Driverless vehicles - Will they change cycling in any ways?

[classic33]

The Tesla won't be coming to the UK or EU, it's too big, as are all U.S built trucks, you only see the odd one as a recovery truck, or a show vehicle, with no trailer on them

We'd a local specialist heavy haulage company with two Peterbilts in their fleet.

 

[Brandane]

I stand by what I said. When properly programmed and set up, they WILL be better than humans.

It doesn't matter how hard it is to reverse a truck into some of these places, AI will be able to manoeuvre more accurately, and will be able to successfully get into anywhere a human can, usually with less back and forth for difficult ones.

I would agree with that. Having seen some artic drivers (myself sometimes included, to be honest!) making a complete hash of reversing into a tight space. Sometimes it all fell into place, sometimes not. Blind side reversing (reversing using reference points on your left side) was especially tricky.

 

[icowden]

The Tesla won't be coming to the UK or EU, it's too big, as are all U.S built trucks, you only see the odd one as a recovery truck, or a show vehicle, with no trailer on them

But it proves that it *can be done*. I thought that was the point.

 

[icowden]

Also if truly driverless, there would be no need to take a 45 minute break. Machines aren't covered by the working time directive.

No - but at present they do need to charge. The 45 minute break is required of a human so I applied that to the need for the truck to charge,

This could lead to them being driven as long as their fuel supply lasts, then stopping to refuel or recharge. Not all "driverless" lorries are electric. The one's involved in the M6 trials were all diesel powered, and each had a driver as "backup".

Yes but we were comparing a real life example to the possibility of doing the same journey with an autonomous electric truck. I demonstrated that it would be better than using a driver.

You've previously said that if a fault develops, whilst on the motorway, they'll simply pull over to the hard shoulder and await recovery. How do you propose they do this where there is no hard shoulder(so called smart motorways) or where the vehicle has broken down in a working lane?

Exactly the same way that they do for a non-autonomous truck. They aren't magic.

Realistically though, driverless HGV's on motorways will have little or no impact on cyclists. Due in the main part to cycling not being allowed on UK motorways. Making your argument nowt but a red herring.

Not my argument, or indeed an argument at all. I gave a comparison of a potential EV automated truck with a human HGV driver as requested by @DRM and showed that an EV Driverless truck could indeed be the near future. I answered all the concerns and gave viable examples from real world data.

 

[classic33]

No - but at present they do need to charge. The 45 minute break is required of a human so I applied that to the need for the truck to charge,(1)

Yes but we were comparing a real life example to the possibility of doing the same journey with an autonomous electric truck. I demonstrated that it would be better than using a driver.(2)

Exactly the same way that they do for a non-autonomous truck. They aren't magic.(3)

Not my argument, or indeed an argument at all. I gave a comparison of a potential EV automated truck with a human HGV driver as requested by @DRM and showed that an EV Driverless truck could indeed be the near future. I answered all the concerns and gave viable examples from real world data.(4)

(1) The Semi has to charge every 300 miles, Tesla's own figures used, which will take two hours. If charged on one of their own purpose built chargers. Which don't exist outside the US.
(2) Other than the hypothetical you've done no such thing.
(3) When it breaks down in a live lane and can't be moved, without specialist equipment that no heavy recovery company near me owns. They deal with HGV breakdowns and recoveries on the nearby motorways. M1, M6, M62...
It's one reason the M6 trials on driverless convoys used diesel powered tractor units.
(4) Concerning a vehicle that will not be appearing any time soon on UK roads. Nor have the manufacturer even included automation in the vehicle.
Why is that?

 

[icowden]

(1) The Semi has to charge every 300 miles, Tesla's own figures used, which will take two hours. If charged on one of their own purpose built chargers. Which don't exist outside the US.

Yes. Any long range EV tractor is going to need to us a very high powered charger. That will come as truck stops get upgraded. There are two models of the Semi - the 300 mile and the 500 mile. Obviously there are a lot of variables that affect range. Pepsi's Tesla Semis have confirmed that it is possible to get a real world 500 miles out of them.

(2) Other than the hypothetical you've done no such thing.

Well yes, the whole thing is hypothetical. There are no autonomous cars yet that have achieved level 5 let alone trucks.

(4) Concerning a vehicle that will not be appearing any time soon on UK roads. Nor have the manufacturer even included automation in the vehicle.
Why is that?

This automation you mean?

As if this wasn’t enough, new information from Tesla employees after Investor Day confirms that the Tesla Semi has all the required hardware for driving autonomously. Matthew Donegan-Ryan, one of the 50 retail investors invited to Investor Day, shared exclusive information about the Semi. Not all are accurate, so take this with a grain of salt, but what he found out is nevertheless interesting.

Matthew confirmed that Tesla Semi has all the necessary FSD hardware, as we suspected. However, the software is not ready, or Tesla is reluctant to let truck drivers test it with so much at stake. Recently, a Tesla Semi prototype was spotted testing with a LiDAR device attached to the hood. This confirms that Tesla is still working on calibrating the Semi sensors, as that would be the purpose of the LiDAR system built by XenomatiX and installed on the Semi.

 

[classic33]

Yes. Any long range EV tractor is going to need to us a very high powered charger. That will come as truck stops get upgraded. There are two models of the Semi - the 300 mile and the 500 mile. Obviously there are a lot of variables that affect range. Pepsi's Tesla Semis have confirmed that it is possible to get a real world 500 miles out of them.

Only three of the Pepsi fleet have recorded more than a 250 mile trip, before having to recharge. They are kept for trips of less than 100 miles between chargers.
What use is a lorry that size, were it to become available in the UK, if it can't make a coast to coast trip from one port to another, Liverpool to Hull or the other way round, without stopping.

Well yes, the whole thing is hypothetical. There are no autonomous cars yet that have achieved level 5 let alone trucks.

And the manufacturer for whom you are blowing your trumpet, have no plans to make theirs autonomous.
Maybe there's a simple reason they've not been let onto public roads yet. However they're powered.

This automation you mean?

Tesla's own site disagrees. Who would you go with?

 

[icowden]

Tesla's own site disagrees. Who would you go with?

Good of you to provide a link to what you say is Tesla clearly stating that the Semi does not have the hardware necessary for FSD and that Autopilot is not equipped. I haven't been able to find that statement myself.

 

[Mike_P]

I would agree with that. Having seen some artic drivers (myself sometimes included, to be honest!) making a complete hash of reversing into a tight space. Sometimes it all fell into place, sometimes not. Blind side reversing (reversing using reference points on your left side) was especially tricky.

The Waitrose in Harrogate requires a precise reverse left then right to access the delivery bay, reversing in off the southbound two lane A61. Use to be a Safeway and the first attempts by Waitroses lorry drivers were interesting to say the least. Definitely a one where automation would be appropriate.

 

[classic33]

The Waitrose in Harrogate requires a precise reverse left then right to access the delivery bay, reversing in off the southbound two lane A61. Use to be a Safeway and the first attempts by Waitroses lorry drivers were interesting to say the least. Definitely a one where automation would be appropriate.

The limiting factor in reversing a trailer will be the length of the trailer. There's no way of getting it to bend halfway along its length if it's not designed to.
Designing a trailer that will bend to help with reversing, will require extra control systems and a system that will ensure it can only do so at low speeds, in reverse.

 

[Brandane]

The Waitrose in Harrogate requires a precise reverse left then right to access the delivery bay, reversing in off the southbound two lane A61. Use to be a Safeway and the first attempts by Waitroses lorry drivers were interesting to say the least. Definitely a one where automation would be appropriate.

Yes that does look "interesting", with street furniture in the form of a pavement stanchion and a direction sign placed on the driver's blind side just to add to the fun 😳.

 

[Fastpedaller]

That is another 'benefit' I have already seen pushed in media. The idea is that multi vehicle lorry / commercial convoys can travel really close together, following decisions (braking, turning, suchlike) made by the vehicle at the very front, which should pass the calculations and actions back down the roadtrain, with all the rest obeying. This means fuel will be saved as well as no longer paying drivers, so profits can go up.

I saw this roadtrain concept challenged somewhere (it was some while back, so cant remember but was probably in a newspaper) as it would mean cars and small commercial vehicles might be physically blocked out/dominated by whats good for the multi vehicle commercial roadtrains. The response at the time was that roadtrain length would probabally be limited to X vehicles (number/length was not specified) and they would have to travel with some gap (unspecified) between each roadtrain, to allow other vehicles to enter and leave the road. Also of course people trying to cross A roads etc may find problems, if this concept is not just for motorways - it was not clear.

It sounds like a multi pile up waiting to happen, as it was not clear what response would take place by other vehicles if the first vehicle in the roadtrain was not aware of a problem occurring further back.

Also if there is some possibility of cars and light commercials having to fight for road access etc what hope for cyclists and indeed mopeds or motorcyclists?

Would air currents from mass roadtrain drafting have any additional effect on cyclists, mopeds etc?

Crikey - that sounds like the 'school playground logic' we laughed at when we were teenagers.......... Drive as close as possible to the car in front so that when it brakes the car behind hits it with less impact because it all happens before the one in front has lost very little of its momentum.
The vision of the 300+ vehicles colliding in fog on the Isle of Sheppey in kent several years ago!

 

[Fastpedaller]

Surely if totally automated cars are going at a sufficiently sensible speed they will have ample time and space for their brains to make a sensible decision for a given situation, and thus avoid dilemmas altogether.

Sadly though I suspect the tech will instead be used to pack them in tighter and make them faster.

I think you are correct. I question how 'intelligent' they will be e.g. If speed limit is 30MPH will they just blunder on at 30 even though the car that's 3 in front has slowed? A human can (but I agree doesn't always) see the situation and decelerates and may be only going 15 MPH before applying the brakes. Will the auto-car just go at 30 until the car immediately in front is known to be too close and then slam on the brakes? The laws of physics can't be beaten of course, and wet roads etc need consideration - I agree there may be sensors that could sense such conditions, but will the 'programming' always be to go 'as fast as possible'? I agree this is likely to be the case.

 

[Fastpedaller]

I strongly disagee; the missing bolts could have been detected had there been better testing.

DO you really think testing was sufficient when it allowed a plane to take to the air with bolts missing from its airframe? The passengers of that plan would suggest not.


A door plug is so called because it plugs the hole in the fuselage and air pressure helps secure it.
The fact it dislodged suggests is wasn't a true plug - a redesign might be beneficial.


Yes! Finally we agree.
I've got a few years experience of deploying software solutions within government departments, but even if I was just sending out a monthly security patch my testing would include (a) functionality of the patch, and (b) a check of the deployment process.

Because testing should never be skimped on, which is why I also plan intregration testing, regression testing, performance testing, security testing, user acceptance testing and then a live pilot prior to the main deployment.

The AI technology of self-driving is amazing, but it still needs comprehensive testing.

When I worked in the Auto industry FMEA (Failure Modes and Effects Analysis ) was a big thing, focussing our thoughts on a structured analysis of 'what would happen if'. Simple examples of course have evolved through the years eg 'this wheel hub will fall off if the nut loosens and comes off' so the addition of a split pin (split cotter) with castellated nut is the solution which reduces the risk to about 0. A main focus is to create good designs so parts don't fail and can't be assembled incorrectly. My understanding of the aircraft industry is that every fitment/change is documented to a set procedure and also a second person verifies this independently - that would seem to eliminate any possibility of failure if the design and procedures are also correct.

 

[the snail]

I think you are correct. I question how 'intelligent' they will be e.g. If speed limit is 30MPH will they just blunder on at 30 even though the car that's 3 in front has slowed? A human can (but I agree doesn't always) see the situation and decelerates and may be only going 15 MPH before applying the brakes. Will the auto-car just go at 30 until the car immediately in front is known to be too close and then slam on the brakes? The laws of physics can't be beaten of course, and wet roads etc need consideration - I agree there may be sensors that could sense such conditions, but will the 'programming' always be to go 'as fast as possible'? I agree this is likely to be the case.

There would surely have to be some sort of protocol to follow, rather than 'go as fast as possible'. I think it is inevitable that vehicles at some point will be networked together, so that information about hazzards will be shared between vehicles, so if there is an obstruction ahead, your vehicle will know about it before it's even visible, similarly if another vehicle needs to change lanes.