2017-02-05
1st edition of the 5th year of SmartDrivingCars
February 4, 2017
Autonomous Vehicles Meet Human Drivers: Traffic Safety Issues for States
J. Hedlund, Feb 2017Fully autonomous vehicles – cars and trucks that can drive themselves, without a human
at the controls – are coming soon. In fact, they
already are on the road. Yes!
...Autonomous vehicles will change
our lives in many ways. Yes!
... But all vehicles on the road will
not be autonomous for a very long time, perhaps
never. Until then, autonomous vehicles must share
the road with vehicles driven by humans. Yes! How can this
be done safely? States are responsible for safety
on the roads – for licensing drivers, registering
vehicles, and establishing and enforcing traffic
laws. So states must take the lead in dealing with
the many traffic safety issues that a mix of
driver-operated and autonomous vehicles will
bring. Yes! In
particular, states should help educate the public
about the benefits that autonomous vehicles will
bring and the risks that they may present, educate
drivers of semi-autonomous vehicles about their
driving responsibilities, and educate all drivers
about how to share the road safely with autonomous
vehicles. Yes! This
report should help states understand and address
these issues. It's written for state Departments
of Transportation (DOTs), Departments of Motor
Vehicles (DMVs), and State Highway Safety Offices
(SHSOs)....Great!
The public’s views on new technology can change quickly. AVs today may well be similar to automobiles a century ago or smart phones only 10 years ago: a new technology with a few ardent supporters and many skeptics initially but which quickly became both acceptable and highly desirable. As Henry Ford is purported to have said regarding automobiles (probably incorrectly), “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Also, today’s teenagers are more accepting of AVs: in the Kelley Blue Book survey, 48% of respondents age 12-15 said they would be comfortable riding in an AV compared to 36% of all respondents….Yes!
Laws or regulations formed in haste may hinder rather than help AV testing and implementation. (p17) Yes! “ Read more Hmmm… This is a very well written and well referenced report that is well balanced and properly presents the challenges. Some modest suggestions are: Abandon the SAE/NHTSA Levels and go with 3 types/classes/levels: Safe-Driving, Self-driving and Driverless. Also, this is not the first technological change that DMVs have faced. The advent of turn signals changed driver testing. Self-driving is really not that much different. DMVs could start by addressing cruise control in that they could promote & educate on the best use of cruise control. By the way, I am not aware of a single sign along any highway encouraging/promoting/prohibiting the use of cruise control. DMVs could start with that since it really is not much different that Self-driving. Alain
Self-driving car prototypes need less human help, data show
AP, Feb 1, "Self-driving car prototypes appear to
be getting better at negotiating California streets
and highways without a human backup driver
intervening, according to data made public Wednesday
by California transportation regulators. ... Waymo,
..., did far more testing than the other 10
companies combined — and had much greater success.
Its fleet drove itself more than 635,000 miles with
124 safety-related "disengagements," which must be
reported when the technology fails or the backup
driver takes control out of concern the car is
malfunctioning.
The Google project's disengagement rate was the
equivalent of two incidents every 10,000 miles, a
notable decrease over the prior year, when there
were eight disengagements per 10,000 miles.
"[This four-fold improvement reflects the significant work](https://medium.com/waymo/accelerating-the-pace-of-learning-36f6bc2ee1d5#.j8rxxhb0m) we've been doing to make our software and
hardware more capable and mature," Dmitri Dolgov,
Waymo's head of self-driving technology wrote in a
blog post .
Waymo's chief critic acknowledged the improvement,
but John Simpson of the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog
said the number of disengagements shows the cars
still "simply aren't ready to be released to roam
our roads" without human backup drivers." [Read more](http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-self-driving-cars-20170201-story.html)Hmmm... No one
has yet suggested that these are 'Driverless
Cars' with no one in them. This reliability
improvement demonstrates substantial progress
towards 'Self-driving cars' in many/most
places. [Clink on Link](https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disengagement_report_2016) and then [Click on Manufacturer](https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/946b3502-c959-4e3b-b119-91319c27788f/GoogleAutoWaymo_disengage_report_2016.pdf?MOD=AJPERES) to get details of the
improvement by Manufacturer. Congratulations to
all! Alain
Serving the Nation’s Personal Mobility Needs with the Casual Sharing of autonomousTaxis & Today’s Urban Rail, Amtrak and Air Transport Systems
A. Kornhauser, et al. Feb 3, “Orf467F16 Final Project Symposium quantifying implications of such a Nation-wide mobility system on Average Vehicle Occupancy (AVO), energy, environment and congestion, including estimates of fleet size, needed empty vehicle repositioning, and ridership implications on existing rail transit systems (west, east, NYC) and Amtrak of a system that would efficiently and effectively perform their ‘1st mile’/’last-mile’ mobility needs. Read more Hmmm… Now linked is Draft Final Report Alain
Driverless cars better sooner than later:
F. Fishkin, Feb 3, "Techstination, your destination
for gadgets and gear. I'm Fred Fishkin.
Driverless cars…better sooner than later. You've
been hearing about autonomous vehicles…or driverless
cars…for years now. As the kids in the back seat
like to say…are we there yet? And the answer…" [Listen](http://www.techstination.com/report.jsp?reportId=4905)
Hmmm... Nice :-) Alain
Autonomous Car Pricing Will Turn Your Town Into A Science Experiment
M. Turck, Jan 29, "In a future driven by shared
autonomous vehicles, transportation becomes a
utility. The name of the game is efficiency — you
pay for what you use, and how you use it. No car
ownership, no car insurance, no maintenance, no gas,
no driveways or garages… you pay for a ride from A
to B, and when you get out, you've washed your hands
of the investment.
But all those things have a cost, so it must mean
someone else is coughing up the dough, right?..." [Read more](https://hackernoon.com/autonomous-car-pricing-will-turn-your-town-into-a-science-experiment-a7b797734df6#.rnkt9wxvl) Hmmm... Some
nice ideas; however, Google/Alphabet/Waymo may
just offer it for free and have its advertisers
pay to have the opportunity to secure your
undivided attention to buy stuff during the
ride. Hmmmmmm$$$ Alain
Fight Over Tesla’s Self-Driving Pro Shows Talent War Escalating
D. Hull, Jan 30, "There was chatter for months
within the tight-knit network of Silicon Valley
self-driving whizzes: Where was one of their
industry's most-prominent players going to land?
The world found out last week when Tesla Motors Inc.
sued Sterling Anderson, the former director of its
Autopilot program. The electric-car maker alleged
Anderson started working months ago with Chris
Urmson, the former head of Google's self-driving car
program.
The legal fight involving autonomous-driving hot
shots is the latest to show how the war for talent
in Silicon Valley is heating up, as tech and auto
companies alike compete for skilled
engineers...."All of the sudden, people realize that
self-driving cars are becoming a reality," said
Sebastian Thrun, who founded Google's self-driving
car project and researches robotics and artificial
intelligence as a professor at Stanford University.
"Every CEO of an automaker has made autonomous cars
a priority, and 2016 was the year when people of
influence woke up to the potential of this." [Read more](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-30/fight-over-tesla-s-self-driving-pro-shows-talent-war-escalating) Hmmm... Yup!
Alain
Ohio backs next-gen car center
Feb 3, “The country’s biggest automotive testing facility outside Columbus will receive a $45 million grant to expand as the state furthers its efforts to become a national leader in advancing autonomous vehicle research and smart road technology, Gov. John Kasich and other officials announced recently at Ohio State University in Columbus.
The state, OSU and JobsOhio are providing the
grant for the Transportation Research Center in
East Liberty, a testing facility about 45 miles
northwest of Columbus. The university is
contributing $25 million, the state $12.5 million
and JobsOhio $7.5 million..." [Read more](http://www.agrinews-pubs.com/farm_equipment/ohio-backs-next-gen-car-center/article_8378bc95-470d-5eea-a885-bb9c6a15b8cf.html) Hmmm... Nice
to see the Ohio governor, state university and
jobs program coming together to support this
emerging transformative industry. Alain
Scania takes lead with full-scale autonomous truck platoon
Press Release, Jan 9 "Scania will design the world's
first full-scale autonomous truck platooning
operations, based on its own advanced technology.
The platoon will traffic public roads while
transporting containers between port terminals in
Singapore. The aim is to organise convoys of four
trucks – with the following three trucks behind the
lead truck autonomously driven, as well as to fully
automate the processes for precise docking and
undocking of cargo..." [Read more](https://www.scania.com/group/en/scania-takes-lead-with-full-scale-autonomous-truck-platoon/) Hmmm... See
embedded video. Fine, but still at the "The aim
to..." stage for what is a very small market
niche with a challenged value opportunity. I
really wish that they would focus on perfecting
and selling Automated Collision Avoidance (aka
Safe-driving Trucks), that would deliver to each
so equipped truck trip a substantial value
proposition (a much lower liability
risk/expectation). It's only cash. Alain
The Self-Driving Car’s Bicycle Problem
P. Fairley, Jan 31, “Robotic cars are great at monitoring other cars, and they’re getting better at noticing pedestrians, squirrels, and birds. The main challenge, though, is posed by the lightest, quietest, swerviest vehicles on the road. “Bicycles are probably the most difficult detection problem that autonomous vehicle systems face,” says UC Berkeley research engineer Steven Shladover.
Nuno Vasconcelos, a visual computing expert at the
University of California, San Diego, says bikes
pose a complex detection problem because they are
relatively small, fast and heterogenous. "A car is
basically a big block of stuff. A bicycle has much
less mass and also there can be more variation in
appearance — there are more shapes and colors and
people hang stuff on them." [Read more](http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/the-selfdriving-cars-bicycle-problem) Hmmm... Yes,
bicycle recognition is very important, so is
motorcycle recognition which because of higher
speeds may well be tougher. Alain
Just
for Fun..
Mercedes AA-Class Electric Car
Watch video Hmmm… Cute. Alain
Some
other thoughts that deserve your attention
Supplier’s Role Shows Breadth of VW’s Deceit
J. Ewing, Feb 1, "When Volkswagen executives
decided in 2006 to use software to evade
emissions rules, they needed help. No one inside
Volkswagen knew how to write the software. So
the company turned to one of its most trusted
partners: the German supplier, Robert Bosch.
Working from Volkswagen specifications, Bosch
developed code that instructed computers in
diesel engines to fully deploy pollution
controls only when the cars were being tested in
laboratories, according to lawsuits in the
United States and Germany....
In 2008, Bosch asked Volkswagen to guarantee
that it would take responsibility if the fraud
were discovered, according to court documents
filed as part of the lawsuit by the German
owner. Volkswagen refused. Bosch maintains that
a letter seeking the guarantee has been
misinterpreted and actually refers to a gasoline
engine, not the diesel engines at the heart of
the scandal...." [Read more](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/business/bosch-vw-diesel-settlement.html) Hmmm...
Nothing pretty about this and we MUST all
make sure that nothing like this goes on
with the code for SmartDrivingCars. Alain
###
On the More Technical Side
http://orfe.princeton.edu/~alaink/SmartDrivingCars/Papers/
Half-baked stuff
that probably doesn't deserve your time
Tesla S Falls Short of Luxury Rivals on Tougher Safety Test
C. Jensen, Feb 1, “ Tesla has long promoted its cars as among the safest available. After its Model S electric sedan was reviewed by the federal government’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2013, Tesla said it had received the best safety rating of any car ever tested.
But a more rigorous safety review has reached a different conclusion: that the Tesla S is not on a par with several of its luxury rivals. On Wednesday, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a group known for its strict testing, announced that the Tesla Sdid not receive either of its safety awards. That was, in part, because in one of five crash tests the dummy’s head hit the steering wheel….
The insurance institute did not test
the Model S's forward collision
prevention and automatic braking system
because it bought the car before Tesla
added new hardware and software in
October..." [Read more](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/business/tesla-s-safety-test.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Ftechnology&action=click&contentCollection=technology®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=13&pgtype=sectionfront) Hmmm...
Seems to suggest that IIHS desperately
needs to change its safety ratings.
Yes, Crash Mitigation is important,
BUT Crash Avoidance is MORE important
and should AT MINIMUM be taken into
consideration. If Crash Avoidance
Systems (aka 'Safe-Driving Cars') that
work greatly decreases the probability
of the IIHS crash test and thereby
rendering it essentially irrelevant,
shouldn't IIHS be testing the veracity
of the Crash Avoidance System???
Isn't the 'Tougher Safety Hurdle' the
one that avoids the crash in the first
place?? NHTSA's and IIHS (and Euro
NCAP) Safety Ratings are desperately
in need of a substantial overhaul. As
they currently exist they do NOT do
not perform as good of a public
service as they could. Alain
###
C’mon Man!(These folks
didn't get/read the memo)
Reliance on autonomous systems the cause of fatal Tesla crash with tractor-trailer
J. Jaillet, Feb 2, “Department of Transportation regarding the high-profile 2016 crash involving a Tesla Model S and a tractor-trailer reached the conclusion — again — that the inattention of the Tesla’s driver was to blame for the crash. NHTSA says the car’s operator, who died in the collision, was leaning too heavily on the car’s driver assist systems, which failed to brake when a tractor-trailer crossed the road in front of the car…“ Read more Hmmm… What???? Is this more Fake News?? How does tractor-trailer crossing/’cutting off’ a car on a highway all of a sudden NOT be the ‘blame’ for a crash??? Oh yes, this CCJ and the era of alternative facts. C’mon Man! :-( Alain
I was
'Onioned' in the last edition of SDC ...
[This was a fake reporting](http://www.masstransitmag.com/news/12298430/trump-team-compiles-infrastructure-priority-list): [Trump team compiles infrastructure priority list](http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article128492164.html)
L. Horsley, Jan 24, “President Donald Trump’s team has compiled a list of about 50 infrastructure projects nationwide, totaling at least $137.5 billion, as the new White House tries to determine its investment priorities,… Among the projects could be a new terminal for the Kansas City airport, upgrades to Interstate 95 in North Carolina (Hmmm… NC again, maybe some of Foxx’s down home projects will make it to the new administration) and a proposal to replace the nation’s radar-based air traffic control system with one called NextGen, based on satellites….a list of about 50 infrastructure projects nationwide, totaling at least $137.5 billion. Read more Hmmm… which produce 193,350 ‘Direct’ job years and 241,700 ‘Indirect’ job years. Doing the arithmetic, that’s $711K per direct job-year ( or $316K per combined job-year.). Those are expensive job-years! What is built had better be something that doesn’t require a Washington (or other public-sector) subsidy to keep it operating once it is built; else it would be better just create 3 times as many (1.375M) $100K welfare jobs-year and not be forever begging for operating subsidies.
Well what’s on the list…# 13 Texas Central RR, #23 Maryland Purple Line, #24 M-1 Rail, Detroit, #24 MBTA Green Line Extension… all projects that, at best, have no hope of being able to operate without perpetual public subsidies. Moreover, each is likely to have been made totally obsolete by driverless MaaS systems before they serve their first customer. Seems like some of these infrastructure projects will be filling rather than draining the swamp. So sad! Alain
Calendar of Upcoming
Events:
Recent Highlights
of:
#
###
###
January 27, 2017
Serving the Nation’s Personal Mobility Needs with the Casual Sharing of autonomousTaxis & Today’s Urban Rail, Amtrak and Air Transport Systems ODI
A. Kornhauser, Jan 14, “Orf467F16 Final Project Symposium quantifying implications of such a Nation-wide mobility system on Average Vehicle Occupancy (AVO), energy, environment and congestion, including estimates of fleet size, needed empty vehicle repositioning, and ridership implications on existing rail transit systems (west, east, NYC) and Amtrak of a system that would efficiently and effectively perform their ‘1st mile’/’last-mile’ mobility needs. Read more Hmmm… Now linked are 1st Drafts of the chapters and the powerPoint summaries of these elements. Final Report should be available by early February. The major finding is, nationwide there exists sufficient casual ridesharing potential that a well–managed Nationwide Fleet of about 30M aTaxis (in conjunction with the existing air, Amtrak and Urban fixed-rail systems) could serve the vehicular mobility needs of the whole nation with VMT 40% less than today’s automobiles while providing a Level-of-Service (LoS) largely equivalent and in many ways superior than is delivered by the personal automobile today. Also interesting are the findings as to the substantial increased patronage opportunities available to Amtrak and each of the fixed rail transit systems around the country because the aTaxis solve the ‘1st and last mile’ problem. While all of this is extremely good news, the challenging news is that since all of these fixed rail systems currently lose money on each passenger served, the additional patronage would likely mean that they’ll lose even more money in the future. :-( Alain
January 20, 2017
Fiscal Year 2016 SRD Program Grant Selections
Public Announcement, Jan 22: “Pierce Transit will receive $1,664,894 to deploy buses equipped with collision avoidance warning systems or automatic braking features. The objective of this project is to deploy and demonstrate collision avoidance technology in partnership with the Washington State Transit Insurance Pool (WSTIP), a collaborative organization of 25 Washington public transit agencies that combine their resources to provide and purchase insurance coverage, manage claims and litigation, and receive risk management and training. Pierce Transit will work with WSTIP to accurately determine the business case for investing in these technologies.” Read moreHmmm… Finally!! More than 3 years since Lou Sanders of APTA, Jerome Lutin and I first proposed to FTA to do such a thing for the benefit of the entire bus transit industry (which FTA deemed as non-worthy) the FTA has finally turned around and jumped on-board. The unfortunate news: we lost 3 years. The fortunate news: the process of substantially reducing bus crashes is finally underway thanks to the hard work in the interim by Jerome Lutin and Jerry Spears (formerly of WSTIP). This and the good news below from Tesla may finally enlighten the insurance industry to play a leadership role in the market adoption of SafeDrivingCars/Buses/Trucks. Congratulations Jerome & Jerry! Alain
ODI (Office of Defects Investigation) Findings on Tesla AEB & AutoPilot
###
(Above link should work) Jan 19, “… Summary: … NHTSA’s examination did not identify any defects in the design or performance of the AEB or Autopilot systems of the subject vehicles nor any incidents in which the systems did not perform as designed. AEB systems used in the automotive industry through MY 2016 are rear-end collision avoidance technologies that are not designed to reliably perform in all crash modes, including crossing path collisions. The Autopilot system is an Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS) that requires the continual and full attention of the driver to monitor the traffic environment and be prepared to take action to avoid crashes. Tesla’s design included a hands-on the steering wheel system for monitoring driver engagement…
... ODI analyzed data from crashes of
Tesla Model S and Model X vehicles
involving airbag deployments that
occurred while operating in, or within
15 seconds of transitioning from,
Autopilot mode. Some crashes involved
impacts from other vehicles striking the
Tesla from various directions with
little to no warning to the Tesla
driver. Other crashes involved
scenarios known to be outside of the
state-of-technology for
current-generation Level 1 or 2 systems,
such as cut-ins, cut-outs and crossing
path collisions....
...The Florida fatal crash appears to
have involved a period of extended
distraction (at least 7 seconds)..." .Hmmm... nothing else is
written about this nor is a basis
given for the 'at least 7
seconds'. Possibly the most
important information revealed in
this summary is Figure 11, p11: "...
Figure 11 shows the rates
calculated by ODI for airbag
deployment crashes in the
subject Tesla vehicles before
and after Autosteer
installation. The data show
that the Tesla vehicles crash
rate dropped by almost 40
percent after Autosteer
installation...
...A safety-related defect trend
has not been identified at this
time and further examination of
this issue does not appear to be
warranted. Accordingly, this investigation
is closed. " [Read more](http://www.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/Orf467F16/NHTSA_ODI_FindingsOnTeslaFloridaCrash.PDF) Hmmm... WOW!!!
. Every word of this Finding
is worth reading. It basically
exonerates Tesla, states that AEBs
(Automated Emergency Braking)
systems don't really work and aren't
designed to work in some scenarios
(straight crossing path (SCP) and
left turn across path (LTAP), see p
2,3). ...which suggests, to me,
that DoT/NHTSA should be placing
substantial efforts on making these
systems really work in more
scenarios. And... there is the solid
data that 'AutoSteer" reduced
Tesla crashes by almost 40%!!! WOW!!
Will Insurance now finally get
on-board and lead? Alai
January 13, 2017
Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx Announces New Federal Committee on Automation
News, Jan 10, “…U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “I’m proud to announce this new automation committee, and look forward to seeing its members advance life-saving innovations while boosting our economy and making our transportation network more fair, reliable, and efficient.”… Read more Hmmm… Excellent!!! Congratulations Chris, Bryant, Missy and everyone else. Alain
January 4, 2017
Volume 4, Issue 3
M. Sena, Jan. 5, “In This Issue:
Report from Dispatch Central 1 “…While the 12 million people in the EU who earn their livings directly from the automotive industry are delighted by the news that car sales figures for Novem-ber were up significantly, and it looks like 2016 will be another banner year, there are people in governments doing everything in their power to make both building and owning motorized vehicles economically unviable…” Read more Hmmm…Very interesting!
Autonomous Driving News Apple’s Letter to NHTSA 1 “…The Vehicle Safety Act requires companies to certify vehicles to the FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) before first sale. But this law applies to new motor vehicles intended for sale to the public, and by implication, by companies that make and sell cars, not companies like Apple that may or may not intend to sell cars. Further, FAST Act2 specifically allows car makers, but not non-car makers, to test on public roads without requiring ex-emptions from FMVSS…Read more “ Hmmm… Very interesting!
What Car Companies Are Doing 2 “…So Uber must have made Volvo a pretty sweet offer when it gets rid of all the drivers with their own cars and has its own fleet of driverless cars…Read more” Hmmm…Very interesting!
Reurbanization or Spreading the Sprawl 3 “…Where do you want to go? My chart below has two opposing scenarios. In the top scenario, we keep doing what we have been doing. In the bottom sce-nario, we try to match policies with desired results. You choose…Read more” Hmmm…Very interesting!
Automotive Navigation-The Future of Traffic Info 4 “…ROUTE GUIDANCE WITHOUT
traffic information is useless..[Read more](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/The%20Dispatcher_5_January%202017.pdf)" Hmmm...Stop
right there. We've known that! The
connected world will not get here
until most of road vehicles are part
of what will be but a few competing
fleets. It is those fleet
owners/managers that will find it
compelling to deploy connectedness
throughout their own fleets. Any
meaningful sharing of data between
competing fleets is not in any future
that I foresee. It may even violate
anti-trust laws (Unless Putin takes
over the world). Alain
Musings of a Dispatcher – Civilis cogitationes 6 “…I did not see a lot of people cycling to their jobs when I was in Västerås in the early autumn of this year. Like most places in Europe
and the U.S., when cars became affordable
for people with even modest
incomes—starting in the 50s in the U.S.
and in the 60s in Europe—it was a delight
for workers to get out of the rain and
snow and into their own car. It's the same
today in emerging markets, especially
China,.." [Read more](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/The%20Dispatcher_5_January%202017.pdf) Hmmm...Our
only hope is "Driverless"! Alain
December 24, 2016
Waymo’s 100 autonomous Chrysler minivans are here
J. Golson, Dec 19, “Chrysler has completed the 100 autonomous Pacifica minivans that will join the Waymo (née Google) fleet in early 2017. The vans, which are plug-in hybrid variants with Waymo’s self-driving hardware and software built in, are part of a partnership between Fiat Chrysler (FCA) and Waymo that was announced earlier this year.
Waymo CEO John Krafcik said last week that his company is not interested in “making better cars.” Instead, it wants to make “better drivers.”…”
Read more Hmmm…Nice that these vehicles are targeted to a ride-sharing market (more seating capacity and easier in&out than the Prius/Lexus/Bug.)
However, the quote by John Krafcik is VERY troubling. To make “better drivers” all one needs is Automated Collision Avoidance systems (or what I’ve termed ‘Safe-driving cars’). That is indeed a laudable goal; however, that goal can be reached with a lot less hardware and software than what is in these modified Pacificas (which have a conventional steering wheel, brake & throttle pedals and driver’s seat). But Safe-driving cars aren’t helpful to the Steve Mahan’s of this world (or to the young, or the Ubers or enable the Modified Pacifica’s to offer inexpensive high-quality shared-ride on-demand mobility to all. Most unfortunately, what all of the extra gizmos on the modified Pacificas enable is for the driver to be better able to consume Google Ads for part of his/her time trapped in this vehicle. So a more honest quote might have been: it wants to make “better drivers who can better consume Google Ads.” No wonder Chris bailed! :-( Alain
December 14, 2016
Google is spinning off its self-driving car program into a new company called Waymo
A. Hawkins, Dec 13, “Today, Google announced that it would be spinning off its six-year-old self-driving project into a standalone business called Waymo, which stands for “a new way forward in mobility,” according to John Krafcik, the CEO of the new company.
It was previously reported that Google
would be dropping its plan to build its
own vehicle without steering wheels and
pedals, instead focusing on creating the
self-driving technology that can be
installed in third-party vehicles. Krafcik
didn't provide much clarity there, but did
state definitively that the new company
was still fully committed to fully
autonomous vehicle technology.
"We are all in, 100 percent, on Level Four
and Level Five fully driverless
solutions," he said.
Krafcik didn't comment on a report in
Bloomberg that Google would be starting
its own ride-sharing service in
partnership with Fiat Chrysler using the
Italian car maker's Pacifica minivans as
its fleet of self-driving taxis. Google
and FCA announced their collaboration
earlier this year. Krafcik did confirm
that the self-driving Pacificas were still
in the build phase, but would hopefully be
on the road for testing very soon.
It may be too soon to say that Google is
abandoning its plans to build it's own
fleet of driverless cars, without steering
wheels and pedals. That said, Krafcik made
it clear that Waymo "is not a car company,
there's been some confusion on that point.
We're not in business of making better
cars, we're in the business of making
better drivers."...[Read more](http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/13/13936782/google-self-driving-car-waymo-spin-off-company)
Hmmm... Boy that is a lot of
hedging. If they are in the business
of making better drivers, then all
they need to do is to make Automated
Collision Avoidance systems that
actually work... avoid collisions (aka
Safe-driving Cars). That would make
all drivers better drivers, but it
wouldn't do anything for
non-drivers... the young, old, poor,
blind, those under the influence, ...
Has Google abandoned all of those
folks and reverted to the
'dark-side'? Alain
December 7, 2016
Why the driverless car industry is happy (so far) with Trump’s pick for Transportation secretary
R. Mitchell, Dec 6, “Silicon Valley voted heavily for Hillary Clinton, but companies working on driverless cars seem overjoyed with President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for Transportation secretary, Elaine Chao. Chao will wield great power over how driverless cars and other automated vehicles will be regulated — or not….Industry insiders say they don’t want Chao to ignore driverless car policy….
Instead, they hope to avoid a patchwork of
differing and conflicting rules across the
50 states. "This should be centralized,"
said Alain L. Kornhauser, director of the
transportation program at Princeton
University and an autonomous vehicle
expert, "but that doesn't mean the states
don't play a part. It would be better if
we had a common understanding...." [Read more](http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-chao-trump-driverless-20161205-story.html)Hmmm... Yup! Alain
November 20, 2016
DSRC’s ‘Dead End,’ Says Qualcomm Exec
J, Yoshida, Nov 15, “…Qualcomm’s pending takeover of NXP Semiconductors isn’t making the path to V2X any clearer.
NXP remains a staunch advocate for
DSRC-based V2X (as demonstrated via truck
platooning on Munich roads last week
during Electronica). Qualcomm, a leading
voice and force behind the progress of the
cellular standards, is sticking to its
cellular radio technology-based V2X
evolution...We see this as a continued
cellular revolution with new elements
coming in... " [Read more](http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1330834) Hmmm...V2X
is important, but primarily as a
complement to vehicle-centered
automated collision avoidance and not
as a centralized orchestration of
individual vehicles. Finally seeing
this as: "We see this as a
continued cellular revolution with new
elements coming in..." may
bring some reality to V2X. Alain
October 27, 2016
Ontario Must Prepare for Vehicle Automation
B. Grush, Oct. 2016, “Two contradictory stories about our transportation infrastructure are currently in circulation. One is that Ontario’s aging, inadequate and congested infrastructure is perennially unable to catch up with a growing and sprawling GTHA. The other is that vehicle automation will soon dramatically multiply current road capacity by enabling narrower lanes, shorter headways and coordinated streams of connected vehicles to pass through intersections without traffic signals to impede flow.
Since the premature forecast of peak car
in 2008 and now the hype surrounding the
automated vehicle, we are often told that
we have enough road capacity; that shared
robotic taxis will optimize our trips,
reduce congestion, and largely eliminate
the need for parking. This advice implies
we need wait only a few short years to
experience relief from our current
infrastructure problems given by decades
of under-investment in transportation
infrastructure.
This is wishful thinking. Vehicle automation will give rise to two different emerging markets: semi-automated vehicles for household consumption and fully automated vehicles for public service such as robo-taxi and robo-transit. These two vehicle types will develop in parallel to serve different social markets. They will compete for both riders and infrastructure. The purpose of this report is to look at why and how government agencies and public interest groups can and should influence the preferred types and deployment of automated vehicles and the implication of related factors for planning…” Read moreHmmm…Bravo! The Key Findings & Recommendations are excellent. This is an excellent report (but it largely misses goods movement.) Especially 5.1 (read ‘semi-autonomous’ as ‘Self-driving’ and ‘full-automation’ as ‘Driverless’. My view: Driverless may well be at the heals of Self-driving because it is a business play rather than a consumer play. Driverless will be ordered by the hundreds or thousands rather than individually.) and, of course Ch 10: Ownership (the business model) is more important than technology. Alain
October 7, 2016
An Alarming 10% Rise in Traffic Deaths in the First Half of 2016
D. Victor, Oct. 5, “Traffic deaths in the United States rose 10.4 percent in the first half of this year compared with the same period in 2015, maintaining a steady climb….
The [numbers were released on Wednesday](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812332) by the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, which noted that Americans
drove about 50.5 billion more miles in the
first six months of 2016 than in the first
half of 2015, an increase of 3.3
percent....Officials have not identified a
specific cause for the most recent
increase... " [Read more](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/06/us/traffic-deaths-up-more-than-10-percent-in-first-half-of-2016.html?_r=0)Hmmm...worst
kept secret...Texting!!! It is an
epidemic and the way to address it
begins with Automated
Collision Avoidance Systems
(ACAS)...what is on the shelf today
(if it only really worked), and a
necessary foundation for Self-driving
(which improves Quality-of-Life for
some but increases VMT) and Driverless
(which improves Quality-of-Life for
all and decreases VMT). Alain
September 23, 2016
Federal Automated Vehicles Policy: Accelerating the Next Revolution In Roadway Safety
September 2016, “Executive Summary…For DOT, the excitement around highly automated vehicles (HAVs) starts with safety. (p5)
…The development of advanced automated vehicle safety technologies, including fully self-driving cars, may prove to be the greatest personal transportation revolution since the popularization of the personal automobile nearly a century ago. (p5)
…The benefits don’t stop with safety. Innovations have the potential to transform personal mobility and open doors to people and communities. (p5)
…The remarkable speed with which increasingly complex HAVs are evolving challenges DOT to take new approaches that ensure these technologies are safely introduced (i.e., do not introduce significant new safety risks), provide safety benefits today, and achieve their full safety potential in the future. (p6) Hmmm…Fantastic statements and I appreciate that the fundamental basis and motivator is SAFETY. We all have recognized safety as a necessary condition that must be satisfied if this technology is to be successful. (unfortunately it is not a sufficient condition, (in a pure math context)). This policy statement appropriately reaffirms this necessary condition. Alain
“…we divide the task of facilitating the safe introduction and deployment (…defines “deployment” as the operation of an HAV by members of the public who are not the employees or agents of the designer, developer, or manufacturer of that HAV.) of HAVs into four sections:(p6) Hmmm…Perfect! Alain
“…1. Vehicle Performance Guidance for Automated Vehicles (p6)…“ Hmmm… 15 Points, more later. Alain
“…2. Model State Policy (p7) The Model State Policy confirms that States retain their traditional responsibilities…but… The shared objective is to ensure the establishment of a consistent national framework rather than a patchwork of incompatible laws…” Hmmm… Well done. Alain
“…3. NHTSA Current Regulatory Tools (p7) … This document provides instructions, practical guidance, and assistance to entities seeking to employ those tools. Furthermore, NHTSA has streamlined its review process and is committing to…” Hmmm… Excellent. Alain
“…4. New Tools and Authorities (p7)…The speed with which HAVs are advancing, combined with the complexity and novelty of these innovations, threatens to outpace the Agency’s conventional regulatory processes and capabilities. This challenge requires DOT to examine whether the way DOT has addressed safety for the last 50 years should be expanded to realize the safety potential of automated vehicles over the next 50 years. Therefore, this section identifies potential new tools, authorities and regulatory structures that could aid the safe and appropriately expeditious deployment of new technologies by enabling the Agency to be more nimble and flexible (p8)…“ Hmmm… Yes. Alain
“…Note on “Levels of Automation” There are multiple definitions for various levels of automation and for some time there has been need for standardization to aid clarity and consistency. Therefore, this Policy adopts the SAE International (SAE) definitions for levels of automation. ) Hmmm… I’m not sure this adds clarity because it does not deal directly with the difference between self-driving and driverless. While it might be implied in level 4 and level 5 that these vehicles can proceed with no one in the vehicle, it is not stated explicitly. That is unfortunate, because driverless freight delivery can’t be done without “driverless”; neither can mobility-on-demand be offered to the young, old, blind, inebriated, …without “driverless”. Vehicles can’t be “repositioned-empty” (which (I don’t mean to offend anyone) is the real value of a taxi driver today). So autonomousTaxis are impossible.
Also, these levels do not address Automated Emergency Braking (AEB) Systems and Automated Lane Keeping Systems which are the very first systems whose on-all-the-time performance must be perfected. These are the Safety Foundation of HAV (Highly Automated vehicles). I understand that the guidelines may assume that these systems are already perfect and that “20 manufacturer have committed” to have AEB on all new cars, but to date these systems really don’t work. In 12 mph IIHS test, few stop before hitting the target, and, as we may have seen with the Florida Tesla crash, the Level 2/3 AutoPilot may not have failed, but, instead, it was the “Phantom Level 1” AEB that is supposed to be on all the time. This is not acceptable. These AEB systems MUST get infinitely better now. It is a shame that AEBs were were not explicitly addressed in this document.
“…I. Vehicle Performance Guidance for Automated Vehicles (p11) A. Guidance: if a vehicle is compliant within the existing FMVSS regulatory framework and maintains a conventional vehicle design, there is currently no specific federal legal barrier to an HAV being offered for sale.(footnote 7) However, manufacturers and other entities designing new automated vehicle systems
are subject to NHTSA's defects, recall and
enforcement authority. (footnote 8) . and the "[15 Cross-cutting Areas of Guidance](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/technology/the-15-point-federal-checklist-for-self-driving-cars.html?_r=0)"
p17)
In sum this is a very good document and displays just how far DoT policy has come from promoting v2v, DSRC and centralized control, “connected”, focus to creating an environment focused on individual vehicles that responsibly take care of themselves. Kudos to Secretary Foxx for this 180 degree policy turn focused on safety. Once done correctly, the HAV will yield the early safety benefits that will stimulate continued improvements that, in turn, will yield the great mobility, environmental and quality-of-life benefits afforded by driverless mobility.
What are not addressed are commercial trucking and buses/mass transit. NHTSA is auto focused, so maybe FMCSA is preparing similar guidelines. FTA (Federal Transit Administration) seems nowhere in sight. Alain
August 28, 2016
Prepare to be Underwhelmed by 2021’s Autonomous Cars
August 19, 2016
Ford Promises Fleets of Driverless Cars Within Five Years
N. Boudette, Aug 16, “In the race to develop driverless cars, several automakers and technology companies are already testing vehicles that pilot themselves on public roads. And others have outlined plans to expand their development fleets over the next few years. At a news conference on Tuesday at the company’s research center in Palo Alto, Calif., Mark Fields, Ford’s chief executive, said the company planned to mass produce driverless cars and have them in commercial operation in a ride-hailing service by 2021….
"That means there's going to be no
steering wheel. There's going to be no gas
pedal. There's going to be no brake
pedal,'' he said. ...." [Read mor](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/business/ford-promises-fleets-of-driverless-cars-within-five-years.html?_r=0http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/business/ford-promises-fleets-of-driverless-cars-within-five-years.html?_r=0)e Hmmm...This
is significant because it implies that
Ford, (or an entity under its control)
will operate and deliver on a
day-to-day basis MaaS (Mobility as a
Service). In other words it will both
build/assemble and operate mobility's
"Cloud". The scale economies of such
a mobility "cloud" are arguably much
more substantial than that of the data
storage & computing "cloud".
Think about it! Alain
August 1, 2016
Mobileye Ends Partnership With Tesla
2016
Lessons From the Tesla Crash
2016
7 Crash
Hmmm…What we know now (and don’t know):
Extracting Cognition out of Images for the Purpose of Autonomous Driving
Chenyi Chen PhD Dissertation , “…the key part of the thesis, a direct perception approach is proposed to drive a car in a highway environment. In this approach, an input image is mapped to a small number of key perception indicators that directly relate to the affordance of a road/traffic state for driving…..” Read more Hmmm..FPO 10:00am, May 16 , 120 Sherrerd Hall, Establishing a foundation for image-based autonomous driving using DeepLearning Neural Networks trained in virtual environments. Very promising. Alain
2016
Hearing focus of SF 2569 Autonomous vehicles task force establishment and demonstration project for people with disabilities
March 23 Hmmm… Watch the video of the Committee Meeting. The testimony is Excellent and very compelling! Also see Self-Driving Minnesota Alain
17, 2016
U.S. DOT and IIHS announce historic commitment of 20 automakers to make automatic emergency braking standard on new vehicles
18, 2016
Motor Vehicle Deaths Increase by Largest Percent in 50 Years
19, 2015
Adam Jonas’ View on Autonomous Cars
Video similar to part of Adam's Luncheon
talk @ 2015 Florida Automated Vehicle
Symposium on Dec 1. [Hmmm ... Watch Video](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/Videos/AdamJonas10T_MorganStanley.mp4) especially
at the 13:12 mark. Compelling;
especially after the 60 Minutes segment
above! Also see his [TipRanks](https://www.tipranks.com/analysts/adam-jonas).
Alain
This list is
maintained by [Alain Kornhauser](mailto:alaink@princeton.edu)
and hosted by
the [Princeton University LISTSERV](http://lists.princeton.edu).
| Unsubscribe | Re-subscribe |
This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.
This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.