3 ms·
> But that still doesn't address the problem facing most large cities: gridlock. Whether the cars are automated or not won't drastically change that (although i
by temphn 15y ago
> But that still doesn't address the problem facing most large cities: gridlock. Whether the cars are automated or not won't drastically change that (although it may well reduce arterial traffic clogs due to accidents and rubbernecking) because there are still more cars than the roads can handle.
Humans are going to be a lot less efficient than computers in driving cars. With proper networking, you could have cars doing 60mph while only a few car lengths from each other, vastly increasing the capacity of any segment of road.
For example, the presence of an unexpected crash or obstruction down the road can be relayed back at the speed of light via networked cars, and the entire wave of cars behind the crash can slow down and reroute.
There have been some simulation papers on this, comparing humans vs. automatic driving algorithms. It's similar to automatic control in other areas.
- Anechoic 15y ago>With proper networking, you could have cars doing 60mph while only a few car lengths from each other, vastly increasing the capacity of any segment of road. That works if 100% of the cars are autonmous. I'm betting that even if automous cars were available tomorrow, it would take longer than 20 years for that to be true.
- waterlesscloud 15y agoI think there's a threshold beyond which it becomes socially mandatory for all cars to be autonomous. The pressures will be enormous at a certain point. Endangering the lives of others when there's an option to not do so, etc etc. What that threshold percentage is and how the transition will be accomplished in practical terms, I don't know. But I do believe the pressures will manifest themselves mightily.
- Anechoic 15y ago>I think there's a threshold beyond which it becomes socially mandatory for all cars to be autonomous. Economics are still going to be the driving factor (no pun intended) for the poor and working class. As long as beater non-automated cars are going to cost less than the (used but still newer) automated cars, and as long as cars are still going to be necessary in much of the USA, there are still going to be normal cars around. At some point (say in 40-50 years, and if "classic" driver cars are outlawed) I think we'll reach that point, but then that weakens the argument of autonomous cars (and its benefits) getting here before the CA HSR project.
- ars 15y agoI would imagine it would start with restricted lanes just for autonomous cars - I would be fine doing the start and end of the drive, and letting the car take over for the long distance stretch.
- easp 15y agoI think you are right, there will be a tipping point at some stage. For something that is so thoroughly baked into the American way of life, I think 20 years isnt a bad estimate. I'm not totally up on autonomous car tech, but while very promising, it still seems to be proof of concept stage. To me that means ~10 years from commercializarion, and then at least 10 years before it has penetrated enough of the fleet that you can even start to consider making it mandatory. Automotive engineering is conservative because of the scale and age of the industry, the cost of the goods sold, and the risks inherent in their failure. Automobile owners are conservative because cars are big purchases. The thing about timeframes like that is that there are enough unknowns that estimates can easily be 2x too optimistic. I tend to agree that rail (whether urban light rail, or region high speed rail) may not be the most cost effective way to move a lot of people from point a to point b given existing patterns of development, I know that part of the reason planners favor it is that its cost comes comes as part of a permanence that can shape the way communities develop around it over the long term.