Radar on cars already exists, you're behind the times mate. The latest cruise control systems run with radar. So for example, cruise used to work solely on a set speed and relied on the driver to apply the brake if there was slower traffic in front etc, which disengaged the cruise. The new systems have a radar sensor in the front grille and you set the required speed and the car slows automatically if a slower vehicle is detected in front, it holds a safe distance behind it and then accelerates back up to the set speed once they moved out of the way. You can set how aggressive you want this function to be to suit your own driving style, so in other words you can set a long distance in front that you want the car to react or a shorter one. So I can get in my car on an A road or motorway, set the speed and not touch the brake or accelerator again until I've exiting the trunk road / motorway as the car does the rest, all I do is steer. The radar also controls the emergency braking function which senses if anything is in front of the car and performs an emergency stop if the driver has not reacted in time. The road conditions are constantly monitored by the wheel sensors so you're wrong on that one aswell mate.
Traditional auto boxes are stone age technology. The modern 'auto's' aren't really auto boxes in the traditional sense, they're merely 6 or 8 speed manuals that are computer controlled. Direct shift boxes don't have a kick down, they just move to the appropriate gear same as you would if you driving it.
that's a totally different and dumb system though.... thats not got any feedback loop so it follows along and sure it speeds up and slows down. its not actually a huge tencial challenge compared to the original cruise control. what you are talking about is presets in the algorithm. its not truely intelligent. there are individual systems for emergency stops too which are using same sensor. again. its not really intelligent. what we are really looking at is a closed loop system where every car is in communication to every other and the roads have hubs that they jump between so its not to globally controlled. then you hope that road conditions allow it to work, that it can then work off the main routes where its not viable to set up like on a b road and then you are hoping the road surfaces are manageable AND that animals and kids running about are safe. It'd sure be a shame if a kid ran out in front of one and it could go a great job saving that one kid and 10 cars behind it pile up. In the end.... the one thing you can't legislate for is the guy in his classic car driving about like a luddite and you've 20 peopel sitting in robot cars being driven mad by the guy. neither can you legislate for the guy who thinks he knows better anyway and wants to undertake the car train then cut it up when a lorry is seen ahead. I think its quite..... funny.... that we are not starting with lorry trains that drive themselves in the left lane and behave.
Problem is self driving cars are they don't think like us. If a dog runs out, will the car swerve? Probably as it'll try and miss it.. But what if it swerves into a lay by with 3 people there and hits them instead? It can only do one thing at a time. On a straight road wth no hazards perfectly fine but you can't account for every action.
yes... how long will they last cos frankly i can see electic drive trains killing all this. linear torque band, always there. the "eco" and the drivers version of electric are very different no?
That would be a good idea. Stop them spending 10 minutes in the fast lane because they've decided to overtake one going 15 yards an hour slower than them.
Nope. You're confusing some sort of sci-fi 'car train' computer controlled mass transport system with individual cars operating within a road system that has both driverless and driven cars. The example you've given of the car stopping suddenly because a kid ran in the road, the current systems would brake the car if the driver failed to react. If cars behind were fitted with the same technology then they'd react to the car that had braked, in the same way as humans do! None of the scenarios you've outlined there, are beyond the current technology Lane change technology - tick Radar controlled sensors - tick Nav - tick Road condition sensors - tick Controlled and emergency braking systems - tick These driverless cars DO exist and are currently in the testing phase.
Electric cars aren't the future of the automotive industry mate, unless there's a massive leap in battery technology that comes from left field, they'll remain the domain of the chunky sweater brigade who like to think they're environmentally friendly - when they're not really contributing much in terms of the carbon footprint. The range makes them virtually useless unless you never want to drive more than 50 miles in any one direction. There's years left in the combustion engine and it's genuine long term successor will be something fresh as opposed to electric imo.
It'd be highly likely to make a better choice than most humans, as it's reaction time and ability to process all the available information would be quicker.
Could we all go out and get pissed and drive home then? That'd breathe new life into the rural pub trade.
Off to test drive a3 and bmw1 on Friday so can compare the 2. Audi is cheaper by a bit so looking more attractive, the 2litre bmw has gone so they have a 1.6 version which gonna drive instead.
Ah ok, let us know how you get on, especially @Red Hadron Collider because he loves all this talk of cars
Meh. They said in the 60's there'd be sentient computers by the millennium. Didn't say which millennium though.
