R.
Diamond, May
13, "Join SAFE
for an event
focused on the
importance of
autonomous
vehicles to
our national
and economic
security and
outlining
pathways for
the safe
deployment of
autonomous
vehicles.
The event will
feature
remarks from
Dr. Steve
Cliff, Acting
Administrator
of NHTSA, a
discussion
between
industry
leaders, and
the release of
a report, "A
Regulatory
Framework for
AV Safety," by
O. Kevin
Vincent,
Associate
General
Counsel,
Regulatory at
Lucid...." Read
more Hmmmm... A must watch,
complemented
by the Vincent
report and
our latest PodCast below.
Alain
[log in to unmask]" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" width="44" height="44" border="0"> The SmartDrivingCars eLetter, Pod-Casts, Zoom-Casts and Zoom-inars are made possible in part by support from the Smart Transportation and Technology ETF, symbol MOTO. For more information: www.motoetf.com. Most funding is supplied by Princeton University's Department of Operations Research & Financial Engineering and Princeton Autonomous Vehicle Engineering (PAVE) research laboratory as part of its research dissemination initiatives.
K. Vincent,
May 2021,
"Promising
step-changes
in
productivity
for economic
growth, an
ability to
maintain
leadership in
the
transportation
sector by
competing with
China, saving
lives on our
roads, and
increases in
efficiency and
the
acceleration
of electric
vehicle
adoption,
autonomous
vehicles (AVs)
hold the
potential for
U.S. economic
and societal
advancement on
a scale unseen
since the
invention of
the automobile
itself. AVs
can follow in
the footsteps
of the
Interstate
Highway System
and the
Internet as
the next
catalyzing
technology to
realize
dramatic
economic
growth across
all sectors.
The promise of affordable, point-to-point autonomous transportation, with novel vehicles redesigned from the ground up, also portends significant benefits for underserved communities. Improvements in emissions through a widespread deployment of electric, autonomous vehicles would positively impact public health and the environment. Moreover, AVs stand to greatly increase economic opportunities and provide upward economic mobility, as low-income communities can access low-cost transportation that plugs the systemic gaps in today's mass transit systems. For the disability and senior citizen communities, often unable to either access conventional mass transit or afford private or paratransit alternatives, AV transportation allows them the opportunity of greater participation in American public life.
Most
importantly of
all, however,
is the
tremendous
potential of
AVs to
dramatically
improve safety
on our
nation's
roads...." Read more Hmmmm... This is a really good
report for
many reasons,
including the
global
competition/political
aspects of
this
technological
transformation
of motive
power, vehicle
control,
mobility and
the
environmental
responsibility. My only caution is that when we talk about Autonomous
Vehicles, we
are really
talking about
2 very
different
kinds... (I'll
knuckle under
and call
them..) Level
2 and Level
4.
"Level
2" are simply
technological
extensions of
conventional
cars... OEMs
design and
build them; we
buy them; we
are
responsible
for them; we
buy insurance
for them; they
happen to have
gizmos that
keep us from
crashing (what
I also call
Safe-driving
cars) and
might include
Comfort &
Convenience
features that
entices us to
buy them
because they
allow us to
take our hands
off the wheel
and/or feet
off the pedals
(what I also
call
Self-driving
cars). Let's
be clear...
the way Level
2 should work
is... if we
get a little
ahead of
ourselves and
over-rely on
the Comfort
&
Convenience
features, by
say, hopping
in the back
seat, then the
"keep us from
crashing
features" keep
us from
running into a
tree and avoid
having the car
catch on fire
and cook us.
"Level 2" continues and in some ways may also enhance mobility, but the gizmos really bail us out when we misbehave and consequently substantially improve safety. Mobility is largely Constant; Safety is Enhanced.
"Level
4" are
vehicles that
are capable of
and have been
certified as
being able to
drive
themselves in
an Operational
Design Domain
(ODD). That
ODD is NOT
going to
be
"everywhere"
any time soon
or maybe even
ever. Please
don't even
bring it up...
Level 5 will
never
exist except
in some limit
that will
never be
achieved!
Stop talking
about it!
What
is important
is that "Level
4" is all
about
improving
mobility; for
example,
providing
personal
on-demand (aka
auto-like)
mobility for
those that
don't have
access to a
"Level 2"
(or "Level 0")
vehicle. I
contend that
Safety is
constant (as
good as we can
make it and,
in the limit,
as good as us
when we are
not
misbehaving.)
Our objective
is to provide
as much
high-quality
mobility as we
can. Here we
are trying to
extremize
mobility
without
compromising
Safety. Safety
is largely
Constant;
Mobility is
Enhanced.
Alain
Battelle,
May 2021,
"ABSTRACT:
This document
is the project
report for the
Connected
Vehicle
Infrastructure
– Urban Bus
Operational
Safety
Platform
project also
known as the
Enhanced
Transit Safety
Retrofit
Package
(E-TRP)
project. The
report
describes the
project’s
background and
purpose,
summarizes its
activities and
results,
includes
results from
an independent
evaluation,
and provides
insight into
the lessons
learned and
experiences
captured
through the
project...."
Read more Hmmmm... In the interest of full
disclosure,
this project,
which included
Greater Cleveland Regional Transit
Authority,
was selected
by FRA in 2014
instead of one
that I had
submitted that
included Greater Cleveland Regional Transit
Authority.
Unfortunately,
at the time of
submittal, I
was unaware
that Greater Cleveland Regional Transit
Authority
had also
partnered with
Battelle;
else, I would
have never
wasted my time
or other
people's time
finishing the
proposal. The
probability
that a
competitive
FRA
solicitation
makes two
awards to the
same Transit
Company is as
"slim2none" as
one can get.
Moreover,
given that
Batelle is
located in
Ohio, any
influence
forthcoming
from Ohio
would almost
certainly lean
towards the
partnership
with
Battelle.
Princeton
might be
strong, but
not that
strong.
Consequently
we didn't
stand a
chance. Had
we known (my
fault for not
knowing) we
would have
either found
another
Transit
partner, or
simply moved
on earlier (as
Jerome Lutin
eventually did
by crafting a
very
successful
Active
Safety-Collision
Warning Pilot
with the
Washington
State Transit
Insurance Pool
(WSTIP), Pierce
Transit, U. of
Washington and
others.)
We,
of course,
felt we had an
outstanding
proposal.
Reading the
eventual
findings of
the effort
that was
selected over
us, as are
reported in
Section 4,
Project
Results, I can
only shake my
head. Page 37
and 38 on RoI
is just ...
Annual benefit
reported to 6
significant
digits
($106,452) and
Annual costs
(also to 6
significant
digits are so
obviously
challenging
that the
research team
should have
realized at
the very
beginning, or
early in the
study, that
whatever they
had proposed
was extremely
challenged
and pivoted.
They certainly
should not
have written
so many pages
and just told
us..
financially,
what ever we
were trying to
do here is
completely NOT
in the public
interest.
This must be
the worse RoI
ever reported
in any report
that was over
a few pages
long. Can you
imagine
investing $2M
(sorry, I'll
be a little
sloppy and use
only one
significant
number) in a new technology
that
necessarily
involves
substantial
risk and
getting 5%
annual return
in an RoI
analysis (and
apparently
without
uncovering a
low
probability up
side). The
writing should
have been on
the wall years
ago and the
report should
have simply
said right
from the
beginning...the RoI of what we tried is bad, we found no upside that we
can justify.
We are sorry,
our best
advice is,
please don't
go here.
Moreover,
since they
couldn't even
test DSRC even
though this
was supposed
to be a
"Connected
Vehicle..."
says something
about the lack
of
quality/creativity
to use the
funding to
really try to
improve bus
safety. Did
they really
use the
research money
to achieve 6
digit
precision on
something that
was DoA at
single digit
accuracy?
Again,
please read as
much as you
can of this
and reach your
own
conclusions. I
admit that I'm
looking at
this report
from a biased
world view. I
apologize.
Alain
Video of
ValleyMetro -
Waymo
Partnership to
create an
Automated
Vehicle
Mobility on
Demand (AV
MoD) Project.
Read more Hmmmm...
Must
watch!
S. Meyers
& K.
Chang, May 14,
"The United
States now has
company on
Mars.
A Chinese
spacecraft
descended
through the
thin Martian
atmosphere and
landed safely
on a large
plain on
Saturday
morning, state
media
reported,
accomplishing
a feat that
only two other
nations have
before. (In
the United
States, it was
still Friday—
7:18 p.m.
Eastern time —
when the
spacecraft
touched down.)
The landing
follows
China’s launch
last month of
the core
module of a
new orbiting
space station
and a
successful
mission in
December that
collected
nearly four
pounds of
rocks and soil
from the moon
and brought
them back to
Earth. Next
month, the
country’s
space program
plans to send
three
astronauts
back to space,
inaugurating
what could
become a
regular
Chinese
presence in
Earth’s orbit.
Just by
arriving at
Mars and
orbiting the
planet in
February,
China’s space
program
confirmed its
place among
the top tier
of agencies
exploring the
solar system.
Now that it
has executed a
landing — with
a deployment
of a rover
still to come
— it has
established
itself as a
principal
contender in
what some view
as a new era
of space
competition.
Read more...
" Read more Hmmmm... Congratulations!
L. Butcher,
May 7, "The
launch of
AutoX’s fully
driverless
robotaxi in
January 2021
was a major
milestone for
the company,
as it provided
the first
commercial
robotaxi
service in
China and made
AutoX the
second company
in the world
to operate a
robotaxi
service
without a
safety driver
in the
vehicle.
According to
AutoX, the
service has
been well
received by
Shenzhen
residents and
officials
alike. Within
the first 100
days of
operation, the
company claims
its service
has won over a
group of loyal
users from the
traditional
ride-hailing
market...." Read more Hmmmm... Be sure to see
video.
Looks good;
however, was
it
"driverless"
or "driverless
with an
'attendant'
inside". Not
to be picky,
but I couldn't
find
independent
confirmation
that "no
disengagements"
occurred
during the two
hour video.
Also, it seems
as if this was
videoed early
on a "Sunday
morning".
Anyway, it
looks good.
Alain
B.
Stephens, May
5, "How can
railroads
compete with
autonomous or
electric
trucks that
would
dramatically
reduce the
cost of
trucking?
“Ultimately,
our answer to
autonomous
trucks is
autonomous
trains,” Union
Pacific CEO
Lance Fritz
says. A first
step toward
automation is
reducing crew
size where
feasible,
Fritz said
during the
railroad’s
investor day
Tuesday.
UP invested in
autonomous
truck company
TuSimple in
December to
keep tabs on
the
technology,
and so it can
test
driverless
rigs for
intermodal
drayage
service, Fritz
says.
TuSimple,
which runs
autonomous
trucks in the
Southwest with
a driver
aboard who can
step in if
necessary,
plans to make
its first
driverless
revenue move
this fall.
Analysts say
that
autonomous
rigs could
threaten
nearly a third
of the traffic
that currently
moves by rail.
Electric
trucks are
significantly
cheaper to
operate than
diesel rigs
and are likely
to arrive
sooner, and in
greater
numbers, than
driverless
rigs,
according to
consulting
firm Oliver
Wyman. Either
would erode
rail’s cost
advantage over
trucks.... "
Read more Hmmmm... If I was UP, I wouldn't
be worried
about
Driverless
trucks (they
are way way
out in the
future). I'd
be worried
about not
having 200 car
unit coal
trains to
move.
Consequently,
I'd be fully
invested in
driverless
trains and
prepared to
buy out the
two-man crews
on the UP.
Trains can
always beat
trucks on a
carbon
footprint
basis. If
they can get
out of their
own way and
better compete
on a service
frequency
basis by
running short
few-car trains
they can
readily
compete with
trucks. The
hard part of
getting to
short few-car
trains the
buying out of
the last two
crew members,
not the
automatic
operation.
Alain
K. Pyle,
May 12,
"Things that
were abstract
dreams and
nightmares in
the early
1990s have
become today’s
reality.
Specifically,
the idea of
electronic
viruses and
cybercriminals
wreaking havoc
on the real
world has
sadly become a
reality and
the resulting
gas shortages
are a reminder
of the 1970
era.
Unfortunately,
the
cyberinfrastructure
vulnerabilities we are seeing today are just a sliver of what could be
if GPS is
compromised,
according to an
excellent
article by
former DOT
Deputy
Assistant
Secretary for
Research and
Technology
Diana
Furchtgott-Roth...."
Read more Hmmmm...GPS must NOT be
compromised.
See also: "Resilient
Positioning,
Navigation,
and Timing –
Right Now"
Alain
M. Wayland,
May 12,
"Volkswagen is
planning to
bring to
market by 2025
a version of
its upcoming
microbus, a
retro-styled
electric van,
with the
ability to
drive itself
in certain
circumstances,
the automaker
announced
Wednesday.
VW is
developing the
vehicle with
Argo AI, a
Pittsburgh-based
autonomous
vehicle
start-up
backed by the
German
automaker and
Ford Motor.
Testing of the
ID.Buzz vans
to transport
people and
goods is
expected to
begin this
summer in
Munich,
according to
the companies.
“Our aim with
the
self-driving
version of the
ID.Buzz is to
facilitate
commercial
deployment of
transport and
delivery
services starting
in 2025,”
Christian
Senger, head
of autonomous
driving at
VW’s van unit,
said in a
press release.
... " Read more Hmmmm... "... starting
in 2025
Another gonna
rather dida.
Alain
Press
release, May
12, "Today
Mothers
Against Drunk
Driving (MADD)
released
an updated
analysis of
vehicle
technologies
that are
available now
– or in
various stages
of development
– that could
be installed
in vehicles to
prevent drunk
driving and
other
impairments
and save
thousands of
lives a year.
The analysis was first submitted Jan. 11 to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in response to the agency’s Request for Information on drunk driving prevention technology. MADD also submitted the RFI to the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee as part of the record for an April 27 auto safety hearing... In total, this updated report details 241 examples of technology that NHTSA should consider as part of a rulemaking to prevent impaired driving. Numerous technologies to correct dangerous and deadly driving behaviors are available today, and are now an option on almost all new vehicles. Driving performance monitoring systems are critical to the elimination of impaired driving and will likely be used in tandem with other driver monitoring systems, and potentially (but not limited to) breath or touch-based passive alcohol detection technology...." Read more Hmmmm... Very interesting. Alain
M. Wayland,
May 13,
"Cruise, a
majority-owned
autonomous
vehicle
subsidiary of
General
Motors,
expects
production of
its driverless
shuttle called
the Origin to
begin in
early 2023,
CEO Dan Ammann
said Thursday.
The time frame
given for the
vehicle is the
most detailed
yet and also
hints at when
the commercial
operation of
Cruise’s
current
autonomous
vehicle test
fleet is
expected to
start.
The Origin is
the company’s
first vehicle
specifically
designed to
operate
without a
driver on
board. It does
not have
manual
controls such
as pedals or a
steering
wheel.... " Read more Hmmmm... "... begin
in early 2023
Another gonna
rather dida.
Alain
H. Posner'77, Sept 13, 2020. "Creating Value for Light Density Urban Rail Lines" . See slides, See video Hmmmm... Simply Brilliant. Alain
Virtual on July 12-15, 2021
These
editions are
sponsored by
the SmartETFs
Smart
Transportation
and Technology
ETF, symbol
MOTO. For more
information
head to www.motoetf.com
F. Fishkin,
Nov 25, "What
you should
know about
electric cars,
climate change
and more. The
Dispatcher
publisher
Michael Sena
joins
Princeton's
Alain
Kornhauser and
co-host Fred
Fishkin in an
eye opening
edition of
Smart Driving
Cars.."
F. Fishkin, Nov 24, "When it comes to active driver assistance systems, what works and what needs improvement? Some answers from Kelly Funkhouser… program manager for vehicle interface, head of connected and automated vehicles at Consumer Reports. She joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for episode 186 of Smart Driving Cars."
F. Fishkin, July 20, "Is Driverless home delivery the fastest route to Affordable Mobility for the Mobility Disadvantaged? ... "
F. Fishkin,
July 2,
"Transportation,
racial
injustices and
changing the
thinking
around the
future of
mobility. NYU
McSilver
Institute for
Poverty Policy
& Research
fellow Henry
Greenidge
joins
Princeton's
Alain
Kornhauser and
co-host Fred
Fishkin in an
eye and mind
opening
episode of
Smart Driving
Cars. Plus
Amazon, Zoox,
Waymo, Tesla
& more.
."
F. Fishkin,
June 2, "But
the debate is
not really
about
technology nor
is it about
who delivers
the best value
for the money
or the most
privacy. It is
about ..."
T.
Krisher, Feb
19, "The fiery
crash of a
Tesla near
Houston with
no one behind
the wheel is
drawing
scrutiny from
two federal
agencies that
could bring
new regulation
of electronic
systems that
take on some
driving tasks.
The National
Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration
and the
National
Transportation
Safety board
said Monday
they would
send teams to
investigate
the Saturday
night crash on
a residential
road that
killed two men
in a Tesla
Model S.
Local
authorities
said one man
was found in
the passenger
seat, while
another was in
the back.
They’re
issuing search
warrants in
the probe,
which will
determine
whether the
Tesla’s
Autopilot
partially
automated
system was in
use. Autopilot
can keep a car
centered in
its lane, keep
a distance
from cars in
front of it,
and can even
change lanes
automatically
in some
circumstances.
On Twitter
Monday, Tesla
CEO Elon Musk
wrote that
data logs
“recovered so
far” show
Autopilot
wasn’t turned
on, and “Full
Self-Driving”
was not
purchased for
the vehicle.
He didn’t
answer
reporters’
questions
posed on
Twitter...."
Read
more Hmmmm... I'll stand by my
quote... "...“Elon’s
been totally
irresponsible,”
said Alain
Kornhauser,
faculty chair
of autonomous
vehicle
engineering at
Princeton
University.
Musk, he said,
has sold the
dream that the
cars can drive
themselves
even though in
the fine print
Tesla says
they’re not
ready. “It’s
not a game.
This is
serious
stuff.”..."
... even
though it
isn't the most
critical
comment.
What is more concerning.... "Why didn't Tesla's Automated Emergency Braking System prevent the Tesla from hitting the tree?" The common theme in the Joshua Brown, Elaine Herzberg, Walter Huang, Firetruck/Derrick Monet, 2nd_Firetruck_Tesla crash ..., Teslas seem to disregard stationary objects directly ahead, or certainly doesn't avoid hitting them enough of the time. The Tesla code must assume that it can pass underneath them. Can such an egregious oversight in Tesla's AEB computer code really exist? Is the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) involved in this oversight because it has made Tesla and maybe others so adverse to false positives that they simply assume that Teslas can pass under any and all stationary objects in the road ahead? Not a pretty situation. Alain
A.
Ohnsman, April
2, "John
Krafcik, the
auto industry
veteran who’s
run Waymo for
over five
years, is
stepping down
as CEO of the
Alphabet Inc.
self-driving
tech giant and
is being
replaced by
two
high-ranking
company
executives.
J.
Gallagher,
March 24, "Two
prominent
labor unions
want the U.S.
Department of
Transportation
(DOT) to
reject the
Trump
administration’s
automated
vehicle (AV)
strategy for
relying too
much on the
viewpoint from
industry
without enough
attention paid
to potential
damage to
worker safety
and jobs.
The 38-page Automated
Vehicles
Comprehensive
Plan
(AVCP), one of
the last
documents
released for
public comment
by DOT under
Secretary
Elaine Chao
before she
left the
administration
in January,
laid out the
previous
administration’s
vision for
integrating
AVs – both
cars and heavy
trucks – into
the U.S.
transportation
system.
The plan received 23 comments before the comment period closed on Tuesday, with trucking technology companies generally supporting the strategy and labor rejecting it.
“This document doubles down on the previous administration’s irresponsible, hands-off approach to AV deployment and regulation and mostly boosts the agency’s role as cheerleader and enabler rather than safety regulator,” wrote John Samuelsen, international president of the Transport Workers Union of America (TWU), which represents transit workers...." Read more Hmmmm... One might suggest that TWU's position is enormously short sighted. Transit pre_Covid served 1% of the person-miles in the US. That is a niche of a niche. During Covid, almost anyone who could affords a car and didn't have one, bought one. Transit ridership took an enormous hit. Even with enormous subsidy, Transit, especially bus transit, is hardly ever the "mode of choice" for anyone because its level-of-service is fundamentally poor. It serves relatively few locations, loosely connected by a route which delivers service only at infrequent fixed times. Essentially no other consumer commodity today operates with so little regard to its customer's real-time needs and desires. Even network television has adapted to become demand-responsive as opposed to take-it-or-leave-it.
Conventional transit is labor
intensive
because it
needs a
chauffeur for
each vehicle
and that
chauffeur
deserves nice
working
conditions and
a living
wage.
Unfortunately,
the service
that a
chauffeur can
deliver can't
attract enough
customers to
make that
service a
going
concern.
However, an
automated
driver can
arguably
deliver
demand-responsive
service while
having the
total cost of
its working
conditions and
level-of-effort be substantially less than a TWU driver. This might let
a Transit
entity to
actually
develop a
going concern
that would
serve 10x or
more
person-miles
and create
better paying
and better
working
conditions for
all TWU
members.
M.
Hogan, March
19, "A beta
version of
Tesla's "Full
Self Driving"
Autopilot
update has
begun rolling
out to certain
users. And
man, if you
thought "Full
Self Driving"
was even close
to a reality,
this video
of the system
in action
will certainly
relieve you of
that notion.
It is perhaps
the best
comprehensive
video at
illustrating
just how
morally
dubious,
technologically
limited, and
potentially
dangerous
Autopilot's
"Full Self
Driving" beta
program
is...." Read
more Hmmmm... The Video
is
MUST watch.
This is what I
would call a "Semi-SelfDriving
Alpha"
product in
this
Operational
Design Domain
(non-dense
city/commercial
suburban
streets,
during
daylight, in
clear weather
with moderate
temperature
conditions).
Drivers have four (4)
"responsibilities".
1. Feet/foot
on/near the
pedals, 2.
Hand(s) on the
wheel, 3. Eyes
on the road,
and 4. Butt in
the driver's
seat (and
possibly 5....
Have
reasonable
cognitive
brain
functions).
If the
Operational
Design Domain
is a straight
lane with a
slight
downgrade and
nothing else
around, my "55
Chevy" can
"Self-drive"
and even be
"Driverless".
I don't even
have to be in
it. However,
we must all
agree, that we
can't call my
"55 Chevy" a
"Driverless"
car. We can't
even call it a
Self-driving
because I'm
going to need
to have my
butt is the
driver's seat
to do
something when
the ODD
changes (the
road turns ,
...) and it
is, at best,
Semi-Self
driving
because my
eyes will need
to be on the
road for me to
realize that
the "55 Chevy"
is about to
exit its ODD.
It is going to
need help from
me to not
crash.
So Elon's FSD is definitely Semi-SelfDriving because its ODD doesn't come close to including many of the situations that it found in its video journey above. It is Alpha because any potential user can be expected to have little if any idea what is required to use this product without getting hurt. So, please be very careful out there and don't stop paying attention to the road ahead!!! Alain