatically.

      --
      DATABASE WOW WOW
    4. Re:About damn time by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Installing the software and linking it wirelessly to back-office computers is expensive,

      If you're relying on the ability to always be wirelessly in contact with a central server, then this project is a fail (maybe they aren't relying on that, though, it's not clear).

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:About damn time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It is about cost.

      Lets say there are 100k drivers for a train. They are about a median of 50k each. Or about 5 billion a year in cost.

      There are ~1.7 million drivers of trucks with an median of ~40k each. Or about 68 billion a year. With another 1.3 billion doing short load delivery (about 32 billion)

      Trains are actually fairly much automated at this point. With the driver being the final say. Their job is mostly inspection and kicking kids off.

      Trucks are not even close in cost and cost 12x as much.

      To underestimate how much automated trucks will inside out the industry is not to really understand it. This will wildy reduce accidents. The number of people injured by trains is tiny compared to the 80-100k per year with trucks (about 4-5k per year).

      Also they will fully automate the trains but the guys will stay on them. Inspection still takes eyes on site. Trucks will follow a similar method. With a guy sitting in a seat doing pretty much nothing for 10-12 hours at a time. Other than maybe pumping some gas in the tank or doing some load/unload on the ends. It will be a cheap shit job.

    6. Re:About damn time by TWX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To underestimate how much automated trucks will inside out the industry is not to really understand it. This will wildy reduce accidents. The number of people injured by trains is tiny compared to the 80-100k per year with trucks (about 4-5k per year).

      Automating trucks is great in theory: the difficulty is implementing it in practice. That's why I brought up the train example: automating freight trains is an easier task, by several orders of magnitude, and yet it hasn't been done yet. We still keep a driver on.

      Couple of things...

      Depending on who owns the rail infrastructure it might be difficult to get the owner to actually make the improvements that are necessary to leave the current paradigm for an autonomous one. That means that there really could be times when something has to be done manually on the rail line, or when the experienced engineer needs to change the speed or other behavior of the train to account for local conditions.

      Trains, believe it or not, are allowed to operate with severe deficiencies in key systems, like brakes. That's right, there are instances when of those four locomotives pulling the train, two of them have full brake failures. I don't know what the exact ratio is, but it's rather unsettling given the mass involved, that they do not have to be in tip-top shape.

      There are collisions that do not mandate that a train stop. If a train hits animal life or debris on the tracks there isn't necessarily a need to stop the train. If a train hits a person or a car or some other condition there might be a good reason to stop the train. It may be difficult to tell, in a simple automated way, what the train has struck given the mass difference of the train versus anything that it strikes short of another train.

      Per given unit of freight mass being delivered, having an engineer or two on-board is still not very expensive. Factor the rest of the considerations listed and for the moment it makes sense to keep an engineer or crew onboard. Fix those, and it might be cost-effective to be automated.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    7. Re:About damn time by climb_no_fear · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except that in Germany, the country is criss-crossed by train lines.

      My little village has a station of its own, served several times a day. I can (and have) gotten in the train and with only one transfer, gone to Berlin, Paris and London. What you say is probably true in the US but not here.

      Also, when you say controlled-access highways, please remember, this is the Autobahn, and yes, people do drive 230 kmh (trucks are limited to 100). Most people would like to have fewer trucks, simply because of the speed differential.

    8. Re: About damn time by prefec2 · · Score: 2

      The cost of the driver of a train is neglectable compared to the 20 or more carriges in a train which compare to one or two truck loads.

      Automated trains are used on high speed tracks and subways.

    9. Re:About damn time by Tom · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to WP, there are a number of fully autonomous metro lines in the world, and a longer list where there's a human basically just to intervene in case of emergencies.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    10. Re:About damn time by rioki · · Score: 2

      I once drove a car that was fitted with adaptive cruise control and lane assist. I very rarely needed to do anything, just watch traffic and be ready when the systems disengaged or misbehaved. This system is basically a beefed up version of the combination of the two.

      This feels quite like the autopilot on an airplane. You focus on the big picture tasks and don't concentrate on the minute details of flying the airplane. The result is that the pilot is more alert over a longer period of time.

      I can see these type of systems work, well before we see fully autonomous cars. The Google cars look interesting, but are a joke if you look at the details and the amount of precise and accurate data that needs to be fed into the system. These systems work of the bat and need little extra data and can rely on nothing but their sensors.

    11. Re:About damn time by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Where? Not so very far from my house. If I go about 30 minutes to the North East then I lose all connectivity and don't get connectivity again for about another hour and a half. Of course, there are no telephone lines (but there are electricity lines in most of the areas) for much of this trip.

      I'm currently on the road and am just traveling at random (technically paused in western New York for the moment) and you'd be surprised how often I don't have a reliable signal. I'm thinking you don't get out much or tend to stay to the well worn tracts when you do. I'm not suggesting you try it but you may want to do so before you assume connectivity is ubiquitous. It simply isn't and those are unprofitable areas so this is likely to remain unchanged for the duration.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  2. Guaranteed to put stress on any car? As if. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    People on the autobahn are generally courteous, signal when changing lanes and so on. I guess you'd have to be at such speeds, but it's also part of the German national character. Furthermore, it's a highway so everyone is driving fast and the velocity differences, which cause most of the danger, are actually rather low most of the time. I think the highway may possibly be the safest and easiest environment for automated driving.

    1. Re:Guaranteed to put stress on any car? As if. by _merlin · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, I have to agree. Autobahn has very strict rules about not passing someone to their right, and people actually follow them. People are also generally courteous about getting up to speed before entering, leaving gaps for people to enter, getting out of the left lane for people wanting to pass, indicating for lane changes and exits, etc. Automating driving on an Australian freeway would be far more challenging, and even that would be easy compared to an intercity road in Vietnam.

  3. Not a substitute by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not a substitute, it's a complement.

    A truck goes exactly where you need it to go, not some hub somewhere where you have to send it out by truck for 100 more miles anyway... You simply cannot do that with trains.

    Even though freight trains will still be around because of massive hauling capacity, you would STILL need a robust trucking infrastructure just to handle the "last few hundred miles" needs.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Not a substitute by jrumney · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually a lot of larger trucks do just go between hubs, with smaller delivery trucks used for the "last few (tens in most countries, maybe hundreds in sparsely populated parts of the US) miles".

    2. Re:Not a substitute by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      Depending on where the hubs are, that can also easily make more sense than trains.

      Trains are great if you can make use of the hubs they service, but I don't see new train lines being built much after self-driving trucks take over..

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    3. Re:Not a substitute by rioki · · Score: 2

      Trains are only efficient if you can get the train full. For example, take mail. For about the same capacity, you can send one train with 7 carriages once a week or one truck every day. Sure the trucks are probably more expensive, but the customer would rather have their book tomorrow morning for a higher fee, than in a week. Trains only work where really large amount of freight is transported from one location to the other and the actual duration of trip is not that important. These are thinks like raw materials, such as coal; a domain where you will also see river barges.

    4. Re: Not a substitute by rioki · · Score: 2

      Yes they will and that is a future you need to get to grips with. Now these systems that are tested now will still have a driver on board. They may reduce the regulation on mandatory breaks and maximum working hours, but we are talking 5-10% reduction in workforce. I seriously don't think that any real autonomous car or truck will be fielded any time soon, within the next ten years.

  4. Test It On The Tanks Too. by zenlessyank · · Score: 5, Funny

    German self driving tanks sound like more fun. Maybe some armored drones and, and LASERS!!!!!!

  5. Re:Just wait by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What would a driver be able to do about it?

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  6. remote control has to meny points of fail that cut by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    remote control has to meny points of fail that can cut the link.

  7. Re:In Denial by x0ra · · Score: 2

    they came long ago replacing workers in factories...

  8. Re:remote control has to meny points of fail that by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So All I need a cell jamer and I can DDOS you full rail line?

  9. It Will Change Everything. by JimSadler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Think about it. One tractor trailer driver can easily be paid 60K per year and he must get food and shelter allowances as well. The law limits his hours in the cab so unless he is breaking the law that truck will sit still at least 12 hours a day. On the other hand a machine driving the truck requires zero rest so that truck can keep rolling 24/7 with brief stops for fueling. That means operation of a truck will be reduced in cost by 60% or greater. Further the customers will get much faster delivery of their orders. Trucking companies will want this like you won't believe. Taxis will also be automated and we will probably see Uber cars automated as well. The cost of owning such a vehicle will be far lower as the vehicle can stay in constant use. So you own the vehicle and it is out earning you money every minute you are not in your car. This means that we can reduce the actual number of cars on the road vastly. Further your automated car can drop your kids off at school and then go to the grocery store and have it loaded by the bag boy and the car brings your order home. Amazon is about to start a delivery service such that products from any store can be delivered to your home. One side effect is that hundreds of thousands of jobs are about to vanish because of this technology.

  10. Re:In Denial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "This doesn't mean you'll see fleets of robotic trucks in the near future."

    Yes it will. And these idiots are the ones who will make it happen.

    First the robots came for the truckers, and I said nothing because I wasn't a trucker...

    The prostitutes at the truck stops aren't going to get much business from a self driving truck.

  11. clueless author by Tom · · Score: 4, Informative

    one environment guaranteed to put stress on any car: the German Autobahn

    Uh, no?

    Have you ever actually driven on the German Autobahn? It is probably the most simple environment for an autonomous car, because absolutely everything is very clearly defined and built to standards. You have very reliable road quality, width, signaling. No traffic lights, roundabouts or intersections. Very few traffic rules (basically speed limit and whether or not trucks are allowed to overtake on this stretch). Construction sites are about the only tricky spots you will ever encounter. Even incoming and exiting traffic is very simple to handle, because there is one and only one way in which it will ever happen.

    If I were to write autonomous driving software, I would start with the Autobahn, and then go to more complicated road systems later.

    For trucks, even speed is trivial. The general high speed of trucks is 80 km/h, so if you are a truck you stay on the right lane and stick to that speed and that's it.

    Left-lane driving on the Autobahn is more interesting, especially for foreigners (you think you're going crazy fast in your rental car at 190 km/h (about 120 mph), and there's this BMW behind you signaling to get your slow ass out of the way). But we're talking about trucks here.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  12. Re:Just wait by Tom · · Score: 2

    And you would hijack such a truck how, exactly? Get on board and threaten the computer with counting?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org