The trucks could be chained together and run on some sort of track...
Oh, I see what I've done there. Whoever is running this trial will struggle to find a quiet bit on the M6.
|
>> Whoever is running this trial will struggle to find a quiet bit on the M6.
>>
I take it you don't know the M6 north of Lancaster.
|
"So that they can drive closer together".
Yeah, right. We get enough bad press for tailgating as it is, without a 10-strong demonstration piece tootling up and down the motorway.
And cameras for wing mirrors? No thanks; it may save a cupful of fuel but at what cost if the electronics fail? Presumably something like this would cause the whole outfit to come to a grinding halt. I admire the technology behind this but have serious doubts as to the pracicality.
Last edited by: Harleyman on Sat 5 Mar 16 at 18:50
|
|
I would not like to arrive at the end of an on slip at the same time that lot were going past. The hard shoulder escape route might be useful, if there is one.
|
|
Nor me. Wouldn't be so bad in a decent car, but in another lorry where you're limited to the same top speed as they are? No thanks.
|
|
If there is more than a cars length between them someone will get in there, or a slip road to lane three in one go idiot will get through them. That should confuse their adaptive cruise control.
|
Survey question:
Would you feel safe knowing driverless lorries are on the road?
• Yes
• Yes, but only if there is still a person in the cab who can override the system
• Maybe in time, with more testing
• No
Results highlighted that of the 1732 people taking part in the survey 43% would not feel safe knowing driverless lorries are on the road.
• Less than one in ten (8%) would feel safe on the road.
• 22% would feel safe if there was still a person in the cab who can override the system.
• 27% may in time feel safe with more testing.
• 47% of over 55 year olds wouldn’t feel safe.
What does this mean?
Lisa Bedwell, Senior Director at Future Thinking comments: “Consumers are clearly cautious towards the concept of driverless vehicles.
futurethinking.com/consumers-wary-of-government-plans-to-trial-driverless-lorries-in-england/
|
|
The whole concept is so insane it makes the driverless cars thing look vaguely sensible.
|
What does this mean?
There's lies, dammed lies and statistics. I'm surprised as many actually feel safe - I wonder what they were actually asked. After all, to get the answer you want, you first have to ask the right question.
|
|
Rather then chaining them all together, why not give them a special road and schedule them .. Must safer. We can call it a rail way.
|
>>
>> There's lies, dammed lies and statistics. I'm surprised as many actually feel safe - I
>> wonder what they were actually asked. After all, to get the answer you want, you
>> first have to ask the right question.
>>
Aye, I can't believe that many people are that gullible. Probably like the survey I did for HMG via Kentar (IIRC) back in 2011, where the questions were all slanted to make it look like I thought national identity cards are a great idea, without actually asking that question.
|
There seems to be some controversy at the moment of the actual status of the driver who has to be in them.
One source seems to think the driver will be on a 'break' and indeed all the photo's show the driver sitting back and relaxing.
Another, myself included, feels that the legal status of a driver's break is clearly defined as having to be used for 'rest and recuperation'.
However the driver is supposed to go to the loo or get a shower while he's supervising the vehicle, or get a bacon roll for breakfast, I really don't know but no-one seems to want to answer that question.
Pat
|
>> There seems to be some controversy at the moment of the actual status of the
>> driver who has to be in them.
Just wait until there is an accident, the driver will soon find out who is liable. You used the words supervising the vehicle.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 30 Mar 16 at 17:57
|
>> There seems to be some controversy at the moment of the actual status of the
>> driver who has to be in them.
>>
Well the article states "a human operator will also be sitting in the driver's seat in case there is an emergency"
Which counts out any thoughts of 'sitting back and relaxing'.
Like I said in the equivalent car thread, how the heck is this driver supposed to react in a split second to an emergency situation? May as well just drive it properly.
|
|
The system does not seem to be much more than an adaptive cruise control with lane assist.
|
>> There seems to be some controversy at the moment of the actual status of the
>> driver who has to be in them.
>>
As far as his tachograph is concerned, he would surely be driving. As we both know, if your digi-card is in slot #1 then if the vehicle is moving then it records you as driving, whether you're in control of the vehicle or not. Since, in my experience, it takes a full two minutes to shift one's digi-card from the second-man slot (where it would only record other work, rest or POA) to the driver's, it ain't going to be much use doing that if the system suddenly crashes and you have to grab the steering wheel before the truck does too.
Given that the lead truck is being physically driven (well, at the moment, anyway) then it follows that the drivers in the "slave" trucks will take their breaks at the same time as the lead driver.
I don't see a future for this kind of thing in the UK. Quite simply, our roads are too short, too complicated and too overcrowded.
|
>> I don't see a future for this kind of thing in the UK. Quite simply,
>> our roads are too short, too complicated and too overcrowded.
And our pickup and drop off points too numerous, diverse and spread out I'm sure Pat will confirm that getting a 14 lorry train in and out of Bretts in once piece is a pipe dream.
|
Try getting that out of the gate on a Friday afternoon when the masses are all off to Sunny Hunny Z:)
Yes HM, I agree with you entirely but I do suspect a way will be found even if it means legally re-defining what we now know as 'break'.
It makes me angry that we can be prosecuted, and I know drivers who have been, for having one minute short of a full 45 minutes yet when it suits the agenda......
I would even struggle with it being POA, wouldn't you?
Pat
|
>>
>> What does this mean?
>>
That it's more important to feel safe than to be safe?
|
|
I guess its human nature to feel that human control is somehow inherently safer than an automated system. Experience proves otherwise. It nearly alwasy the human element that leads to disaster
|
>> I guess its human nature to feel that human control is somehow inherently safer than
>> an automated system. Experience proves otherwise. It nearly alwasy the human element that leads to
>> disaster
>>
Provided every part of the automated system is functioning 100% correctly, and the environment it is operating in is totally within the scope of the software, then I agree.
In terms of this thread's specific scenario then the driver only seems to be there to give a misleading impression of improving safety and somebody to take the can when it goes wrong.
|
|
I rather think the proposal to include a "driver" is for much the same reason that London Underground used a one legged man to travel the escalators when the were first introduced: to bolster public confidence.
|
|
All very good from your armchair, but when there is the inevitable accident you won't be the one explaining your involvement to a judge.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 30 Mar 16 at 20:15
|
This will happen in the future.For most things the technology is there or soon will be there.
Often it is politicial will which put a brake on this.You never know it might create new type of jobs to build different road systems.
|
|
And will driverless lorries still have those signs on the back...How's My Driving? Call 0800 123456
|
Absolutely Dutchie. What we are not good at is imagining change and at at the same believing the present methods and systems are somehow the best and that change will inevitably bring disaster in its wake.
It's been said of railways,cars, aeroplanes, computers and practically everything else.
Ten years time driverless vehicles will be trundling about our roads and no one will give them a second. thought.
|
Many years ago I used to work for a very large company who were one of the first businesses to have a warehouse with automated picking.
The main feature of it was unmanned carts moving around the warehouse to the bay or bays where they needed to be loaded. I think they followed some kind of underfloor guide wires or something.
So, when this new facility was introduced I was there one day and asked the warehouse manager what happened if someone inadvertently got in front of one of the carts ( sort of a big mesh cage on wheels )
He assured me they had a fail safe and would stop if an unexpected obstruction was encountered and encouraged me to try it.
'king thing took my off my feet and damn near ran me over if I hadn't rolled out of its way...
|
|
Vey funny Runfer it must have known it was you the aftershave?>:)
|
|
Well, I think someone knew what they were doing. I was the warehouse manager's boss at the time...
|
|
I can't imagine it was against you Runfer but you never know.
|
Someone on the radio mentioned something I have never considered and which would certainly prevent me ever buying a driverless car, namely car sickness.
I suffer from motion sickness when not driving even if sitting in the front seat. The back seat will have me feeling nauseous in a few miles. Reading a newspaper whilst on the move as is often suggested as being possible would have me throwing up before I finished page three.
It seems a fairly intractable problem. I wonder if one of those stuck on steering wheels that you used to be able to buy for kids allowing me to pretend to drive would solve the problem.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 22 Apr 16 at 16:45
|
>> I suffer from motion sickness when not driving even if sitting in the front seat.
>> The back seat will have me feeling nauseous in a few miles. Reading a newspaper
>> whilst on the move as is often suggested as being possible would have me throwing up before I finished page three.
I wonder what it is in the brain that makes that extra bit, driving, nullify the feeling of motion sickness?
Do you get it on aircraft or trains?
|
|
Page 3 used to be so much more distracting.
|
No, planes and trains are OK. Ships can be be bad although modern stabilised ferries are OK unless its very rough. A whale spotting afternoon cruise in a sailing schooner in Nova Scotia was truly miserable. As they say with sea sickness first you think you are going to die and then you are concerned that you won't.
Coaches are pretty awful. Nothing in the world could induce me to attempt a Rattle type long distance coach trip.
My wife completely is impervious to any form of motion sickness and would have made an ideal astronaut. Fortunately in a way she doesn't drive so I very rarely have to be a car passenger
|
I fairly regularly get the ferry to and from Ireland. When it's rough it's a bit bumpy to say the least. I'm lucky enough to be one of those who can tuck into a hearty meal while others are hanging over the side.
;-)
|
I can remember a trip on the Jersey ferry as boy spending most of the time throwing up over the side whilst my father tucked into a hearty fried breakfast in the restaurant and later regaled me with war time tales of life onboard a convoy escort in the North Atlantic.
There is of course one sure cure for sea sickness. Sit under a tree.
|
>> No, planes and trains are OK. Ships can be be bad although modern stabilised ferries
>> are OK unless its very rough. A whale spotting afternoon cruise in a sailing schooner
>> in Nova Scotia was truly miserable. As they say with sea sickness first you think
>> you are going to die and then you are concerned that you won't.
Strange how only certain modes of transport set it off. Isn't it supposed to be all about the inner ear and your percerption of balance?
>> Coaches are pretty awful. Nothing in the world could induce me to attempt a Rattle
>> type long distance coach trip.
They're pretty awful, with or without motion sickness.
|
|
Almost all motion in a train or a plane in on direction. I have been very nearly sick as a passenger in a glider spiralling uo in a thermal though. I think it is the combination of movements, especially unpredictable movement that disorientate and confuses the brain causing nausea
|
Do you get it when say flying through turbulence?
I take it none of the remedies have ever worked?
Last edited by: sooty123 on Fri 22 Apr 16 at 15:21
|
|
I guess I would if it endured for any length of time.. Never experiencedd air turbulence for more than a few minutes. Pilots tend to avoid it.
|
They're pretty awful, with or without motion sickness.
Rats can't be on all of them, can he?
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Fri 22 Apr 16 at 15:44
|
>> They're pretty awful, with or without motion sickness.
>>
>> Rats can't be on all of them, can he?
>>
No he couldn't.
|
. I wonder if one of those stuck on steering
>> wheels that you used to be able to buy for kids allowing me to pretend
>> to drive would solve the problem.
>>
I wonder if that would work in the back seat too?
It works on boats too, for me. At the helm I can view the rise and fall into waves as quite good fun, after overcoming the initial fear that the boat will just go on ploughing down to the bottom. But as a passenger I have indeed felt like death, and have lain in the scupper seriously thinking how easy it would be to roll off the side and end the misery.
It's not just the having something to do and occupy the mind that works, I think the action has to have an actual discernable effect on the motion, as in your case when steering the car.
So I don't think a dummy wheel would work.
When I was a child in the 50s everyone swore by a bit of chain dangling from the tailpipe. Some said it only worked if it actually touched the road, earthing the static, others that it was purely psychological. The act of watching the chain being attached did have a reassuring effect.
|
Somebody once told me that the difference was that as a driver most of the time you focused on sights outside the car and that as a rear passenger you focused on things you could see in the car.
Your eyes trying to maintain focus on something which is close but moving slightly in relation to yourself causes the motion sickness.
I don't know if that's true, but focusing outside the thing I am in absolutely solved the problem for me.
|
We once came back from Cherbourg on the old Brittany Ferries ' Cornoualles ' The bows were going under the water and rearing up to the sky. All the family were as sick as budgies apart from eldest daughter and me who were enjoying greasy chips and tea in the cafe,
I was more concerned about our caravan, wondering whether it was being punted around in the hold....but it was ok in the end.
Then, to add to the fun, we got comprehensively turned over by the customs at Poole...they even threatened to strip search the kids........I told them, in no gentle terms, that they'd better get a magistrate out first. They backed off and sent us on our way. I had exactly the correct amount of wine allowed for 3 over 17s and 200 small cigars for meself. They even took the cover off the air filter !
|
>> Then, to add to the fun, we got comprehensively turned over <<
Failed the attitude test then?
Did they relace the air filter, IIRC they were actually allowed to leave a pile of of pieces on the floor. The powers of C&E greatly exceeded that of the police.
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Sat 23 Apr 16 at 07:36
|
>> The powers of C&E greatly exceeded that of
>> the police.
>>
It's interesting that their successors now don't appear to possess any powers at all.
|
>> Your eyes trying to maintain focus on something which is close but moving slightly in
>> relation to yourself causes the motion sickness.
>>
>> I don't know if that's true, but focusing outside the thing I am in absolutely
>> solved the problem for me.
I believe it.
The 3 things that contribute to balance are vision, the inner ear (together the vestibular system), and gravity/weight/movement (the weight on your feet or the seat of your pants).
Take one away and you are impaired. Try standing on one leg with your eyes shut, it makes it more difficult.
A friend of mine has inner ear problems. He can manage OK in good light, but just about falls over in the dark.
By looking at something that is mostly stationary with respect to yourself, when both you and it are being moved this way and that, results in conflicting sensations. I don't suffer from travel sickness, in general, but reading in a moving car will make me nauseous and sweaty in about 10 minutes.
|
I don't suffer from motion sickness but I do know what you mean about some drivers having the ability to make their passengers fell nauseous and sweaty in about 10 minutes.
;-)
|
|
Mrs ON often reads while I am driving, I know I am overdoing it when she reaches for the door pull. I can only assume that she is worried about the integrity of the door hinges. :-)
|
>> I don't suffer from motion sickness but I do know what you mean about some
>> drivers having the ability to make their passengers fell nauseous and sweaty in about 10
>> minutes.
>>
>> ;-)
Yes some are worse than others. A dear friend and former boss of mine had a habit of constantly speeding up and slowing down as well as going round corners and roundabouts threepenny bit style, in bites. I felt queasy more than once with that.
Fortunately he didn't much like driving, so on long trips in his car he would often get me to drive.
|
My father in law is not a natural driver. Trouble is, he thinks he is...
He treats all the controls as if they have only two positions, on or off. This includes the clutch, brakes and steering. He also labours under the delusion that being about three feet from the vehicle in front is a safe stopping distance at any speed and in any conditions.
I avoid being driven by him at all costs.
;-)
|
|
Being able to see the horizon worked for me, difficult in a submarine but sea legs acquired early in surface ships. Staying near the middle of the ship and on the lower decks reduces the amplitude of the motion.
|
A group of former employees from Google, Apple and Tesla has formed a start-up aimed at turning commercial lorries into self-drive vehicles.
Rather than building vehicles from scratch, Otto will make kits to retro-fit existing lorries
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36311648
|
This could be embarrassing. - Alastairw
