Driverless cars ! Is it all Bah Humbug?

[BG John]

Rather than develop complex technology to control automated vehicles on wide smooth surfaces, that are also occupied by manually controlled vehicles, humans, animals and other obstructions, I've had a crazy idea. Why not lay a pair of parallel rails that the vehicles could run on? Then all the automation has to deal with is not running into the vehicle in front, and switching to the set of parallel rails that take it to its destination.

[ian]

Rather than develop complex technology to control automated vehicles on wide smooth surfaces, that are also occupied by manually controlled vehicles, humans, animals and other obstructions, I've had a crazy idea. Why not lay a pair of parallel rails that the vehicles could run on? Then all the automation has to deal with is not running into the vehicle in front, and switching to the set of parallel rails that take it to its destination.

 

It'll never catch on.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

If there's still a need for humans to take over the controls in certain circumstances, surely their lack of experience will make things even worse. Or will we all be forced to live in cities, and rural areas will become no go zones.

 This is a non-problem with the degree of automation an autonomous vehicle requires. It ensures the driver is 'kept up to date' on driving skill by requiring a minimum number of driver hours at the wheel per month - and here's the 'kicker' - it will evaluate driver performance, and alert the licencing authority of driver incompetence with recorded evidence demonstrating the 'drove over the top of a roundabout', 'pulled out in front of an oncoming vehicle', 'ran straight across a zebra crossing with pedestrians on it with no brake application'; to specifically identify the three incidents I saw yesterday, executed by the drivers of the Keighley area.

 

According to the tech-savvy Yanks, back in 1957 we were all supposed to have flying cars by 1967 !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Where are they ?

 Should have seen the back-pack helicoptered soldiers with nuclear hand grenades edition. The model railway features were good: a level of adventure in things like loco drive systems and point control, twenty years and more ahead of the UK hobby. Thanks to a kind US citizen who lived in my home town, there was a stash of these magazines in circulation, directed at kids who were long term unwell, to help relieve the boredom: my turn came around with a vile throat infection that kept me off school for a term when I was nine. Excellent mag, don't think there has been anything quite like it published in the UK.

[BG John]

This is a non-problem with the degree of automation an autonomous vehicle requires. It ensures the driver is 'kept up to date' on driving skill by requiring a minimum number of driver hours at the wheel per month - and here's the 'kicker' - it will evaluate driver performance, and alert the licencing authority of driver incompetence with recorded evidence demonstrating the 'drove over the top of a roundabout', 'pulled out in front of an oncoming vehicle', 'ran straight across a zebra crossing with pedestrians on it with no brake application'; to specifically identify the three incidents I saw yesterday, executed by the drivers of the Keighley area.

That doesn't seem like a non problem to me. I agree that the examples you gave are serious issues, but do we really want to live in a country where Big Brother knows every little error we make, and has the ability to punish us for it?

[Horsetan]

.... do we really want to live in a country where Big Brother knows every little error we make, and has the ability to punish us for it?

 

Aren't we in one already?

[BG John]

Aren't we in one already?

Yes, but this could make it even worse.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

That doesn't seem like a non problem to me. I agree that the examples you gave are serious issues, but do we really want to live in a country where Big Brother knows every little error we make, and has the ability to punish us for it?

 That's a debate that needs to occur. I have no problem in closely monitoring a specific activity which inevitably involves the deployment of potentially lethal force. Others may differ.

[ThePipersSon]

One problem with driver-less cars which has not been mentioned yet is travel (motion) sickness. 

 

I occasionally suffer from it. 

 

It has been reported that these vehicles are worse in that respect than chauffeured cars, so I won't be using one anytime soon. 

[Andrew F]

They may become compulsory and you have to put so many hours in per week as a non-driver being bombarded with ads via a screen in front of you that's non-turn on/offable in order to keep your non-driving license.

[BG John]

They may become compulsory and you have to put so many hours in per week as a non-driver being bombarded with ads via a screen in front of you that's non-turn on/offable in order to keep your non-driving license.

That would be interesting for those of us who live in rural areas. I haven't been on a motorway for several years, and I suspect that most of the roads around here would need to be driven in manual mode!

[Glorious NSE]

Aren't we in one already?

Given the examples quoted, with I presume no legal issues for the perpetrator, no.

[rockershovel]

According to the tech-savvy Yanks, back in 1957 we were all supposed to have flying cars by 1967 !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Where are they ?

 

Brit15

You know it's the future when there are flying cars!

 

Where are their Jetsons-style shoulder pads?

[Pacific231G]

You know it's the future when there are flying cars!

 

Where are their Jetsons-style shoulder pads?

Flying cars have always amused me. The glossy adverts for the type with ducted fans like Hiller's Aerial Sedan* never say what would happen if they had a power failure. An aeroplane simply (!) becomes a glider and with any luck you can land it in a field, a helicopter can be autorated but one of these things would simply fall out of the sky (yes I do know about ballistic parachutes) and the same is probably even more true of a jet pack. Some of the others do have short wings implying conventional flight but with a very high stalling speed (making forced landings far less survivable)  

There have been a few flying cars of course the most successful being this.

.   

At least one of Moulton Taylor's Aerocars is still flying but it shows the real problem common to all amphibians. They have to be capable of doing two things and generally end up being an expensive compromise. For mass production the Taylor aerocar needed full FAA type approval as an aircraft as well as satisfying all the regulations applying to cars which are not necessarily mutually compatible and make for an unduly heavy aircraft. The user would also need a full pilot's licence as well as their driving licence.

 

The most interesting roadable aircraft IMHO, was Henri Mignet's  HM280 "Pou Maquis". This was a folding tandem-wing single seater using Mignet's "formule pou" (usually referred to in English as "Flying Flea") It was a tiny aircraft that could be towed on its own wheels by a motorcycle and operated from roads or small fields and was designed to be used by the French Resistance/FFI  for communications behind enemy lines (presumably largely at night) and was simple enough to fly that it wouldn't need highly trained military pilots. The occupation of France ended before it was put into use but it was tested by the French army in the 1940s and was perfectly practical. I think a few have more recently been built from Mignet's plans.  

 

*You can read the Popular Mechancs article from 1957 here https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DOEDAAAAMBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=popular+mechanics+1957&hl=en&ei=MVf5TLeKDcT58Ab1rcmkCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=popular%20mechanics%201957&f=false

it begins on page 74 and on the previous page is a news item about the prospective launch of Ford's exciting new car....The Edsel !!

[rockershovel]

I know someone who owns a Flying Flea! Probably the first "microlight" and designed to be built by home enthusiasts, the original design suffered from a serious aerodynamic flaw which could result in the aircraft going into a rapidly accelerating nosedive.

 

The flaw was later designed out in later versions, but the bad publicity remained and the craft was never passed for civilian use in UK. The Perse School owned one, less engine, which was used by the CCF - towed around the playing fields and used for short "hops" to practice take-off and landing drill. I've seen photos of this but it had gone by the time I was in the CCF (1972-3), replaced by a "skeleton" glider propelled by a huge bungee cord. Twenty or thirty sweating, cursing cadets would haul on the ends of the cord, so that one if their number might be shot across the playing fields and possibly, make a short "flight" of twenty or thirty yards, a few feet above the ground.

 

The Austin 7 chassis which had formerly served as the tow car, was donated to the Motor Club and fuelled by methanol, it competed at least once at a sprint meeting at Duxford.

 

Education really meant something in those days! I can't imagine any modern school allowing its Sixth Formers to practice such dangerous amusements on school premises..

[Pacific231G]

I know someone who owns a Flying Flea! Probably the first "microlight" and designed to be built by home enthusiasts, the original design suffered from a serious aerodynamic flaw which could result in the aircraft going into a rapidly accelerating nosedive.

 

The flaw was later designed out in later versions, but the bad publicity remained and the craft was never passed for civilian use in UK.

I'm intrigued. Do you know what type it is?

The original HM14 had the fatal flaw but, as you say, later marques were free of it. The current version of the HM14 has a slightly longer fuselage and uses a different aerofoil. There are still some doubts expressed about the aerodynamics of the Mignet arrangement but it's simpler than a three axis aeroplane and still popular with home builders in France.

 

Mignet's nephew and son restarted the Mignet company in the 1980s and produced the HM1000 Balerit and the HM1100 Cordouan, both factory built aircraft. I've flown both types and, compared with a traditional aeroplane, they did feel strange but the Balerit in particular was very easy to fly. The French Army bought 26 HM1000s for monitoring military convoys and they've also been used for spotting forest fires. The HM1000 is certified in the UK as a microlight. https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/CAA/Content/Standard_Content/Commercial_industry/Aircraft/Airworthiness/Flight_manuals_and_type_certificates/Type_certificate_date_sheet_files/Microlights/BM-49-i04_070203_Mignet-HM-1000-Balerit.pdf A number  were imported but both the importers Fleaplanes UK and the Mignet company ceased trading a few years ago. Five are still on the UK aircraft registry and three of those have current Permits to Fly under the airworthiness auspices of the British Microlight Aircraft Association (delegated from the CAA).

 

The HM14/93 was going through the Popular Flying Association (now the LAA) approval process as a homebuilt aircraft but the sponsors gave up before any were completed. They are being built in other countries

[PatB]

Somewhere on the web is (was?) a photo of a 1950s looking chap on a Vespa (I think, but it could have been one of the more obscure scooters) with has HM-Something-Or-Other hooked up behind with its wings neatly folded. Might have been an interesting ride in windy weather .

 

I've always been quite interested in the tandem wing concept. Early problems aside (which appear to have been the result of a combination of several factors, including aerofoil shape, control linkage design, overlap between the wings and, possibly, builder inexperience) , the Flea appears to be a successful, if somewhat eccentric, aircraft. Sort of the aviation equivalent of the Citroen 2CV and its derivatives. The original HM-14 seems to be pretty basic but its successors seem to be proper little aeroplanes with performance comparable to others in their size/cost/usage bracket. Not that I'd fit into most of them, but that's not unique to Mignet's designs. I've got the drawings for the Rand KR-1 somewhere and the cockpit is narrower than my pelvis and ribcage so even if I lost the requisite 30 kg I still wouldn't fit.

[F-UnitMad]

You know it's the future when there are flying cars!

Where are their Jetsons-style shoulder pads?

Just goes to show what a disappointment the future has been, so far...

 

That Hillier concept does remind me of current 'drones' - 4 fans/propellers, 1 at each corner. We just need bigger drones!!

[BG John]

I'd be interested to see how traffic would be managed if everyone drove a flying car. The published pictures seem to show them as one-offs in totally empty sky!

[Ron Ron Ron]

[Ron Ron Ron]

The technology has advanced a long way since this early demo from three years ago......

 

 

[Pacific231G]

I'd be interested to see how traffic would be managed if everyone drove a flying car. The published pictures seem to show them as one-offs in totally empty sky!

. Just as adverts for cars almost invariably show them speeding along the open road amid gorgeous scenery or in an even more unlikely urban setting on equally empty streets.

Traffic management would have to be a fully automated version of Controlled Air Space able to handle vastly more aircraft but to the same levels of safety. Fail safe is (relatively) easy to accomplish on a railway or terrestrial system as if all else fails you just make everything stop. You can't do that  in the air and even craft capable of hovering will have to come back to earth sooner or later, probably sooner. 

 

to be honest I just can't see self driving cars being acceptably safe except at low speeds or on reserved highways. If a child runs out in front of it does it swerve into the other lane and put its own passengers in danger or kill the child. If you programme it to not hit the child will it then swerve equally dangerously to avoid a deer or fox and put you in the path of a 44 tonne truck? Clearly a lot of the jobs lost by drivers of automatic vehicles will be replace by lucrative new ones for lawyers. Even driving assist will have problems as, even with a hand on the wheel, few human being can switch instantly from passively monitoring the car to reacting very quickly to an emergency - like the satnav deciding that the local canal is a good route to use!!.  

[Glorious NSE]

to be honest I just can't see self driving cars being acceptably safe except at low speeds or on reserved highways. If a child runs out in front of it does it swerve into the other lane and put its own passengers in danger or kill the child. If you programme it to not hit the child will it then swerve equally dangerously to avoid a deer or fox and put you in the path of a 44 tonne truck?

Personally, for all the angst about moral choices, I think it'll come down to cold, hard callous numbers, not emotive moral choices - is it better to run over a child versus a kitten for example.

 

IE will fewer people be killed/injured with the algorithm in charge than without.

 

And when they can numerically prove that (and the machine I suspect already has a much better chance of missing both your obstacles in most conditions than the average human driver does due to reaction time if nothing else.)

I don't find that "nice" to think about. But overall the world will have fewer grieving families.

 

I'm sure there will still be plenty of times when the machine gets blamed for making a bad situation worse, or when it's claimed a given human could have done better - some of those claims may even be true in some situations. None of that is so different to the present in some ways, as grieving families sometimes deny the reality that their beloved did so something very silly and ended up dead.

 

But overall taking the human element of controlling something we are ill equipped for will be a win for the human race as a whole. Albeit a rather hollow and joyless one...

 

 

[rockershovel]

I don't know much about the Flea in question, it is dismantled and hanging in the rafters of a barn in the Cambridge area, where it has been for many years. I don't believe any of the surviving family have ever seen it assembled.

 

The Shuttleworth Collection have a complete HM-14 which is described on their webpage as "not airworthy". Considering some of the things they fly there, it must be a highly dangerous piece of kit!

[rockershovel]

Re self-driving cars judging priorities, that Mr Asimov pretty much "wrote the book" on THAT subject.

 

IIRC,

(1) a robot may not harm a human being or through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm

(2) a robot must obey orders given to it by a human being, subject to (1)

(3) a robot must protect its own existence subject to (1) and (2)

 

Asimov wrote a series of short stories (which have no real relationship at all to the Will Smith film) revolving around robots behaving in unforeseen or counter-intuitive ways due to inherent limitations or internal conflicts within them - for example, a robot circling an object it had been ordered to collect, because the object was dangerous and the robot had a strong self-preservation drive due to its replacement cost, so it became trapped at the locus of points of equal potential..

[BG John]

Re self-driving cars judging priorities, that Mr Asimov pretty much "wrote the book" on THAT subject.

 

IIRC,

(1) a robot may not harm a human being or through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm

(2) a robot must obey orders given to it by a human being, subject to (1)

(3) a robot must protect its own existence subject to (1) and (2)

 

Asimov wrote a series of short stories (which have no real relationship at all to the Will Smith film)

I haven't read the books, but the film showed how those rules could be replaced, and the consequences of it. Aren't the military keen on developing autonomous killing machines?