3 ms·
> Where would you park the self-driving cars then? They will be driving around and not be parked.. > Considering in most cases > 80% of cars are on the road a
by nickez 10y ago
> Where would you park the self-driving cars then?
They will be driving around and not be parked..
> Considering in most cases > 80% of cars are on the road at the same time during rush hours, you can't save much with self-driving cars — not more than with a well-working transit system already.
Maybe self driving cars can be the "last/first mile" in transit so that more people actually will use public transit.
> People want to own a car, have it always available, and don't want to share.
I don't want to own a car and no-one that I know of in my surroundings want to own a car. Car companies even do private leasing now because people do not want to own a car.
> Self-Driving cars provide no advantage there.
I think you have to think bigger. Why would you want to own a car if you could call one at any moment with your phone with an app?
- coldtea 10y ago>> Where would you park the self-driving cars then? > They will be driving around and not be parked.. They could also go to park in more remote areas, that are uncomfortable for people to walk to, and come back when asked to.
- bryanlarsen 10y agoSo we're going to have a bunch of self-driving cars driving around without people in them? Sounds like that's going to make our traffic problems worse, not better.
- coldtea 10y agoThat's assuming our traffic problems are because of "too many cars" and not because of inefficient utilization / driving. That said, I didn't say we'll have cars driving around with no people in them. I said that cars will be able to drive to remote parking areas by themselves.
- justJanne 10y ago> Maybe self driving cars can be the "last/first mile" in transit so that more people actually will use public transit. So the Park+Ride concept. That’s already possible today, yet completely underutilized. A criticism often brought against transit is "I’d have to switch trains at some point", do you think these people would start using that now? > They will be driving around and not be parked.. All the time? That’d be quite wasteful, considering most cars are only used for about 2h a day, during the rush hours, for the commute. > I think you have to think bigger. Why would you want to own a car if you could call one at any moment with your phone with an app? Why would you want to own a car if you could call a taxi at any moment with your phone with an app? Why would you want to own a car if busses and trains come every 2-5 minutes at every stop, and you’re never more than 400m from a stop? Reality is, as European cities show, all these "advantages" can already be gotten with public transit today. I’m not sure what self-driving cars actually improve compared to existing public transit methods. And especially because they’re using space more inefficient than existing transit methods, these advantages would have to be huge to make any tradeoff worth it. Otherwise you could just invest in better transit, not self-driving cars.
- usrusr 10y agoPark+ride combines more of the drawbacks of personal vehicles and public transportation than robocab+ride would. (Initial sunk cost, always having to return to your personal vehicle instead of free roaming using whatever mode and path available, requiring the personal vehicle being operational at all times) Also, robocab+ride could work on both ends of the commute. Where I live, "office suburbs" tend to have transit connections just as bad as actual suburbs, or worse.
- hawaiianbrah 10y agoAre park and rides completely underutilized? I've always lived in the cities I've lived in, but whenever I happen to pass one, they seem quite full to me.