Researchers from Standford University test their driverless Audi at the Thunderhill Park Racing Track in Willows, California.

In case you missed it Doug Newcomb has published an article at Wired Autopia on the transition period between our current driving habits and driverless cars. Also Doug has cross posted this article on his own blog  if you are interested in visiting his personal page.

In short, the article points out that while systems like Cadillac’s Super Cruise technology are scheduled to come to retail mid decade, drivers may become complacent using the technology:

Llaneras points out that even when the vehicle can steer itself and stay in its lane, the driver still has to deal with unexpected obstacles or events. “With autonomous vehicles,” he says, “drivers may think the system can steer around obstacles, like when a truck loses a tire tread on the freeway. But it won’t – at least not yet. The systems that we evaluated did have that capability, but it’s an example of how there’s always limitations of what it can do and can’t do, and drivers need to learn these things over time. We’re talking about what I consider for low-level interventions,” he adds. “People also need to understand the car is able to maintain the lane only if given clear markings and good weather. And it’s not going to be able to respond to obstacles that come in from the side. If a deer runs in front of the vehicle, you may be able to see it before the sensors do.”

One comment on the original article by reader ‘skellener’ was worth noting:

Autonomous cars will be amazing. I don’t see this half driving thing becoming a reality. How can you expect someone to really pay attention to they road if they aren’t in direct control? I know I couldn’t due that. I’m either gonna be the driver or a passenger. Anything in between seems EXTREMELY dangerous to me. I’m out. Either give me the wheel or let the the car drive, but none of this in between stuff. Insurance will a have a field day with this…”Um so who was driving?” “The car…” “Yeah right… so who was driving?

Your thoughts?

Edit: Of relevance is this piece describing research by GM on driver behaviour found by reader Gabriel last week.

If you have a spare five minutes I recommend you read an opinion piece over at usridernews.com.

To summarise the piece the author makes the case that driverless cars will make riding inherently safe for motorcycle riders. On the other hand, the author sees a point in the future where ‘self directed’ vehicles as they put it are outlawed:

Google watchers and those with inside knowledge of the technology believe auto-pilot vehicles will first be deployed as delivery vehicles, taxis, and buses.  How quickly the technology transitions from utility vehicles to personal vehicles is anybody’s guess at this point, but the sad truth is that once a tipping point is reached, say 75% of vehicles are running on auto-drive, the push to rid the highways of “dangerous self driving vehicles” will begin in earnest.   In the NPR report, the author even alludes to a “future ban” on human operated vehicles.

When that happens, so will your ability to pick a destination on a map, load up the motorcycle and head out across this great country with your only worries being rain, bugs and that distracted driver who turns left in front of you.

I want to make a few quick points:

1. Agreement - I think  the usridernews.com article is essentially correct, riding a motorcycle will become safter, but eventually, riding it yourself will become illegal on public roads.
2. Gyroscoopes - All hope isn’t lost – the LIT motors C1 which we have reported on recently is effectively a motorcycle with a gyroscope. Granted it doesn’t look as exciting as riding a regular motorcycle but surely some innovative engineer can not only put those safety features in regular motorcycles making lawmakers less likely to ban them?
3. Speed - Driverless technology will probably be incorporated into motorcycles, and because they will be safer, they will be able to go a lot faster particularly on highways. In fact I think 20 years from now most journeys will be in two wheeled single passenger vehicles.
4. Renting - One of the great things about driverless vehicles is that we probably won’t own them ourselves. If you feel like it, for a few extra dollars you can rent that 500cc bike instead  of being stuck with Dad’s old 125cc that struggles to make it up the hill. (For the record my Dad had a very cool, occasionally operational, Kawasaki Ninja 900).
5. Turn off the auto-pilot - Even though 15-20 years from now every vehicle will be driverless, there will still be racetracks, deserts and national parks for riders to feel the thrill of riding a bike.

In a nutshell; don’t give up on riding that bike just yet!

Something we’ve noticed on this blog is that we have some really amazing commenters and supporters!

So, we have decided to open up the field a little bit.

If you want to write a post on something where you feel you can add a little extra something to the discussion let us know!

First, a couple of ground rules.

1. We’ll be maintaining editorial discretion so it’s probably best to suggest the topic to us first before going off and writing about it.

2. For love, not money.

3. No guest blogs for SEO/personal promotion purposes.”

4. You agree to license it under GNU  or Creative Commons

Contact us through the contact page.

That’s it.

Mat.

We have had very little to say about Japan since starting this blog.

That fact has been somewhat surprising as Japan has such a reputation for being a leader in technological development. While reports have emanated from Britain, Korea, China, Germany and the USA, things have been quiet up until today.

The Japanese government has announced it is taking the first, tentative, steps towards driverless car development:

In a bid to make the dream a reality, the Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry is launching a programme featuring an expert study panel. Discussions about how best to proceed are also set to get underway.

Initial suggestions are that drivers would manually control their car on minor roads away from their home, before switching to ‘automatic driving’ after joining an expressway, which would feature a specific lane for autopilot vehicles.

Speaking to the news provider, a Road Bureau spokesperson said: “The system could prevent such accidents as a vehicle veering out of a lane, as happened with the tour bus that struck a wall alongside Kanetsu Expressway on April 29.

“The planned autopilot system, in combination with the road information transmission system already in place, will make it technically possible to realise driverless driving in about ten years.”

More here

We’ve spent a fair amount of time talking about the passage of self driving car legislation through the Californian legislature.

It’s getting a fair amount of attention from tech media for two reasons. First, most tech media is based in California and second, the state is probably the most important legal battleground given that the region is such a hub for innovation.

While Autonomous Vehicle legislation has passed the Californian Senate 37-0, it’s being reviewed by house committees who are proving to be more of a challenge, with several amendments proposed that would impede development of the technology:

During his testimony Monday, a Google representative said if California legislators amend a proposed driverless car bill to effectively forbid their “driverlessness,” the state will be telling autonomous car technology to get out of town.

More here

Something for the readers.

What would you do? How would you sell the driverless car?

I’ll leave my thoughts in the comments section.

(Credit to Gabriel for the idea)

In the past, I have been down on Ford. No longer.

Doug Newcomb from Wired has a great post up today at Wired.com about Ford bringing driver assist technology mainstream:

The automaker has announced two new driver assistance technologies: Traffic Jam Assist and the addition of perpendicular parking to its Active Park Assist system. Ford says it’s developing Traffic Jam Assist for the “mid-term” and the perpendicular parking feature for the “near-term.”

Traffic Jam Assist is essentially a mash-up of active cruise control and lane-position technology, which Ford notes are already available on current Ford models such as the Focus, Escape and Fusion. Radar sensors and cameras on the car help it keep pace with other vehicles in traffic and stay in its lane. Ford says the feature could potentially improve the flow of traffic “where there are no pedestrians, cyclists or animals, and where lanes are clearly marked.”

Ford has some big ambitions for this technology:

The automaker also claims that in cases in which just 25 percent of vehicles are equipped with Traffic Jam Assist, commutes times on a stretch of road can be reduced by 37.5 percent and delays reduced by 20 percent, “saving millions of gallons of fuel each year.” And to make sure that the driver doesn’t rely on technology to keep the car on track and spend timing texting instead, Ford says Traffic Jam Assist will include features to guarantee the driver stays engaged.

 

And I just LOVE this quote from Doug:

Get used to it: The car is taking control. Resistance is futile. And for those who know how to drive, you can always choose to turn it off.

From Patent Bolt:

“The US Patent & Trademark Office has published Google’s latest trademark application for their “Google Driverless Car” Icon under application 85650611. Can you guess which one it is? No? Well, it’s the one in the bottom right corner that’s slightly tilted. Google filed their trademark under International Class 12 covering “electronic system that allows autonomous driving of vehicles.” Beyond their new icon, our report lists a number of newly registered trademarks that Google gained in June 2012.”

 

What do you think? Do you like the wonky car symbol?

I personally don’t like it – it’s as if the image is from a children’s book!

Thanks to Chris Law for sending this in.

The beauty of autonomous vehicles is just that – that they are autonomous. They don’t need any alien motherships or telecommunication towers to guide them in the right direction. They are happy enough by themselves, just like any other car on the road.

This is why I have consistently argued against V2V as the be-all end-all as it seems to me to be a distraction, not a solution to problems. Needless to say, I am almost alone in that viewpoint.

Susan Kuchinskas from Telematics Update today brings us a thorough update on the market of V2V, asking exactly the same question: in the future world, isn’t V2V redundant?

The NHTSA:

The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said it will decide whether to engage in rule making for vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications in 2013, following its year-long model deployment, which kicks off in Ann Arbor, Michigan in August.

On Dedicated Short-Range Communications (DSRC):

nstead of installing the cameras, radars and sensors needed to ‘see’ around the car, as well as the software and processors to make sense of that data, V2V would let automakers install the cheaper DSRC modems that provide a steady stream of standardized data, with maybe a couple of short-range radars to supplement.

The problem with relying on DSRC, of course, is penetration. Says Steven H. Bayless, seniordirector, telecommunications and telematics at the Intelligent Transportation Society of America, “If it is true that V2V is a cheaper alternative to ADAS systems that depend on sensors like radar, that’s great. But you still have to wait until there’s significant penetration on the roads.”

…

Most agree with Vann Wilber, senior partner of Global Technical Policy Associates and policy program manager for the Vehicle Infrastructure Integration Consortium, who says, “I think the two will coexist; there will be a convergence of some kind. I see them being complementary and maybe one becoming more sophisticated, and the other not having to be so sophisticated.”

He points out that, for example, a car’s forward collision-warning system can’t see two or three cars ahead of the car in front; V2V could expand that visibility. Or, a car might have a forward-facing camera but not one to see what’s coming from the side.

I’d argue with that – Google’s system is able to see several cars in front by bouncing LADAR off the road.

Continental’s Christian Schumacher:

 ”I see vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure as a key enabler for automated driving. The communication gives us more data points for automated driving, and the communications part might be one of the key enablers to approach the next level of automated technology.”

Thanks to reader Thom for the link.