Will Driverless Vehicles Mean the Decline of Railways
- Thread starter wholbr
- Start date
Hi everybody.
Just to bring the thread back to topic, the development of driverless vehicles seems to have accelerated in a big way according to press reports. Virtually all the major vehicle manufacturers are now involved. However with a possible fifty five billion pound/dollar “jackpot” to be had by whoever produces the first truly driverless vehicle, it is not hard to understand the big “splash of cash” on the race.
It is believed that Apple are developing their own car which will carry the Apple logo on the hood. According to media reports the whole project is cloaked in secrecy and security but it is thought to be well down the road towards full highway testing. However being an Apple i feel it would be very easy to get bruised in that car
Google as usual are the only company to have made any money out of this whole thing up to now. It would seem they have sold much of the technology gained from their original testing (being first in the field) to the major car manufacturers and are now going on to develop a car which will have no conventional controls inside the vehicle whatsoever. Yes, there will be no steering wheel, brake pedal, drive shift, Nothing.
In the above, you will get in the car, verbally dictate to the on-board computer where you want to go, and then just sit back. The seats will convert into beds so you can just sleep on a long journey, or push-back to allow an office desk to emerge complete with phones and tablets for full web connectivity as you travel and work. That said, i think I might well be feeling very travel sick after a few mile in town traffic doing that.
It is thought (again according to media reports) that the above is at least part of the reason that Apple are to integrate the Mac and IOS operating systems together, with Google doing a similar but more limited integration of the Chrome OS and Android systems.
I find all this race in development “riveting stuff”. Who will come out tops of all the companies involved is yet to be seen. However, there will be some multi billion profit winners at the end of the day, along with many multi billion investment losers I feel.
Put your money on!
Bill
Clam1952, amigacooke, everytime I see any media of china the vast majority seem to be going round on pushbikes. I am not sure about decapitated buses, but I would have to agree, I can see an awful lot of decapitated cyclists if they ride their bikes anything like many of the cyclists do in this country.
Just to bring the thread back to topic, the development of driverless vehicles seems to have accelerated in a big way according to press reports. Virtually all the major vehicle manufacturers are now involved. However with a possible fifty five billion pound/dollar “jackpot” to be had by whoever produces the first truly driverless vehicle, it is not hard to understand the big “splash of cash” on the race.
It is believed that Apple are developing their own car which will carry the Apple logo on the hood. According to media reports the whole project is cloaked in secrecy and security but it is thought to be well down the road towards full highway testing. However being an Apple i feel it would be very easy to get bruised in that car
Google as usual are the only company to have made any money out of this whole thing up to now. It would seem they have sold much of the technology gained from their original testing (being first in the field) to the major car manufacturers and are now going on to develop a car which will have no conventional controls inside the vehicle whatsoever. Yes, there will be no steering wheel, brake pedal, drive shift, Nothing.
In the above, you will get in the car, verbally dictate to the on-board computer where you want to go, and then just sit back. The seats will convert into beds so you can just sleep on a long journey, or push-back to allow an office desk to emerge complete with phones and tablets for full web connectivity as you travel and work. That said, i think I might well be feeling very travel sick after a few mile in town traffic doing that
.It is thought (again according to media reports) that the above is at least part of the reason that Apple are to integrate the Mac and IOS operating systems together, with Google doing a similar but more limited integration of the Chrome OS and Android systems.
I find all this race in development “riveting stuff”. Who will come out tops of all the companies involved is yet to be seen. However, there will be some multi billion profit winners at the end of the day, along with many multi billion investment losers I feel.
Put your money on!
Bill
Hi everybody.
Well, it would seem that Google has had a set back in it's driverless car development with top robotics engineer Criss Urmson leaving the company along with several other top executives involved in the project.
There are many Media reports on his resignation but the general circumstances can be found following this link:- http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/08/urmson-out/495116/
There is much additional speculation on Google forums in regards to what has led to all the above. However it is felt that Urmson disagreed with Larry Page in regard to the decision not to continue development of a car which still had traditional controls (steering wheel, drive shift, brake pedal etc) .
Google's decision to go forward with a complete robotics controlled vehicle which would have none of the above traditional controls within the car has put the project once again into what is known as one of Google's " moonshot Projects" which will almost certainly not see commercial viability within the next 10 years.
It is thought that Urmson and the other executives who are leaving the company wish to see a vehicle in production within the next 5 years that would be fully driverless even if it still had traditional controls allowing the driver to take over if or when required. None of those who are leaving the company have stated what their future plans are, but Google forums are full of speculation that Urmson and the others are on their way to join Mercedes in their driverless vehicle development.
Much of the Mercedes technology is based on the original Google development which has been brought forward over the last seven years. Therefore, the speculation on this occasion may well prove to be true as undoubtedly Criss Urmson and others from Google would fit in well having played leading roles in that project from the start.
To bring the thread back to the affect driverless technology will have on the railway, I would believe that for Britain's rail passengers driverless vehicles cannot come quick enough. With industrial action strikes taking place on Southern, Eastern, Eurostar and planned on others it would seem that the rail system is in "meltdown".
Even when staff are working sickness levels and absenteeism is "rife" causing huge numbers of train cancelations and late running. Recruitment of drivers, conductors and station staff is near impossible as again it would seem that no one wants these rail jobs. The foregoing has become a very serious situation playing into the hands of the railways critics in regard to the taxpayer funding of them.
Bill
Well, it would seem that Google has had a set back in it's driverless car development with top robotics engineer Criss Urmson leaving the company along with several other top executives involved in the project.
There are many Media reports on his resignation but the general circumstances can be found following this link:- http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/08/urmson-out/495116/
There is much additional speculation on Google forums in regards to what has led to all the above. However it is felt that Urmson disagreed with Larry Page in regard to the decision not to continue development of a car which still had traditional controls (steering wheel, drive shift, brake pedal etc) .
Google's decision to go forward with a complete robotics controlled vehicle which would have none of the above traditional controls within the car has put the project once again into what is known as one of Google's " moonshot Projects" which will almost certainly not see commercial viability within the next 10 years.
It is thought that Urmson and the other executives who are leaving the company wish to see a vehicle in production within the next 5 years that would be fully driverless even if it still had traditional controls allowing the driver to take over if or when required. None of those who are leaving the company have stated what their future plans are, but Google forums are full of speculation that Urmson and the others are on their way to join Mercedes in their driverless vehicle development.
Much of the Mercedes technology is based on the original Google development which has been brought forward over the last seven years. Therefore, the speculation on this occasion may well prove to be true as undoubtedly Criss Urmson and others from Google would fit in well having played leading roles in that project from the start.
To bring the thread back to the affect driverless technology will have on the railway, I would believe that for Britain's rail passengers driverless vehicles cannot come quick enough. With industrial action strikes taking place on Southern, Eastern, Eurostar and planned on others it would seem that the rail system is in "meltdown".
Even when staff are working sickness levels and absenteeism is "rife" causing huge numbers of train cancelations and late running. Recruitment of drivers, conductors and station staff is near impossible as again it would seem that no one wants these rail jobs. The foregoing has become a very serious situation playing into the hands of the railways critics in regard to the taxpayer funding of them.
Bill
Last edited:
amigacooke
Well-known member
Hi everybody.
Well, it has all started, Driverless vehicles are here and far earlier in time than even the most optimistic of us who have contributed belief in this technology throughout this thread thought possible. Taxis in Philadelphia first followed by family use in London shortly after that, driverless vehicles will be on our roads bringing forward what will be undoubtedly the biggest revolution in transport since the invention of the internal combustion engine.
In just one sector, freight, it is being stated that overall trucks will increase their productivity by as much as 45% while the cost of running those vehicles will reduce by more than 30%. In the UK the road hauliers are advising that the foregoing figures are on the conservative side of what they believe may be achieved eventually by way of productivity and cost saving.
Driverless technology will change the way we think about how and when we travel, car ownership and bring forward the ability to safely carry out other things during the course of any journey.
To bring the thread back on topic, just what the forging will mean for the railways is yet to be seen. However, any person who stops to think deeply on the matter i feel can come to no other conclusion than the technology will have an impact on any rail system. In the foregoing, just how heavy that impact will be will very much depend on the ability of the individual rail operators to “up their game” to meet a very much changing situation and competitive outlook.
By example to the above, Much has been made of the ever increasing passenger figures on Britain's railways. However, many of those now using the railways for their everyday commute do so as their is little alternative open to them. Road congestion, restricted parking in city centres make using cars virtually impossible for those long suffering commuters on those desperately overcrowded trains.
However, with a driverless car those problems are drastically reduced in terms of road vehicle use. Even with the congestion still there, any office worker will be able to commence work immediately they get into the car as without the need to drive the vehicle that person can make the car part of the office and work on the journey.
On arrival at their place of work, if there is nowhere to park you just send your car off to an out of town parking area and recall it by way of your smartphone when you wish to go home. It sounds incredible but the technology is now here and the foregoing will happen and within a few short years.
In terms of freight transport the changes could be even more immense. That said much will depend on how the railways react to the forthcoming changes whether that be in passenger or freight transport. If they react as they did in the 1950s-60s to the challenge of the car (by way of doing nothing) then their decline is inevitable. However, if they react with innovation and increased performance they may well survive and even broaden their customer base.
Bill
Well, it has all started, Driverless vehicles are here and far earlier in time than even the most optimistic of us who have contributed belief in this technology throughout this thread thought possible. Taxis in Philadelphia first followed by family use in London shortly after that, driverless vehicles will be on our roads bringing forward what will be undoubtedly the biggest revolution in transport since the invention of the internal combustion engine.
In just one sector, freight, it is being stated that overall trucks will increase their productivity by as much as 45% while the cost of running those vehicles will reduce by more than 30%. In the UK the road hauliers are advising that the foregoing figures are on the conservative side of what they believe may be achieved eventually by way of productivity and cost saving.
Driverless technology will change the way we think about how and when we travel, car ownership and bring forward the ability to safely carry out other things during the course of any journey.
To bring the thread back on topic, just what the forging will mean for the railways is yet to be seen. However, any person who stops to think deeply on the matter i feel can come to no other conclusion than the technology will have an impact on any rail system. In the foregoing, just how heavy that impact will be will very much depend on the ability of the individual rail operators to “up their game” to meet a very much changing situation and competitive outlook.
By example to the above, Much has been made of the ever increasing passenger figures on Britain's railways. However, many of those now using the railways for their everyday commute do so as their is little alternative open to them. Road congestion, restricted parking in city centres make using cars virtually impossible for those long suffering commuters on those desperately overcrowded trains.
However, with a driverless car those problems are drastically reduced in terms of road vehicle use. Even with the congestion still there, any office worker will be able to commence work immediately they get into the car as without the need to drive the vehicle that person can make the car part of the office and work on the journey.
On arrival at their place of work, if there is nowhere to park you just send your car off to an out of town parking area and recall it by way of your smartphone when you wish to go home. It sounds incredible but the technology is now here and the foregoing will happen and within a few short years.
In terms of freight transport the changes could be even more immense. That said much will depend on how the railways react to the forthcoming changes whether that be in passenger or freight transport. If they react as they did in the 1950s-60s to the challenge of the car (by way of doing nothing) then their decline is inevitable. However, if they react with innovation and increased performance they may well survive and even broaden their customer base.
Bill
Hi Bill69 and everybody.
I thought the tectonic plates where moving in our area a few minutes ago as I seemed to be being jolted all over the house. Then I realized that the wife was hovering around the chair i was sitting in. By continuesly banging my chair I think she was trying to make some sort of statement.
However the whole worlds tectonic plates moved last night when ManU won against Southampton and at Trafford park too.
Oh joy,oh joy. All is well in the world again.
Bill
I thought the tectonic plates where moving in our area a few minutes ago as I seemed to be being jolted all over the house. Then I realized that the wife was hovering around the chair i was sitting in. By continuesly banging my chair I think she was trying to make some sort of statement.
However the whole worlds tectonic plates moved last night when ManU won against Southampton and at Trafford park too.
Oh joy,oh joy. All is well in the world again.
Bill
Last edited:
All this talk of replacing drivers with automation, particularly in the area of commerce, is ignoring the obvious elephant in the room. While I have no problems with driverless family cars (just keep them away from me until all the bugs have been eradicated) as soon as you start replacing existing transport jobs with automation then you are heading for trouble.
Sydney is currently building its first dedicated metro system which will have driverless trains. Since this is completely separate from the current very extensive commuter rail network, which still relies on a human at the controls, no current jobs will be at risk. And in any case I would rate trains as being the most suitable transport system for automation because there is no steering involved - train direction is controlled by the rails and the track switching system.
Road transport, however, is a very different matter. Unless you have the money and time to build a completely separate road or guideway system that is exclusively for automated taxis, cars and trucks, then you have to use the existing road network. This means taking currently employed drivers out of their vehicles and replacing them with automation. Whether this happens quickly or over time, I can easily imagine how the workers who would be threatened with unemployment, would react to that proposal.
Some political commentators are of the view that the political turmoil currently being experienced in many western nations - "Brexit", Donald Trump, to give a few of the better known examples - are the direct result of people feeling dis-empowered by things outside their control such as globalisation, wealth inequality, etc.
Driverless commercial vehicles (trucks, vans, etc) which will no doubt appeal to those who would directly benefit through lower costs, could simply be adding more fuel to the current political and economic "circuses" that now seem to surround us.
Sydney is currently building its first dedicated metro system which will have driverless trains. Since this is completely separate from the current very extensive commuter rail network, which still relies on a human at the controls, no current jobs will be at risk. And in any case I would rate trains as being the most suitable transport system for automation because there is no steering involved - train direction is controlled by the rails and the track switching system.
Road transport, however, is a very different matter. Unless you have the money and time to build a completely separate road or guideway system that is exclusively for automated taxis, cars and trucks, then you have to use the existing road network. This means taking currently employed drivers out of their vehicles and replacing them with automation. Whether this happens quickly or over time, I can easily imagine how the workers who would be threatened with unemployment, would react to that proposal.
Some political commentators are of the view that the political turmoil currently being experienced in many western nations - "Brexit", Donald Trump, to give a few of the better known examples - are the direct result of people feeling dis-empowered by things outside their control such as globalisation, wealth inequality, etc.
Driverless commercial vehicles (trucks, vans, etc) which will no doubt appeal to those who would directly benefit through lower costs, could simply be adding more fuel to the current political and economic "circuses" that now seem to surround us.
amigacooke
Well-known member
People being replaced by automation has been the constant theme of the industrial and information revolution. Once there were thousands of London dockers, now there are thousands of containers.
I have to say, I can't see how having driverless cars on the road with no-one in them looking for parking space is going to decrease congestion on the roads. As previously mentioned, railways would seem to be in the best position to deliver driverless transport, this may well be the base reason behind the rail unions flexing what muscle they have.
I have to say, I can't see how having driverless cars on the road with no-one in them looking for parking space is going to decrease congestion on the roads. As previously mentioned, railways would seem to be in the best position to deliver driverless transport, this may well be the base reason behind the rail unions flexing what muscle they have.
jeffmorris
Active member
I know that the self-driving vehicles are not self-aware. There was an accident involving a self-driving car. I think that a tractor-trailer truck made a turn and the self-driving car went through the space under the trailer, killing the driver. They found out that the car's sensors only sense anything up to its hood, not up to its roof.
That particular case, if I have correctly identified your example, was not an actual "self driving car" but one with "advanced cruise control". The driver foolishly took his hands off the wheel and his eyes off the road to watch a movie. But your general point is valid.
Hi everybody.
With reference to the postings at #73 by Jeff morris and #74 by Pware of this thread, i feel i must point out that the incident refered to was a single death following many millions of miles of driverless vehicle trials by various companies and motor manufacturers around the world.
It is often spoken in regard to autonomous vehicle incidents as if no person has ever suffered death or injury at the hands of someone driving a vehicle manually. However, the road incident statistics demonstrate a far different situation to the foregoing. On Britains roads alone in 2015 accidents accounted for 1,750 deaths and 22,800 serious injuries. In the foregoing, manually driven vehicles accouting the same number of total miles as autonomous vehicles over a similar time period would have been involved in a far higher number of accidents than the driverless vehicles have been throughout their trials so far.
In regard to “advanced cruise control” I have a similar system fitted to the vehicle I currently drive which on that car is named “forward collision control”. I would be the first to state that it certainly tingles your nerves the first few times anyone uses the device. However returning from North Devon to North Somerset here in the UK last week through the M5 motorway holiday traffic the device certainly demonstrated the added safety it gives to any congested driving situation.
The motorway was congested over all its three lanes as i joined it at Tiverton and I soon found myself in one of those 70mph traffic jams we have all become so familiar with. However, I set the forward collision control to 75 mph maximum and my car just set its safety distance from the vehicle in front adjusting that as the traffic flow travelled at varying speeds from near 70 mph at times right down to standstill at others. Not once in the above did i have to touch the brakes or accelerator as the car responded automatically to every change in the speed of the traffic flow.
However, there was danger in that journey at times, and that came from the “ MINDLESS IDIOTS” driving cars manually who you witness continually crossing from lane to lane because they feel the lane adjacent to them has a traffic flow traveling 3mph quicker than the one they are in. As the collision control on my vehicle always leaves a greater distance from the vehicle in front than manually controlled vehicles, those “MINDLESS IDIOTS” several times crossed dangerously in front of my vehicle.
Now I ask the forum, which vehicles were travelling in greater safety that afternoon, those of us with collision control or those vehicles traveling without that technology. Semi autonomous vehicles already hold greater safety than those solely manually controlled vehicles. Fully autonomous vehicles will increase that safety factor again.
Bill
With reference to the postings at #73 by Jeff morris and #74 by Pware of this thread, i feel i must point out that the incident refered to was a single death following many millions of miles of driverless vehicle trials by various companies and motor manufacturers around the world.
It is often spoken in regard to autonomous vehicle incidents as if no person has ever suffered death or injury at the hands of someone driving a vehicle manually. However, the road incident statistics demonstrate a far different situation to the foregoing. On Britains roads alone in 2015 accidents accounted for 1,750 deaths and 22,800 serious injuries. In the foregoing, manually driven vehicles accouting the same number of total miles as autonomous vehicles over a similar time period would have been involved in a far higher number of accidents than the driverless vehicles have been throughout their trials so far.
In regard to “advanced cruise control” I have a similar system fitted to the vehicle I currently drive which on that car is named “forward collision control”. I would be the first to state that it certainly tingles your nerves the first few times anyone uses the device. However returning from North Devon to North Somerset here in the UK last week through the M5 motorway holiday traffic the device certainly demonstrated the added safety it gives to any congested driving situation.
The motorway was congested over all its three lanes as i joined it at Tiverton and I soon found myself in one of those 70mph traffic jams we have all become so familiar with. However, I set the forward collision control to 75 mph maximum and my car just set its safety distance from the vehicle in front adjusting that as the traffic flow travelled at varying speeds from near 70 mph at times right down to standstill at others. Not once in the above did i have to touch the brakes or accelerator as the car responded automatically to every change in the speed of the traffic flow.
However, there was danger in that journey at times, and that came from the “ MINDLESS IDIOTS” driving cars manually who you witness continually crossing from lane to lane because they feel the lane adjacent to them has a traffic flow traveling 3mph quicker than the one they are in. As the collision control on my vehicle always leaves a greater distance from the vehicle in front than manually controlled vehicles, those “MINDLESS IDIOTS” several times crossed dangerously in front of my vehicle.
Now I ask the forum, which vehicles were travelling in greater safety that afternoon, those of us with collision control or those vehicles traveling without that technology. Semi autonomous vehicles already hold greater safety than those solely manually controlled vehicles. Fully autonomous vehicles will increase that safety factor again.
Bill
Last edited:
amigacooke
Well-known member
Pedants corner, but you can't be in a jam if you're moving at 70mph.
Back on topic, I have to agree that systems that never tire, never get distracted or lose concentration and inherently safer than fallible humans. Though as the sad death shows, they don't think, they just run programs.
Last edited:
Hi everybody.
However, for any forum member who may be unaware of just how far this technoligy has come, please follow this link for a youtube video of Volvos self drive car that will be on the roads in the next few months:- https://youtu.be/2q00jIBhkq4
I agree that the forward collision control on the Tesla car that did not scan above hood height was a very bad oversight by the company. I believe that the problem is not incumbent on other cars with this technology, certainly not mine as I have now checked (like many others I suspect).
That said, what is known as “under-run” accidents are very common involving heavy commercial vehicle collisions with standard manually controlled cars.
An interesting argument that has developed between the developers of the autonomous vehicles is that BMW, Mercedes and Audi are stating that self driving vehicles will into the foreseeable future have to contain all the standard controls of a normal vehicle. The reason for the above would be that a human driver will have to take control in off road situations such as temporary grass car parks and farm tracks etc.
The above manufacturers are challenging Google (who state they are developing a car which will have none of the standard controls within the vehicle) to advise how their system will overcome the above. Google have so far not replied.
edit, youtube video of the new Audi self driving car developed on Google technology. Will the railways be able to compete with this? please follow this link or copy and paste:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ww8wX7kAtcI&feature=youtu.be#t=59.73843
further edit, trials of driverless cars and trucks on main highways similar to those taking place on M6 motorway in UK. Trials there have been very successful using 44 Tonne articulated vehicles over last twelve months. please follow link:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO6JtncrY08
Bill
amigacooke, ref above pendants corner……….Oh very comical…...I was metaphorically speaking in my posting at #75……...metaphorically.
However, for any forum member who may be unaware of just how far this technoligy has come, please follow this link for a youtube video of Volvos self drive car that will be on the roads in the next few months:- https://youtu.be/2q00jIBhkq4
I agree that the forward collision control on the Tesla car that did not scan above hood height was a very bad oversight by the company. I believe that the problem is not incumbent on other cars with this technology, certainly not mine as I have now checked (like many others I suspect).
That said, what is known as “under-run” accidents are very common involving heavy commercial vehicle collisions with standard manually controlled cars.
An interesting argument that has developed between the developers of the autonomous vehicles is that BMW, Mercedes and Audi are stating that self driving vehicles will into the foreseeable future have to contain all the standard controls of a normal vehicle. The reason for the above would be that a human driver will have to take control in off road situations such as temporary grass car parks and farm tracks etc.
The above manufacturers are challenging Google (who state they are developing a car which will have none of the standard controls within the vehicle) to advise how their system will overcome the above. Google have so far not replied.
edit, youtube video of the new Audi self driving car developed on Google technology. Will the railways be able to compete with this? please follow this link or copy and paste:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ww8wX7kAtcI&feature=youtu.be#t=59.73843
further edit, trials of driverless cars and trucks on main highways similar to those taking place on M6 motorway in UK. Trials there have been very successful using 44 Tonne articulated vehicles over last twelve months. please follow link:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO6JtncrY08
Bill
Last edited:
jeffmorris
Active member
The first video shows a car parking itself in a parking garage and when the owner calls her car, the car drove itself to her. What about other vehicles and people? The second video shows three cars and two trucks on a highway. The drivers in the self-driving cars didn't watch the roads ahead and be ready to take over control. That is VERY DANGEROUS! This is why most large machines have E-Stop buttons.
With the safety issues aside, there's still going to be a limit to how much traffic the roads can handle not unlike what we are seeing today. Sure the driving will be consistent because the human-factor is not involved, but with an ever increasing number of vehicles on the roads, faster speeds cannot be maintained due to the stopping distance required between vehicles, and with some stopping as well as starting and causing the very same issues we have now with humans driving. Once vehicles stop the flow, this causes a ripple back effect with other cars stopping then moving along. This ripple-effect can last for hours long after the incident caused the stoppage.
The capacity issue is not just inherent to roads, however, railroads and other transit systems face the same issues, and this is why they develop specific lead times between trainsets, and only allowing a specific number of vehicles on the tracks at a time. Speeds are also limited to compensate for stopping between vehicles safely, and to prevent bunching and congestion as vehicles end up stopping one after another at a busy junction, or need to wait outside a station or terminal for other vehicles to exit.
With our roads, what limits the number of vehicles? Do they then put up gates to prevent drivers/cars from entering the highway/motorway until a certain number clears the blocks? This isn't how our roads work, and this surely would cause much unhurt feelings amongst the individuals, after all a private vehicle is supposed to allow unhindered driving wherever whenever.
What auto-driving vehicles do is take the stupid driver factor out of the equation as this allows the distracted driver become a passenger as he or she does all the things they like to do while driving without causing accidents.
John
The capacity issue is not just inherent to roads, however, railroads and other transit systems face the same issues, and this is why they develop specific lead times between trainsets, and only allowing a specific number of vehicles on the tracks at a time. Speeds are also limited to compensate for stopping between vehicles safely, and to prevent bunching and congestion as vehicles end up stopping one after another at a busy junction, or need to wait outside a station or terminal for other vehicles to exit.
With our roads, what limits the number of vehicles? Do they then put up gates to prevent drivers/cars from entering the highway/motorway until a certain number clears the blocks? This isn't how our roads work, and this surely would cause much unhurt feelings amongst the individuals, after all a private vehicle is supposed to allow unhindered driving wherever whenever.
What auto-driving vehicles do is take the stupid driver factor out of the equation as this allows the distracted driver become a passenger as he or she does all the things they like to do while driving without causing accidents.
John
Hi everybody,
John, there are many things that i wholeheartedly agree with in your posting at #79 of this thread. Driverless vehicles could quite easily cause a dramatic increase in road traffic congestion as more commuters decide to let their new autonomous cars take the strain rather than the train taking the strain.
The above stated, there is in the UK now a desire to see an alternative to rail commuting. Many commuters especially in the south of England at this point in time have little alternative to rail as has been discussed in earlier postings in this thread.
In the above, it has to be acknowledged that a person with a driverless car will if they have to use that vehicle for any part of a journey in all probability instruct the vehicle to take them to their final destination rather than to their local station as they would now. Even if the above journey where to take longer in time due to traffic congestion the car owner will not have to worry about driving that vehicle in all the congestion themselves. The vehicle will do the foregoing while the owner sits back,works or watches a film or even plays Trainz.
However, the railways will always have the advantage of speed in passenger transport once a journey is underway. Therefore i feel the train operators need to embrace driverless car technology and add that to the whole rail travel experience.
In the foregoing, i believe that a door to door through tickets should be made available in such a way as tickets to London are made available now with London underground travel added. One ticket through to destination and return.
By example as to how the above could be expanded, If a person wished to travel to Manchester from here in North somerset they would book the ticket not by station to station, but by home start address to final destination address. The train operators would then automatically send a driverless pool car to the travellers home at a set time, take the person to their local station arriving a few minutes before their train was due to depart and the main part of the journey would then be by high speed rail.
On arrival at Manchester a second driverless pool car would be waiting for our traveler to take them on to their final destination in the city. Similar car/train travel could be then be in place for the return part of the journey. All the foregoing would mean, by the minute door to door travel all on one pre-booked ticket and price.
Our traveler would have the advantage of the reduced cost of driverless car technology, with the speed advantage of rail for the largest part of the journey. The cost of purchasing the autonomous vehicles by the train operator would soon be covered by the continuous use of the vehicles throughout the day and traffic congestion would be reduced by way of more commuters entering cities and towns by train rather than road.
Our traveller would also save on parking charges for their car at both ends of the journey which as we all know can be very substantial in large towns and cities these days.
The above are just my thoughts on how the railways could actually increase their Passenger traffic by way of innovation and embracing the new technology into the rail infrastructure. For it has to be faced that without such innovation decline will be on the cards in the very near future for our railways.
Bill
John, there are many things that i wholeheartedly agree with in your posting at #79 of this thread. Driverless vehicles could quite easily cause a dramatic increase in road traffic congestion as more commuters decide to let their new autonomous cars take the strain rather than the train taking the strain.
The above stated, there is in the UK now a desire to see an alternative to rail commuting. Many commuters especially in the south of England at this point in time have little alternative to rail as has been discussed in earlier postings in this thread.
In the above, it has to be acknowledged that a person with a driverless car will if they have to use that vehicle for any part of a journey in all probability instruct the vehicle to take them to their final destination rather than to their local station as they would now. Even if the above journey where to take longer in time due to traffic congestion the car owner will not have to worry about driving that vehicle in all the congestion themselves. The vehicle will do the foregoing while the owner sits back,works or watches a film or even plays Trainz.
However, the railways will always have the advantage of speed in passenger transport once a journey is underway. Therefore i feel the train operators need to embrace driverless car technology and add that to the whole rail travel experience.
In the foregoing, i believe that a door to door through tickets should be made available in such a way as tickets to London are made available now with London underground travel added. One ticket through to destination and return.
By example as to how the above could be expanded, If a person wished to travel to Manchester from here in North somerset they would book the ticket not by station to station, but by home start address to final destination address. The train operators would then automatically send a driverless pool car to the travellers home at a set time, take the person to their local station arriving a few minutes before their train was due to depart and the main part of the journey would then be by high speed rail.
On arrival at Manchester a second driverless pool car would be waiting for our traveler to take them on to their final destination in the city. Similar car/train travel could be then be in place for the return part of the journey. All the foregoing would mean, by the minute door to door travel all on one pre-booked ticket and price.
Our traveler would have the advantage of the reduced cost of driverless car technology, with the speed advantage of rail for the largest part of the journey. The cost of purchasing the autonomous vehicles by the train operator would soon be covered by the continuous use of the vehicles throughout the day and traffic congestion would be reduced by way of more commuters entering cities and towns by train rather than road.
Our traveller would also save on parking charges for their car at both ends of the journey which as we all know can be very substantial in large towns and cities these days.
The above are just my thoughts on how the railways could actually increase their Passenger traffic by way of innovation and embracing the new technology into the rail infrastructure. For it has to be faced that without such innovation decline will be on the cards in the very near future for our railways.
Bill
Last edited: