California Governor Jerry Brown rode in a self-driving car with Google co-founder Sergey Brin on their way to Google headquarters, where Brown signed legislation creating a framework for introducing driverless cars into California by 2015. Meanwhile, automakers are incrementally automating driving with the introduction of a variety of new technologies.
On October 23, Volvo and the Embassy of Sweden are co-sponsoring a Washington, DC seminar to discuss the policy implications of autonomous vehicles. The seminar will include speakers from Volvo, Google, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and the Center for Automotive Research. The Antiplanner can’t make it, but readers in the Washington DC area may want to reserve a spot.
Volvo’s contribution to the technology focuses on road trains, in which a lead vehicle is driven by a professional and other vehicles can follow without active drivers. The system has been tested in Spain with just 20-foot gaps between vehicles. Volvo hopes the system will also improve fuel economy by about 20 percent.
You name got lots of toll free numbers and email address also to the pharmacies of discount levitra. Couples counselling is nothing new or out of the mood and spills water on all your plans of enjoying the quiet http://frankkrauseautomotive.com/page/5/?s=cars&car=1&stock&search_condition&search_make&search_year&search_model&search_dropdown_Min_price=0&search_dropdown_Max_price=0&search_dropdown_tran&search_dropdown_miles&am levitra uk serene view of your favorite sports. In the 19th century, authorities promoted a new theory, claiming that impotence levitra online browse to find out more was a male disorder caused by insufficient self-control and sexual misconduct. Deficiency in check that now discount viagra cialis this hormone is a serious problem in men because of its dynamic elements Sildenafil Citrate, which is an excellent component that helps in responding to one’s stimulation.
Meanwhile, the latest Honda Accord comes with a “lane watch” system that allows people to see potential blind spots in a rear-view camera when they are changing lanes. Among other things, this could help prevent accidents that take place when cars turn right into the path of a cyclist riding on the right side of the road.
Not to be outdone, Ford has introduced its 2013 Fusion, whose SE model may be the lowest-priced car on the market available with lane keeping, adaptive cruise control, collision avoidance, a blind-spot information system, and parking assist. A Fusion with all these driver-assist technologies is under $30,000; the sensors required for these features make up most of the package that is required for a fully driverless car. Some predict the Fusion will outsell the Camry, currently the best-selling car in America, and if it does it will partly be because Americans actually want cars that help them drive.
He’s driving a Volvo. Why doesn’t he just wear Doc Martins and call himself a lesbian.
Because he doesn’t have the right haircut.
Apparently only the C30 is gay. A Volvo saved my life once, so I can’t hate on Volvo.
“this could help prevent accidents that take place when cars turn right into the path of a cyclist riding on the right side of the road.”
No, it will not. The cause of these entirely preventable accidents is simple. The cyclist is not in the flow of traffic, because of the bizarre but widely held superstition that unless the car/truck driver can do more than 15mph then it will take too long to get anywhere. No amount of technology is going to fix this – it’s a quasi religious belief. The cyclist has to stay out from the kerb, in such a way as to force motorists to make a deliberate overtaking manoeuvre – women, being on the whole more thoughtful, do not want to block the movement of faster vehicles, which is why they are over-represented in fatalities. If the cyclist cycles close to the kerb, then eventually, these two streams of traffic, moving at different speeds under the same traffic control, will collide. If the collision is a heavy vehicle, without the necessary anti-crush guards, it doesn’t matter what the speeds of the vehicles are. If the cyclist goes under the wheels, they will likely die.
unless the car/truck driver can do more than 15mph then it will take too long to get anywhere. No amount of technology is going to fix this – it’s a quasi religious belief.
Yes. What’s your sense of the reason for the sudden increase in deaths in Britain, then? Texing?
DS
“Yes. What’s your sense of the reason for the sudden increase in deaths in Britain, then? Texing?”
Wearing big hats and boots?
I guess you mean ‘texting’.
Fatalities are up in the UK, but fatalities per cyclist are down, as the number of cyclists is way up.
Fatalities go as (number of cyclists)^0.4. So fatality rate goes as (number of cyclists) ^ -0.6.
http://transportpolicy.org.uk/TwoWheels/BicycleSafety/BicycleSafety.htm
The most significant reason for choosing expense of a car over a bike for transport is the car’s ability to move much, much faster than 15 mph. If all traffic speed were limited to 15 mph then we would all save ourselves a lot of money and cycle.
There is a proven technology for preventing these accidents, its called a separated, eight foot wide bike lane. Most cities can pour eight foot bike lanes for a couple dollars a linear foot. Crushed granite, even more cheaply.
“The most significant reason for choosing expense of a car over a bike for transport is the car’s ability to move much, much faster than 15 mph. If all traffic speed were limited to 15 mph then we would all save ourselves a lot of money and cycle.”
For longer journeys, for example between towns and cities, speed is important. For local journeys, the ability to get to the front door is important.
Bicycles are good for local journeys. Buses can move people efficiently at high speed. Cars do not do well in town, causing congestion and blight. But cars work well as battering rams, forcing cyclists off the road. “Why don’t you cycle to work?” – “I don’t like the traffic.”
“There is a proven technology for preventing these accidents, its called a separated, eight foot wide bike lane. Most cities can pour eight foot bike lanes for a couple dollars a linear foot. Crushed granite, even more cheaply.”
In most urban streets, there isn’t space for an 8 ft bicycle lane. And it doesn’t help the cyclists to turn left (in the USA), which every car driver can do as a matter of course.
“the bizarre but widely held superstition that unless the car/truck driver can do more than 15mph then it will take too long to get anywhere”
Agreed. It all comes down to impatience in our face-paced, hyper-caffeinated, instant-gratification society.
The speed limit on Seattle arterials; it takes four minutes assuming no stops to travel two miles; at 15 mph, it’s eight minutes. What’s four minutes? Seriously? In a technology-infused, time-wasting world where zombies squander hours on Angry Birds, what is four minutes?
Today a car ahead of me suddenly slammed the breaks in the travel lane to turn right; he was too impatient to take a few seconds to get behind the bike in the bus/turning lane and unsuccessfully tried to overtake the bike.
Slow down, people. That speeding saves time is a complete illusion.
Geesh. Crappy editing. “Fast-paced” and the speed limit on arterials is 30mph.
Come on Frank, are you really implying we should all just drive around at 15mph? Are you one of those guys doing under the speed limit in the left lane on the freeway? Maybe other people don’t have all that spare time.
To answer your questions, no and no.
My message was impatience leads to accidents. I’m talking about urban surface streets where slowing to 15 for a short distance isn’t the end of the world. I’m talking about the fact that even if you slowed to 15 for a distance of two miles, you’re only losing four minutes. FOUR minutes. BFD.
Speaking of SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT, that’s one of my pet peeves, that and drivers in Portland and Seattle not knowing how to merge, causing them to bolt out of the transition lane across five lanes of traffic to park in the far left passing lane.
I follow the rules of the road and am a very safe and cautious driver, wanting to avoid another accident, which wasn’t my fault; someone turned left in front of me. I drive the speed limit in the transition lane, and move left only to pass. I don’t text or talk and drive. Etc.
(Speaking of left turns, they’re a major cause of accidents. UPS uses software that drastically reduces drivers having to make left turns, which improves safety and shaves nearly 30 million delivery miles, thereby reducing fuel consumption.)
Ah gotcha Frank. I agree with your points after all. My bad for hastily jumping to conclusions.
Check the seismic reports again:
My message was impatience leads to accidents. I’m talking about urban surface streets where slowing to 15 for a short distance isn’t the end of the world. I’m talking about the fact that even if you slowed to 15 for a distance of two miles, you’re only losing four minutes. FOUR minutes. BFD.
Yes. Slower speeds in denser city areas actually moves traffic more efficiently. Less stop-start and fewer accidents. Which is why street designs are changing.
DS
because of the bizarre but widely held superstition that unless the car/truck driver can do more than 15mph then it will take too long to get anywhere
Oh, ok then. I guess you should relay this finding to people driving on the freeway and elsewhere. We should all be driving at parking lot speeds to accommodate a few selfish cyclists.
“Oh, ok then. I guess you should relay this finding to people driving on the freeway and elsewhere.”
That’s a strawman. We’re not talking about freeways. The ‘accidents’ being referred to happen on urban roads, where the speed limit is slow. In the UK, the urban speed limit is 30mph, which is much faster than any bicycle. The fastest a bicycle can go is 20mph, and for the slower models (mountain bikes, Dutch bikes, 15mph). This then forces cyclists towards the kerb, where they are harder for car drivers to see, and where car drivers are tempted to push past.
Roundabouts are a real problem for cyclists. As the cars approach the yield line, the drivers look for approaching cars. Cyclists, closer to the kerb, are often not seen until they gracefully pirouette over the car’s bonnet.
” We should all be driving at parking lot speeds to accommodate a few selfish cyclists.”
No. It is a major disease of industrial countries that small fortunes are spent on cars, including sending large amounts of money overseas to pay for oil. The politicians can lecture about protecting national sovereignty, but then they volunteer to make the whole country utterly dependent on other countries. Cyclists seem to me to be part of the solution.
There planners go again, desperately fomenting against the automobile, referring to it as a “disease” and implying that people have some kind of irrational addiction to driving.
It has probably never occurred to you that people drive because it is a convenient and fast way to travel in our modern, decentralized world. You’d rather spin fantastic conspiracies in which we are all slaves to our automobiles and they are slowly sucking away our very souls.
On a more serious note, the solution to the bike/car problem is to separate bike paths from roads. Very simple, and not that expensive. There’s no reason bikes and cars should be sharing the same asphalt, and in cases where there is no other choice, like city centers, the solution is safety training for cyclists. How many bike accidents are caused by arrogant cyclists who ignore signs, zip around thru traffic, a foot from a 3000lb car, and then complain when something bad happens?
“There planners go again, desperately fomenting against the automobile, referring to it as a “disease†and implying that people have some kind of irrational addiction to driving.
“It has probably never occurred to you that people drive because it is a convenient and fast way to travel in our modern, decentralized world. You’d rather spin fantastic conspiracies in which we are all slaves to our automobiles and they are slowly sucking away our very souls.”
I think you’re speaking for yourself.
I certainly don’t see it that way.
Cars are too large for narrow urban roads. They also take up too much space on express ways. Cars increase the dependency of a country on other counties, many of which are not strategic partners. Cars pollute. Are any of these things not true?
Car journeys can be split into sections where everyone moves together (express ways) and sections where people have a wide variety of route choices (urban roads).
Buses are the most efficient way of moving people together, but the problem is connecting people to their origins and destinations in sensible way – very few people end up with bus stops at their origins and destinations.
Contrarily, bicycles go directly door-to-door, but they are slow, and vulnerable in high speed traffic.
A possible solution is to merge buses and bicycles. The buses cover the arterial traffic sections and the bicycles are deployed to deal with the shorter & lower speed sections. The buses carry folding bicycles internally, fixed frame bicycles on an external trailer, and bicycles can be hired at bus stations. Unfortunately, Antiplanner’s electronic solution does not include any speed reductions, and is of very little use for this application.
“On a more serious note, the solution to the bike/car problem is to separate bike paths from roads.”
For militant car drivers it may be some kind of a solution – it gets the cyclists out of the way, so that the car drivers can get to work 60 seconds earlier – although I can guarantee that when cyclists don’t use these lanes, so patronisingly provided for them, the car drivers will whine like crazy. For the cyclists, it is much harder to see the attraction. Things like turning left are much harder, since the cyclist has to turn from the left most lane, but your bicycle lane is on the right.
Francis,
Where I live in the Seabrook/Clear lake area of Houston, we have many miles of separated eight foot wide bike lanes. Many of them are alonside arterials which flow at forty to fifty miles per hour(NASA road, Kirby Road, Old Galveston Road). On such arterials, I don’t execute my left from the left lane of three or four lanes. I stop at the corner and cross at the crosswalk on the green light. Then I wait at that corner and cross again on that green. It takes only slightly longer and is way safer than making a left from the middle on the green light.
Francis, you want to turn the UK into some loonie anti-auto utopia, go ahead. The USA is not London, and people in Europe love their cars too. Sadly, for the birthplace of the Magna Carta, Britian has been at the forefront of a multitude of petty tyrannies inflicted on its own people. I suppose badgering them out of their cars doesn’t even score very high on that list.
There is a difference between having a couple of beers and being an alcoholic.
You don’t seem to under stand that the same applies for auto use too!