A Platoon Of Networked Self-Driving Trucks Will Be Tested in the UK (phys.org)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Platoon Of Networked Self-Driving Trucks Will Be Tested in the UK (phys.org)

Posted by EditorDavid on Sunday August 27, 2017 @01:34AM from the driven-by-wifi dept.

An anonymous reader quotes the AP: Britain is set to conduct road trials of self-driving trucks, involving a "platoon" of vehicles controlled by a driver in the front. The Department for Transport said Friday that up to three trucks will travel in convoy, connected by Wi-Fi and with braking and acceleration controlled by the lead vehicle. Officials say the formation saves fuel and reduces carbon emissions, because the lead truck pushes air out of the way, making the others more efficient.

65 of 90 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Call me a luddite.... by Half-pint+HAL · 2017-08-27 01:42 · Score: 3, Interesting

Call me a luddite, but why make this legal while there is still a ban on any vehicle having more than one trailer. Surely a multitrailer lorry-train with physical wires and wireless backup would offer all the same advantages, but be much safer and easier to manage? Not to mention less hackable.

--
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
1. Re:Call me a luddite.... by jellomizer · 2017-08-27 01:48 · Score: 1
  
  That was my thought too. It seems the make a complex solution for an already solved problem. The only key difference I can think of is after you get to the last mile each truck can split from the pack and go its attended destination.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
2. Re:Call me a luddite.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  Multi trailer setups are already legal in the UK with the right category of license, its more commonly known as "Wagon and Drag", the real restriction is on max weight, and thats what these electronic hook ups are skirting, as for plating purposes they will be 3 seperate vehicles, not one couple tightly one, which in the eyes on the law they become when you ridgidly hitch them together.
  IMHO its a end run around the max weight legislation and weight classes more than pushing the boundaries on technology..
3. Re:Call me a luddite.... by thegarbz · 2017-08-27 03:57 · Score: 2
  
  Call me a luddite, but why make this legal while there is still a ban on any vehicle having more than one trailer.
  It's a problem of dynamics when trailers are connected together. Independently controlled and steered units can compensate quite easily for any movement in the front. However when they are all connected together a wobble in the front can magnify quite badly in the back trailer, combined with some winds and these things are a nightmare on the road. I used to have to overtake road trains regularly on the way to work in Australia. The trick was, if you can overtake the rear trailer you're usually okay, but don't even consider doing it if it's windy or the road isn't perfectly straight.
4. Re:Call me a luddite.... by Computershack · 2017-08-27 04:22 · Score: 1
  
  Multi trailer setups are already legal in the UK with the right category of license, its more commonly known as "Wagon and Drag", .
  No they're not. Wagon and drags aren't multi-trailer rigs. A wagon and drag is a rigid bodied 2 or 3 axle lorry towing a trailer.
  
  --
  I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
5. Re:Call me a luddite.... by angel'o'sphere · 2017-08-27 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  Ordinary trucks with drivers have the requirement to have a safety distance to the car/truck in front of them.
  In Germany the rule of thumb is, divide speed (in km/h) by 2 and replace km by m.
  So you drive 100 km/h fast, you should have a safety distance of 50m.
  However the chained trucks drive in a thumbwidth distance of each other.
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
6. Re:Call me a luddite.... by hoofie · 2017-08-27 17:14 · Score: 1
  
  Nah it never caught on to be honest.
7. Re:Call me a luddite.... by Half-pint+HAL · 2017-08-28 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  Call me a luddite, but why make this legal while there is still a ban on any vehicle having more than one trailer.
  It's a problem of dynamics when trailers are connected together. Independently controlled and steered units can compensate quite easily for any movement in the front. However when they are all connected together a wobble in the front can magnify quite badly in the back trailer, combined with some winds and these things are a nightmare on the road. I used to have to overtake road trains regularly on the way to work in Australia. The trick was, if you can overtake the rear trailer you're usually okay, but don't even consider doing it if it's windy or the road isn't perfectly straight.
  What I'm trying to say is to make multiple tow legal if the trailers are active vehicles with a "slave" steering mechanism controlled from the front.
  
  --
  Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
Effect on global warming by eminencja · 2017-08-27 01:44 · Score: 2

There is an accompanying study that says that a global deployment of such platoons may decrease the temperature increase by 4.27% over the next fifty years.
1. Re: Effect on global warming by cyber-vandal · 2017-08-27 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  The human race will probably survive. Whether our civilisation does is another matter.
2. Re: Effect on global warming by PopeRatface · 2017-08-27 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  Or civilization is in pretty rough shape already.
  
  --
  Oy vey! It's anudda Shoah, I tells ya! Anudda Shoah!
3. Re: Effect on global warming by KGIII · 2017-08-27 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  Nah, we got ourselves a convoy, everything's alright.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
4. Re: Effect on global warming by cyber-vandal · 2017-08-27 08:54 · Score: 1
  
  It's a lot better than it was 100 years ago but whether it will survive another 100 years is hard to say. Depends if we can mitigate the mess we've made of things and transition to better ways of generating electricity.
Does anyone know by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 01:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

How these things work out the follow trucks get stuck at a red light or even behind just a slower vehicle? Are those things even possible? Do they start and stop from depots along the highway and have big flashing lights and warnings not to get in between them?
What happens if the wifi signal is lost? Are the trucks smart enough to pull over and stop? What if there is no shoulder?
Article is very short, no pictures or technical details.
1. Re:Does anyone know by fisted · 2017-08-27 03:01 · Score: 1
  
  In Germany, those trucks would go as a convoy, so the whole group counts as one vehicle. If the convoy leader passes the lights while they're green, the rest of the vehicle (i.e. all the other vehicles) may follow through even if the lights turn red meanwhile.
  I guess the USA have something similar.
  
  --
  CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
2. Re:Does anyone know by fluffernutter · 2017-08-27 03:07 · Score: 1
  
  So the cars going the other way are stuck with half a green light because they have to wait for the remainder of the convoy to go by? I can't see how that would work.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
3. Re:Does anyone know by fisted · 2017-08-27 03:48 · Score: 1
  
  You can't enter the intersection, even if you have a green light, when it's apparent than you can't clear it, simple as that. So yeah, the other cars would have to wait. Needless to say, they will enter the intersection anyway and then have to wait in the middle of it, potentially causing problems for everybody else (gridlock)
  
  --
  CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
4. Re:Does anyone know by thegarbz · 2017-08-27 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  What happens if the wifi signal is lost? Are the trucks smart enough to pull over and stop?
  The driver is. The point of platooning is not to eliminate drivers, but it's to allow trucks to drive far closer together without the safety issue of not being able to see around the one in front or the stopping distance. It's actually quite a simple control scheme much like an autopilot on the plane that covers a small cruising scenario and then defers to the pilot for absolutely everything else.
5. Re:Does anyone know by thegarbz · 2017-08-27 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  I can't see how that would work.
  Even impatient people on the road can live with an intersection being blocked for literally a couple of seconds. Heck given the number of people who run red lights it is already obvious how this "works".
6. Re:Does anyone know by fluffernutter · 2017-08-27 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  I guess this is only intended for use on highways then. I'm not sure how many trucks are being used in this convoy, but many many traffic lights are less than three truck lengths apart and are not timed together, a convoy could easily span through multiple intersections. Also traffic backs up a lot, usually it is a situation where a few cars make it through only to be in the line for the next light. Even single trailer trucks sometimes block intersections in that case but could easily be backing up the intersection for an entire green if in a convoy.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
7. Re:Does anyone know by angel'o'sphere · 2017-08-27 06:05 · Score: 1
  
  The trucks drive behind each other with less than a hand span of distance.
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
8. Re:Does anyone know by fisted · 2017-08-27 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  This conflicts with your other post.
  It doesn't.
  
  Why can some vehicles, when following others, enter intersections on a red light, but other vehicles doing the same cant enter an intersection on a green?
  Because the first set of vehicles is considered one vehicle when going as a convoy, and to it the same rules apply that apply to every other vehicle. I don't see how this is hard to understand..
  
  --
  CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
9. Re:Does anyone know by 0123456 · 2017-08-27 06:08 · Score: 1
  
  So what happens when the front truck 'safely' crashes into something and the other trucks have no chance to stop before they pile into it?
  The whole idea is insane, particularly on Britain's crappy roads.
10. Re:Does anyone know by Maxo-Texas · 2017-08-27 06:11 · Score: 1
  
  Now picture dozens of such convoys. It's not going to fly. One convoy- no big deal. Such convoys all over the city could disrupt traffic flow.
  
  --
  She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
11. Re:Does anyone know by thegarbz · 2017-08-27 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  Such convoys all over the city could disrupt traffic flow.
  If your city has such major trade routes that benefit from platooning "all over" then you're screwed either way.
  But you missed the point of the convoy, improve fuel economy by reducing air resistance. You won't be convoying in the city as it doesn't make any sense to do so.
12. Re:Does anyone know by fisted · 2017-08-27 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  No, you just fail at reading comprehension. Let me have one more try at explaining this to you.
  - You may enter an intersection if and only if:
  -- You have a green light
  AND
  -- The intersection is clear to pass (i.e. not blocked)
  - If the front of your vehicle enters the intersection in a permitted way (see above), the rest of your vehicle may also legally follow through, even if your lights turn red meanwhile (which might happen if your vehicle is really long).
  - A convoy is treated as one vehicle spanning from the leading vehicle (marked with a blue flag) to the trailing vehicle (green flag).
  - A convoy is therefore a really long vehicle. If you see a convoy going through and blocking your way through an intersection you have a green light on, you wait the fuck for it to clear it. If by then you're having a red light again, well, sucks to be you. If you in this case are a convoy leader yourself, literally nothing changes.
  Do you get it now?
  
  --
  CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
13. Re: Does anyone know by KGIII · 2017-08-27 08:29 · Score: 1
  
  They probably won't be using them inside cities... That'd just be dumb.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
14. Re: Does anyone know by Maxo-Texas · 2017-08-27 12:01 · Score: 1
  
  The mention of interactions at intersections lead me to that assumption.
  If they are intended for highway use, then yea- I've thought along those lines myself. Robotic long haul trucks that pull into local lots for drivers to drive manually within the city.
  
  --
  She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
15. Re:Does anyone know by fisted · 2017-08-27 22:58 · Score: 1
  
  Every vehicle needs to be marked.
  That doesn't conflict with what I said, my challenged special friend.
  
  Convoy rules only exist for military vehicles. Civilians cant make use of them.
  
  That's not true, but even if it was, how does it make anything I said wrong? Is your reading comprehension actually this bad?
  Where does it say that in the sources you failed to link? Oh while we're at it, hows the netherlands related?
  
  A convoy as you have been using the term is illegal.
  How have I been using the term, and how is it illegal?
  Are you "arguing" just for the sake of arguing?
  
  --
  CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
16. Re:Does anyone know by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-08-28 02:16 · Score: 1
  
  Now picture dozens of such convoys. It's not going to fly. One convoy- no big deal. Such convoys all over the city could disrupt traffic flow.
  It'll suck to let convoys go past; but remember, if these trucks were travelling separately traffic congestion would be greater WITHOUT the convoys (they'll be taking up less space). So yes, you may get stuck at an extra light cycle occasionally, but your overall traffic congestion will be lowered.
  Just like trains. It stinks to be stuck waiting for a train to pass a crossing, but if all those trailers were on the road you'd be dealing with a lot more traffic (just less at one time).
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
17. Re: Does anyone know by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-08-28 02:24 · Score: 1
  
  They probably won't be using them inside cities... That'd just be dumb.
  I imagine they wouldn't be used primarily for inner-city travel as there wouldn't be much need for platoons crossing cities; they will be mainly for motorway/highway travel.
  However, with that said, there might be occasions where they have to pass through small parts of cities, and almost certainly they'll encounter traffic lights from time to time.
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
18. Re:Does anyone know by BasilBrush · 2017-08-28 04:55 · Score: 1
  
  There are no red lights on a motorway.
19. Re: Does anyone know by KGIII · 2017-08-28 06:42 · Score: 1
  
  I'd expect them to bypass, where available, and use depots outside of city limits. Trying to put that through downtown is going to be a problem.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
20. Re:Does anyone know by david_thornley · 2017-08-28 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  In that case, if there's room for two trucks on the other side because traffic is partly backed up, or the lights are close together, the convoy must not enter the intersection. While the road ahead will clear with a green light on the farther intersection (if it doesn't, traffic's already screwed), it could partly fill up again with people turning from the crossroad. The convoy could be stranded indefinitely even if there's always room for two trucks on the other side.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 01:56 · Score: 3, Interesting

Ever seen the roads mangled and road tar deformed where heavy buses stop all the time?
One truck wheel pushes down, and surface elasticity has time to push it back up.
Now in a close convoy the next wheel crushes that spot again - this is what happens when whackers and steamrollers compress road base. Even concrete roads are not immune to heavy damage. Nobody has consulted a road repair boffin.
All they see are safety issues. Road repair bills will skyrocket. Results will vary, but on superwet days, or hot/ freezing days, the avalanche of heavy tires will punish the roads.
That fact needs to be added to the model.
1. Re:Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by Anne+Thwacks · 2017-08-27 02:18 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  All they see are safety issues.
  Nope. Not even that. The reason we don't have lorries over 44 tons (and very few over 38t) is that the damage goes up with weight in an accident - the energy has to be dissipated somewhere.
  See the Youtube video of Jeremy Clarkson driving an empty truck strait through a brick building, and then imagine Jeremy Clarkson driving three, fully loaded trucks!
  And, as the AA pointed out, they will cause huge problems when people want to get on/off slip roads - same way bendy buses completely clogged the side roads in London.
  It might work in America, where people often drive hundreds of miles non stop - but with the density of traffic on UK motorways and having to brake every couple of hundred yards, I can see this offering little to no benefit, and is probably worse than physically coupling the trucks. I'd trust a Westinghouse brake (no failures other than safe failures ever recorded in 150 years) over Wifi (no day without issues) any day.
  
  --
  Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
2. Re:Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by No+Longer+an+AC · 2017-08-27 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  Surely they're not going to put Jeremy Clarkson in the driver's seat. I think he's artificially intelligent and artificially amusing as well.
  I saw a report on this with a British truck...uh....lorry driver (from Sky News I think). He was very skeptical and while I couldn't help thinking he was just trying to preserve his job he raised some good points.
  When 3 trucks try to "platoon" on or off an exit ramp what happens to other drivers? What happens if they change lanes? It's hard enough for a single 18-wheeler to get enough room in heavy traffic.
  Could the platoon be broken up by having to yield to traffic - and if so what becomes of the trucks who are following?
  Someone claimed Britain had more exit/entry ramps (per mile I guess) than any other European country.
  OTOH, I'd love to see Clarkson, May and Hammond just sit in trucks that platooned as they navigated through a desert. And they wouldn't be able to drive they'd just have to sit in them and make snarky comments about how badly the trucks were driving by themselves.
  Still, given that horrible accident in England the other day, maybe turning the keys over to an autonomous truck leading a couple of others would be safer.
3. Re:Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by mikael · 2017-08-27 06:18 · Score: 1
  
  I've seen that happen due to the camber of the road. The bus or lorry leans to one side, pushing the weight of the vehicle onto a couple of tyres. That's enough to stress the road to cause cracks, water gets into those cracks, washes away the underlying sand and gravel, then gets squeezed out the next time a vehicle goes over.
  
  --
  Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
4. Re:Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by Anne+Thwacks · 2017-08-27 07:06 · Score: 1
  
  Surely they're not going to put Jeremy Clarkson in the driver's seat. This is the UK - I would not bet on it.
  We all know that most drivers are better than average. Unfortunately a quick view of Dash Cam footage on Youtube reveals that some are not.
  
  --
  Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
5. Re:Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by drinkypoo · 2017-08-27 15:29 · Score: 2
  
  I have never seen a triple tow in the US, although I just heard some truckers talking about doing some the last time I was in for tires, so I know it happens. I don't think I've ever seen a non-professional double tow either, though those are legal in California.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
6. Re:Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by BasilBrush · 2017-08-28 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  They have the answer for slip roads. Increase the gaps in the platoon as they approach slip roads, then close them up again.
7. Re:Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by BasilBrush · 2017-08-28 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  They don't form a platoon till they are on the motorway. They break the platoon before they leave the motorway.
  Whilst they are in a platoon, they stay in the nearside lane.
8. Re:Roads will fall apart - HV road damage by Half-pint+HAL · 2017-08-28 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  Ever seen the roads mangled and road tar deformed where heavy buses stop all the time?
  I'm a cyclist... I call riding past bus stops "surfing".
  
  --
  Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
Driver by bluegutang · 2017-08-27 02:09 · Score: 1

In addition to the fuel savings, you also save having a driver in 2 of the 3 trucks.
1. Re:Driver by bazorg · 2017-08-27 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  Further savings are to be had beyond the slow lane from not having impatient lorry drivers overtaking each other to gain a 2 mph advantage at the expense of everyone else who needs to lose15mph while the overtaking takes place.
2. Re:Driver by thegarbz · 2017-08-27 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  In addition to the fuel savings, you also save having a driver in 2 of the 3 trucks.
  No you don't. This system can't replace the driver. It is only designed to allow close tailgating for otherwise non-autonomous vehicles.
3. Re:Driver by 0123456 · 2017-08-27 06:09 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, now you'll have a convoy of multiple trucks overtaking at 2mph.
4. Re:Driver by BasilBrush · 2017-08-28 05:00 · Score: 1
  
  No you don't. All the trucks have drivers. It's just that whilst the platoon is operating, the drivers in the following trucks don't do anything. But they have to be there for when the platoon breaks up.
5. Re:Driver by drinkypoo · 2017-08-28 20:28 · Score: 1
  
  No you don't. This system can't replace the driver. It is only designed to allow close tailgating for otherwise non-autonomous vehicles.
  Today, that's true. One day, it won't be. And they need real-world platooning data for when that day comes, and I don't think that day is that far off.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I got a script for that... by Jack_the_Tripper · 2017-08-27 02:25 · Score: 1

Got this python script to deauth the neighbors when they set their channel to the same as the restaurant with free wifi that should work pretty well for this "platoon".

Oh, and a platoon is like 25-30 so this is more like a fire-team of trucks.
If you push this to its logical conclusion by Solandri · 2017-08-27 03:39 · Score: 1

You know, if you push this idea to its logical conclusion, you end up with a train. And we already have those. Plus, since friction of metal wheels on metal rails is a lot less than friction of rubber pneumatic tires on asphalt, the train is even more energy efficient.

I can understand the desire to reduce loading/unloading times by transporting goods by trucks which can all split up to different delivery addresses when they reach their destination city. But you have to remember that a long convoy of trucks imposes an externalized cost onto other cars on the highway. They have to wait for the convoy to pass before they can get into that lane so they can exit, or incur additional risk of injury or death by speeding up to try to get in front of the convoy. If you really have enough stuff going to the same city that you need multiple trucks to carry everything, just put it onto a train and transfer it to trucks at the destination city.
1. Re:If you push this to its logical conclusion by thegarbz · 2017-08-27 04:04 · Score: 1
  
  you end up with a train. And we already have those.
  Yes but what we lack is train tracks going to every single pick-up and drop-off point. If you want your scenario then you're going to have to cough up a whole lot more taxes, and we all know how much everyone likes paying those.
  I take it you haven't heard of "road trains" before?
2. Re: If you push this to its logical conclusion by KGIII · 2017-08-27 08:36 · Score: 1
  
  Most folks probably don't know what a road train is, and most of them are much smaller than what you have in your country. In much of the US, tandem trailer hauling is illegal, for example. Canada uses them but they aren't that frequent, nor as long.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
3. Re: If you push this to its logical conclusion by thegarbz · 2017-08-27 23:34 · Score: 1
  
  And there's a reason for their steady decline and banning them in many places. They are unstable. Start attaching 3 or more trailers to a vehicle and a little wobble gets amplified to a giant fishtailing caravan. Add some wind and you have a very risky situation on the highway. Even in AU the road trains are only used on low traffic country roads.
  Largest I've overtaken was 6 trailers.
  Platooning gets around a lot of these problems, plus each trailer can go its own way when you get to a city.
4. Re:If you push this to its logical conclusion by goose-incarnated · 2017-08-27 23:53 · Score: 1
  
  you end up with a train. And we already have those.
  Yes but what we lack is train tracks going to every single pick-up and drop-off point.
  I highly doubt that even a tiny convoy of container trucks is going to be able to go to every single pickup and/or drop-off point. What will happen is that the convoy will originate at and end at a depot, and smaller trucks of varying (small) size will be used to ferry goods to and from the depot and actual pickup and drop-off points.
  Much like a train, actually.
  
  --
  I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
5. Re:If you push this to its logical conclusion by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-08-28 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  But you have to remember that a long convoy of trucks imposes an externalized cost onto other cars on the highway. They have to wait for the convoy to pass before they can get into that lane so they can exit, or incur additional risk of injury or death by speeding up to try to get in front of the convoy.
  They would take up less room on the road than if they were travelling separately. Yes, occasionally you get stuck behind a convoy (which would delay you more than an individual lorry), but overall they would delay people LESS because they are taking up less space, and your chance of encountering a lorry is lower because they're grouped together.
  Imagine 5 lorries traveling on a road together now- the safety gap between them, etc. That's a heck of a lot more room taken up, a lot more trouble to get around. Imagine if they took up 1/3 of the space on the road. That's beneficial for your average commuter.
  
  If you really have enough stuff going to the same city that you need multiple trucks to carry everything, just put it onto a train and transfer it to trucks at the destination city.
  Who says they are all going to the same location. 10 leave the depot in Dallas heading East. 2 break away in Louisiana to go to New Orleans. 1 leaves the platoon in Birmingham. 2 break away to different parts of Atlanta. 3 head into South Carolina and eventually split up to go to different cities and the other two head North out of Atlanta to go to Knoxville.
  The different units in the Platoon don't have to be going to the same place, that's actually the beauty of it.
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
6. Re:If you push this to its logical conclusion by thegarbz · 2017-08-28 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  Train is by far the cheapest and most efficient way of transporting goods over land. If there was already a train track at the destination, they'd be using a train.
Do we really need more tractors? by berchca · 2017-08-27 03:44 · Score: 1

I mean, in the end, this becomes something very similar to a road train (a tractor with multiple trailers). There are all sorts of disadvantages to a road train, mainly maneuverability and braking. Still, it seems that rather than get the minor fuel improvement of running three tractors tight on each other, it would be far less complicated--and probably more reliable and safer--to create road trains where each trailer has greater independence from each other. Things like independent steering and the ability to brake harder and somewhat independent of each section ahead of them. All you really need for that is an intelligently designed, and semi-intelligence, set of front wheels for each subsequent trailer, and they can be wired together with Wifi as backup.
Cheaper to produce, and much cheaper to run down the road.
1. Re:Do we really need more tractors? by thegarbz · 2017-08-27 04:07 · Score: 1
  
  Still, it seems that rather than get the minor fuel improvement of running three tractors tight on each other, it would be far less complicated--and probably more reliable and safer--to create road trains where each trailer has greater independence from each other.
  Yeah I've got an idea for independence, we can give each trailer it's own drive and steering system. Then we could decouple the trailers and have them tail each other using a basic electronic following system.
  Ok facetious moment over, this isn't "complicated". Far from it, there's barely more to this than a line-following algorithm, except you're following a truck in front. This is 2nd year university level of "complication" to get this working.
2. Re:Do we really need more tractors? by drinkypoo · 2017-08-28 20:31 · Score: 1
  
  This is the short-term, data gathering phase. Eventually all the parts of the truck that stick up will go away, when the driver is removed. Probably this will happen in phases, with the following vehicles going first.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
at least the out of work drivers have NHS by Joe_Dragon · 2017-08-27 04:30 · Score: 1

at least the out of work drivers have NHS unlike the USA
Not sure by nospam007 · 2017-08-27 05:52 · Score: 1

A platoon consisting usually between 40 and 50 units, calling 'up to 3' units a 'platoon' seems to be a stretch to me, but perhaps UK platoons are just threesomes.
1. Re:Not sure by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-08-28 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  A platoon consisting usually between 40 and 50 units, calling 'up to 3' units a 'platoon' seems to be a stretch to me, but perhaps UK platoons are just threesomes.
  As long as they're the right kind of threesome.
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
autogenocide by Reverend+Green · 2017-08-27 07:43 · Score: 1

And so with small fanfare and a queer simulacrum of hope began mankind's autogenocide.
Re: Really WiFi? by Bluefirebird · 2017-08-27 08:52 · Score: 1

I am sure it is just bad journalism. Most likely was 802.11p at 5.9 GHz, using DSRC standard, with is the standard for vehicular communications.

--
Fear is the mind-killer.