4 ms·
If the truck still requires a human for some tasks (intra-city, fuelling, etc.) but can be rated to legally drive itself for most of the trip, then the human co
by waste_monk 7y ago
If the truck still requires a human for some tasks (intra-city, fuelling, etc.) but can be rated to legally drive itself for most of the trip, then the human could sleep / eat / etc. during those times they're not required. This would presumably let them avoid minimum stationary rest times etc. since they could get a full rest of sleep while the truck drives itself (on sufficiently long journeys).
For owner-operators who live out of their vehicle anyway and are more concerned about getting work than sleeping in a hotel somewhere this could dramatically increase the volume of work they can take on (at least until fully autonomous trucks become widely available and humans are completely deprecated as truck drivers).
From that perspective it would be more efficient, not 90% but there would be significant gains.
- joe_the_user 7y agoWell, if you had trucks that were safe enough to sleep in while they auto-drove, the companies would certainly want to go one better and have them drive empty. They could create dedicated fueling and loading areas if need-be. But the trucks being that safe is the big question. The article describes a single trip without disengagement. Much more that is clearly needed.
- greedo 7y ago"most of the trip" So if I get woken up every 10 miles, am I really meeting the rest requirements?
- waste_monk 7y agoI was thinking more like "the truck can legally drive itself until the next fuel stop in about 14 hours time, so I'm going to get some sleep".