Will Driverless Vehicles Mean the Decline of Railways

[pware]

Well, it has been an interesting discussion so far but, unfortunately, a little bit of venom is starting to creep in. Perhaps this reflects the passion that people feel on all sides of the debate.

My considered opinion is that driverless road vehicles will only become a reality if certain technical, behavioral, legal and economic conditions change - some of which have already been outlined in this debate.

My most likely scenario is that there will be "zones", probably in the inner city areas, where ONLY approved driverless vehicles will be allowed, no manually controlled vehicles not even a push bike. Traffic lights and pedestrians crossings will be removed - traffic lights become unnecessary when the vehicles are under the control of linked computers and pedestrian traffic will be either underground or elevated above the ground and therefore separated from the road traffic.

All passengers of driverless vehicles will have to sign a death and disability waiver before entering a vehicle!

 

[johnwhelan]

Nowhere is it permitted to use a car or truck without a licensed driver in it. None of your links say anything different. There are driver assisted trucks and cars but none are permitted without a licensed driver on the public highway in any country in the world today.

The highways that Google has been testing on are for the most part low density traffic on wide roads. That's where the background comes in. You mentioned the use of electric trucks, I merely pointed out the dangers of Lithium batteries, the bigger they are the more dangerous they are and they are the best available today.

Basically I think you're taking a very narrow look at things, you do not appear to understand the limitations of GPS, nor of the other problems that surround this technology. Any suggestion that there might be technical limitations appears to be taken as a personal attack. Trains have different advantages and disadvantages and different usages to cars and trucks. These days you don't need a B.Sc. to keep up with this stuff your local library or the Internet can help. Remember newspapers hype things to sell newspapers, this stuff is very new and there are many issues to work out not least is keeping track of where you are in built up areas.

Saying the UK will have driverless cars and trucks next year and you won't need a licenesed driver inside them who can take over is an interesting statement. Remember you did say the senior citizens who can no longer drive will use them. One wonders at how it came to be said and the reasoning behind it.

It sounds extremely muddled thinking to me and I can assure you that content creation using Blender etc will challenge even someone as active in mind as yourself whilst these things work themselves out over the next few years.

Cheerio John

Cheerio John

 

[mezzoprezzo]

IGNORE THIS POST

 

[amigacooke]

Unusually, I find myself siding with Bill on this one. There seems to be a whiff of the hysteria that surrounded the first steam locomotives where there was a concern about how people would breath at speeds over 25mph.

I must admit to being skeptical of the time scales and am reluctant to accept newspapers as primary sources of information. However, the UK government clearly believes this is a viable technology and is working to allow the further development of the required technologies and supporting legal framework within the UK.

Driverless vehicles: connected and autonomous technologies

 

[clam1952]

The difference is that Steam locomotives early powered road vehicles etc had a human in control, not a computer running software.

Proposed dates are at the end of this document, I see nothing about removing the "driver" in that document any time soon

From the above Government document Paragraph 2.1

It is important to be clear about terminology as the phrase “driverless
car” can be interpreted in different ways. Truly driverless, or “fully
autonomous”, vehicles would mean that a driver does not need to be
present. However most commentators do not expect vehicles capable
of fully autonomous operation on public roads in all circumstances to
become available until at least the 2020s.

 

[amigacooke]

The difference is that Steam locomotives early powered road vehicles etc had a human in control, not a computer running software.

Indeed, but early forms of transport developed and i can't see any reason why early attempts at driverless vehicles won't develop into vehicles that will drive themselves.

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.
Johnwhellan,with reference to your posting at #22 of this thread, the British government’s position in regard to driverless cars being owned and operated by persons without a full UK drivers license is laid out by following the below link:-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2943467/Driverless-cars-green-light-WON-T-need-licence-meaning-ll-able-school-run-own.html

As amigacooke advised in his above posting, I to do not like using British newspaper articles as evidence of anything in reality, but the article does reference the Transport Secretary Claire Perry statement to the Westminster Parliament in February 2015. Therefore, further reading on that statement can be obtained by way of “Hansard” which are the minutes of both houses of parliament plus all the various committees which meet each day while Parliament is in session.

I have used the Daily Mail article as it makes much easier reading than the Parliamentary minutes which really are heavy going when you can find them amongst the dozens of heavy documents placed on the website each day.

I would take with a pinch of salt in the Daily Mail article section with regard to putting the children into the driverless car alone on any morning and sending the car off to school. Other than the foregoing the articles seems to follow much of what Claire Perry said in the House of Commons statement. That position was and still is as far as I am aware that persons without a full UK driving licence will be allowed to own and operate driverless vehicles when they eventually become available for purchase in the UK.

John,in regard to lithium batteries and vehicles also referenced in your posting at#22of this thread, I believe all road vehicles still use lead acid batteries as their main electrical source of power. The foregoing is due to the high amperage needed to turn the starter motors of the vehicles especially with the trucks which normally operate on a combined 48 volt or even 96 volt battery series. The higher voltage/amperage enables the trucks to operate such ancillaries as tailift’s and Hiab cranes etc.

Again with reference to your above posting John, GPS tracking has been very much part of my life since its introduction over a decade ago. The British road transport industry quickly introduced it on vehicles at that time. Since then I have attended any number of employee disciplinary hearings where GPS records have been used in the hearings brought forward against drivers. However, even with that history I would not claim to be an expert in their technical workings.That stated, I believe the teams from Google, Volvo, Scania along with others are very much aware of all that needs to be known in regards to the use of them in the development of driverless vehicles, with GPS being part of several navigation systems on board.

So,again with every respect to your posting at #22 in this thread, I do not feel there is any “muddled thinking” on my part as the opening poster of this thread.

Bill

Apologies for the font on this posting,seems to be a problem with the website at the time of posting

 

[clam1952]

Indeed, but early forms of transport developed and i can't see any reason why early attempts at driverless vehicles won't develop into vehicles that will drive themselves.

They may well do in time if and when the creation of bug free and hack proof software becomes the norm not just wishful thinking, Apple can't do it Microsoft can't do it, one of the issues discussed in various places and papers in relation to Driverless Vehicles is Cyber Security.

However looking forward when we get to the stage when Quantum Computing becomes a practical reality, it may even be possible to for an AI to perform functions similar to the human Brain, as in an AI that can learn, probably a long way off at present, however the Google / Nasa project is allegedly already 3600 times faster than existing super computers or 100 million times faster than the fastest i7.

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.

snip~They may well do in time if and when the creation of bug free and hack proof software becomes the norm not just wishful thinking, Apple can't do it Microsoft can't do it, one of the issues discussed in various places and papers in relation to Driverless Vehicles is Cyber Security.~snip

Clam1952, in your above posting you have put forward in my humble opinion two very good arguments and reasons why the development of driverless vehicles should be postponed or cancelled at the present time. Therefore, can I take the issues of bug free software and cyber security separately.

It has been Google that has been at the forefront of this technology for several years now, being on its own initially but now joined by the big car and truck manufacturers who are now designing and building the Google developed software into their various production vehicles.

I feel it is without doubt that the above is one of the largest strides taken in software development since Microsoft developed the first Windows software in the 1990s. However on this occasion the risks and stakes are much higher and therefore that very situation will push forward the boundaries of better bug free software. To quote an old adage “necessity is the mother of invention”.

In regards to cyber security, as you so rightly state clam1952 both Microsoft and Apple have been unable to prevent hackers from attacking their systems in recent years. However, there is one operating system that despite growing very large in the five years since its launch no one has successfully broken into in any way. The foregoing would be the Google OS system (not to be confused with Google android) which is now so much used wherever there is good broadband communication. Who better then to be at the forefront of the security development within the software of driverless vehicles than the proven name of google?

It may well be that in the above even Google may not be always capable of preventing hackers from penetrating the above systems with severe consequences. However, surely development of this transport system which will offer so much into the future should not be stopped or even delayed in the face of the foregoing threat(s). To simply give way to persons who wish to disrupt everyone’s lives often for no other reason but “the shear hell of it” would go against everything that the developed democracies have stood for ever since the second world war.

I believe that driverless vehicles will offer greater and longer mobility for many elderly persons, greater road safety overall, and eventually an end to the dreaded and meaningless road driving test. In my humble opinion it will bring forward a second transport revolution to the benefit of everyone. Therefore, the driverless vehicle concept should be continually pushed forward whatever the threat.

Bill

 

[johnwhelan]

Scientific American June 2016 has a couple of articles on these, one says they will come, the other says there are a few technical problems to overcome and suggests 2075 might be a reasonable time when we can expect to see them without the need for a driving licence.

The technical problems are turning left in North America, so turning right in the UK.

Crossing guards for schools and policemen giving traffic directions they have lots of problems with and emergency vehicles do also cause them problems. In urban areas with pedestrians I'll paraphase and say they tend to panic.

There is a nice table that talks about five levels of automation as defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers and where we are today. Basically on freeways and motorways away from crossing guards and policemen directing traffic they do better.

I realise that Scientific American may seem a little heavy at first compared to the Daily Mail but the information but these two articles are quite readable and the contents are very relevant.

Cheerio John

 

[rjhowie]

One overlooked point and I noted it was the number of cars owned here in Gt Britain and roads can only cope up to a point as they cannot constantly build them on this island. No matter whether cars are driven or computerised we just need to watch on television traffic jams on holiday weekends and such. Apart from that as the car ownership mounted to high levels at the same time so too has the rail usage. Older people in cars depends too on how healthy they are and capability so I resolutely stand by my corner in saying that not everyone will get carried away with the latest modern gimmick and the railways will continue to be doing well.

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.
John, in regard to your posting at #30 of this thread, I do believe that there will be various levels of development within this technology. However, as Claire Preddy stated in her address to Parliament last February and later to the House of Commons Transport Select Committee, much of the technology necessary for driverless vehicle's to become a full reality is already available in many cars.

By example to the above, take my own car which I purchased as new last December. It came as standard with self parking ( just pull up at a gap between two parked cars in any road, press the park button and it will park itself in the gap without me touching steering, gears or brakes). It also came with "collision control" which stops me driving to close to the vehicle in front by computing my speed against the distance from vehicle ahead and slows my vehicle if I get to close in the opinion of the onboard computer.

Since I bought that car a further update has brought forward "lane control" which warns or prevents the driver from changing lane's at a time when it may cause a hazard to other vehicles and themselves. Therefore, as Claire Preddy stated to the house select committee, a great deal of the technology is already operational, what is now being developed is the necessary systems to pull all the above together into the first truly driverless vehicle.

The CEO of Bristol Street Motors which owns a large number of car dealerships here in the UK, gave a summary to the media of what the car manufacturers are thinking in terms of timescale with regards to driverless cars. He advised that Fords CEO Mark Fields has stated he expects a full driverless car to be available by 2020, although that this is unlikely to be a Ford vehicle. Audi have stated that they expect to have an autonomous car, albeit a limo, available to purchase by 2017, whilst Nissan have set a target of 2020, and Jaguar and Land Rover have given 2024 as an expected year.

On a lighter note, in the above I did like Audi stating their first autonomous car would be "a limo", oh yes we will all be able to afford one of those (LOL). I believe all who are interested in driverless technology can do at this point in time would be to watch and keep reading on the development along with its triumphs and failures and see how the time frame works out.


Rjhowie in regard to your posting at #30 of this thread, I would 100% agree with you on the fact that we cannot go on placing yet more cars on Britain's roads. Britain' is already one of the most densely populated countries in the world ( which is what a large part of the forthcoming EU referendum is all about). However, I strongly feel that whenever driverless cars are brought to the market they will be taken up by many elderly people as an aid to greater mobility. Whether they carry out their complete journey's in those cars or transfer to Britain's railways for the main part of the journey we have yet to see.

Pensioner groups make up a large percentage of the off-peak rail passenger numbers, and therefore it is very important for Britain's railways to keep hold of those groups. The foregoing will mean that Network Rail and the train operating companies will need to concentrate on their core business to the satisfaction of all regular travellers and not be sidetracked by minority interests. Acording to Stagecoach one of the largest TOCs, passenger numbers have declined in the last nine months due to commuter dissatisfaction with the poor services being provided by Network Rail and the train operating companies in England.

Bill

 

[rjhowie]

Don't think that is a straightforward picture regarding Stagecoach's opinion and my answer to that is by very statistics themselves nationally! It has been confirmed that that national picture is still showing the routine upward trend and where there are differences they can be attributed to individual companies but the UK picture is as i say. There are parts of the UK where we are told the trend is for an ageing population and my area is one but it is not stopping the rise of rail and it wil not matter how many non-driving cars are on the road they will not I would adamantly say decline the railways. At the same older age increase there are large numbers of them who do not own cars and I do not believe that because driverless cars are easier to drive for the older (!) that will decline the rail side. The empty steering wheel will also be operating on the same overcrowded roads as a driver so makes no real difference to the argument.

At the same time on the techy side it has also taken senior citizens an awful lot longer to catch up on the internet and even thought a convenient system tels you something in itself. So convenience on a road is just as important and I stand by my thoughts that whatever the years may bring on techy cars on in a country finding it hard to cope with them is more direct than who controls the car! As a Scot and from a tradition noted on money wisdom I would however place a goodly bet on my view and summation!

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.
Rjhowie, I hope I did not give you the impression that I do not support passenger rail transport in the UK, for I have travelled many thousands of miles in the course of my work on Britain's railways in preference to use of my car . However, I do believe that there are signs of deep rooted rail user dissatisfaction with the current standard of service regular users are receiving from Network Rail and the train operating companies that could have implications for the future of our railways.

In the above what I am passionately keen to avoid would be a repeat of the mistakes that were made in the the mid 1950s when the then British Rail completely underrated the threat that the car posed to the then all powerful rail transport infrastructure. As both of us may well remember rjhowie, the modernisation review which took place in the mid 50s took the view that the car would be something which would be solely owned by the wealthy of Britain and therefore the average passenger would have little option but to continue to commute on the UK's railways.

The above review then took the further view that Britain's railways needed to modernise but that modernisation from steam to diesel could take place over the course of a decade or more. However, British Rail passengers took a very different view by way of very much taking up the option of car ownership and ditching Britain's steam-powered railways, filthy dirty stations and fictional timetable which culminated in Dr Beeching bringing down his axe in 1963.

History has a reputation of repeating itself and there are signs that the foregoing may well happen in the case of today's UK railways. As evidence to the above there is the recent survey which demonstrated that more than 25% of Regular passengers in the South East of England where dissatisfied with the service they are receiving from Network Rail and the train operating companies with up to 15% of passengers other regions stating the same. The latest quarterly trading report from Stagecoach seemed to verify the foregoing when it advised that operating conditions were "difficult" in the rail sector the company is operating in.

The train operating companies and Network Rail seems to be taking the view that rail commuters have no other option but to continue to pay the sky high ticket prices required for grossly overcrowded and often dirty trains which is demonstrated by those organisations lamentable performance in many areas, "history repeating itself". However, here in the UK people have always demonstrated that they will not accept being told they have "no other option but one". Therefore a return to road transport may well look attractive in many commuters eyes if the dissatisfaction with the railways continues and grows.

Development of the driverless car may well bring forward the above in a similar manner as the car transformed the nation's commuting habit's in the 1950s-60s. As Volvo's CEO has advised, driverless cars may well reduce traffic congestion even if the numbers of cars on Britain's roads were to increase by their use.

As stated I firmly wish continued success for Britain's Railways but the shortcomings of the railways in regards to passenger satisfaction have to be addressed, and rapidly.

Bill

 

[rjhowie]

Yes Bill, I accepted there are delinquents in the railway system but against what you say at the very same time this same year again passenger numbers country-wide are up so still on the trend. There are places where some companies do better than others so the eventual statistics tell us more than the backsliders. Over the decades cars have got faster been able to go further with the petrol used and so on yet rail is still on the up and up and the latest car thing will I still say make no difference.

 

[littleshunter060]

I know that the invention of driverless cars is still very new, but strangely enough, driverless trains have been around since at least the 1980s. The best example I can think of is the Docklands Light Railway. Still, I have more confidence in the DLR than in a driverless automobile because even though there is no driver, the train can only go where the tracks go, and there are staff ready to assist if something unexpected happens. In an automobile, you're pretty much on your own. I imagine it would be scary feeling like you're not really in control of the vehicle, and you're basically at the mercy of the software. It's a well-intentioned idea, but I think that the technology (and just technology in general) needs to become more reliable before we're ready to put our physical lives in the hands of a computer.

As for their effects on rail infrastructure, I'm not sure they'd do much more damage than regular cars already do.

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.
I believe that people will feel secure in driverless cars once they are in everyday use and have proved themselves to the public as reliable and safe. Indeed, was there once not public adversity to the "new fangled" railways and motor cars with people having preference to the safe and reliable horse. However, the railways followed shortly after by the car soon demonstrated that they where quicker, more comfortable and more reliable than the horse and therefore they were soon taken up by society and became part of everyday life. In the foregoing I believe that the same pattern will emerge with driverless vehicles.

In the above, it has to be stated that here in the Uk without doubt many regular rail user's are starting to look around for alternatives to what has become in many cases the daily drudgery of the train commute due to poor service by Network Rail and the train operating companies. To give just two of my recent experiences, traveling down from Worcester to home last week, a three car DMU was in service for the section of the journey to Bristol Temple Meads which was grossly inadequate for the number of passengers needing to travel. Therefore I was forced to stand in the carriage entrance forced up against a wall adjacent to the toilet. I remained their until the train arrived into Bristol parkway having to put up with being pushed and shoved by passengers getting on and off at every station and the b***dy awful stink coming from the toilet each time someone went in or out.

In the week before last I had to travel one of my regular journeys to London. I had booked a seat for the journey up but was unsure of the time I would be returning so I could not book a seat for that section of the journey. I eventually caught the 7:30pm from London Paddington to Taunton hst service for the return which was packed with passengers even before I boarded. Therefore, once again I had to stand for the first hour of the journey a privilege for which I had paid a ticket price of £218 (318 US Dollars) for the combined journeys of less than two hundred and fifty miles in total distance

Many regular rail commuters along with myself find the above standard of service to be totally unacceptable if not downright disgusting. Throughout the 1980s, 90s and the first decade of this millennium the railways in the UK offered reasonably good scheduling giving users acceptable times of arrival at destinations (as apposed to motorway and car use). It also offered a seat which gave business users a chance to work as they traveled. Sadly, all the above reasons to travel on the railways are now gone. The usage of the railways has dramatically increased in recent years which has not been met with increased investment by way of longer consists and more regular services on mainline routes.

In the above It would seem that Network Rail and the train operating companies believe their customers have no other option but to travel with them and therefore a policy of lethargy and disrespect for passengers has developed in many regular rail commuters eyes. However, a large number of those users are now looking for alternatives to the railways as that has now become an often talked about subject I would assure anyone in offices and on trains during travel.

Therefore if driverless cars where to become available tomorrow, I would be one of the first to purchase along with many other regular rail commuters I am sure. With Volvo and others advising that these vehicles will bring safer road travel, less congestion and a chance for business people to work in the privacy of their cars, then many rail users will make the change to car use in "very short order" once the above becomes a fact.

I have traveled on the Uk railways in the coarse of my work since the late 1980s and throughout that time have always been a fervent supporter of them as many longtime users of this forum will know. However, I feel many British users of this forum who do not travel regularly on UK trains do not realize just how bad things have become. With airline style seating, the removal of the buffet cars on many HST services and all the above formentioned problems, many now "just want out" of rail use, and will as soon as alternative's become available.

Bill

 

[cascaderailroad]

Why not just employ a human driven UBER driver who drives his own car, which is essentially a gypsy Taxi Cab ?

I seriously doubt that unmanned Robo Cars will ever be able to co-exist with human pedestrians crossing the roadways, with cars and tracks speeding over the speed limit, running red lights ... an automated AI car will just not be able to cope with the real world driving traffic environment ... It will always fail as the real world is not "logical", it is full of totally illogical occurrences ... and AI relies on pure computer logic, and can not fathom in all the possible spontaneous human error variables !

https://www.google.com/search?q=joh...KEwjt_Yq5-__MAhXDMj4KHVHWAV0Q_AUIBigB&dpr=1.2

 

[wholbr]

Cascade.
We will see in 2018 when Volvo puts them on the streets of London with real families inside of their current production cars going about their everyday buissness.
Time will tell how they perform, Volvo are obviously very confident in Googles technology.
Bill

Oh, and by the way, Uber are one of the biggest investors in driverless vehicles in Europe.

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.
To see what we as regular users of the railways in britain are facing just follow the below link:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36359210

Bill