Autonomous Trucking 142
An anonymous reader writes We've heard about all the effort going into self-driving cars, but what about the massive fleet of trucks we use to deliver goods around the country? Well, Mercedes is trying to tackle that problem. They have just demonstrated an autonomous 18-wheeler on the German Autobahn. It's clearly a long-term project; they named it "Future Truck 2025," as an unsubtle reminder that this tech needs a lot of development before it's ready for common use. "Special cameras and multiple radar systems watch the road, the sides of the road, and cars and trucks behind the vehicle. Future Truck is also envisioned to communicate with other vehicles and connect to growing sources of online information as Big Data balloons on the road. ... Many of the component parts to put a vehicle like this into production are already available in trucks on the market: Systems that help drivers keep their distance from other drivers, active braking assistance, guidance and mapping systems, and fine-tuned cruise control and tons of other hi-tech tchotchke."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"In 2025, they'll be promoted to "transport managers."
And then, around 2030, to "route supervisors".
Re: (Score:2)
"In 2025, they'll be promoted to "transport managers."
They'll be demoted to 'unpaid auxiliary worker' or ' on a loooong unpaid break' during the time the autopilot is active.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1.8 million drivers will lose their job. (Score:1)
But I cant wait to see the rules list to replace years of pull 80,000 LBS over Mountains in the snow.
And I cant wait to see the computer chain up.
Re:1.8 million drivers will lose their job. (Score:5, Insightful)
But I cant wait to see the rules list to replace years of pull 80,000 LBS over Mountains in the snow.
And I cant wait to see the computer chain up.
The automatic trucks can be stopped miles away from the snow, patiently waiting for many hours without getting tired or running into problems with rules about allowed hours behind the wheel. Then when conditions are better, the automated trucks can form a train behind the automated snowplow/salt truck and trudge through the roads at 10mph for hours while remaining 100% vigilant at monitoring road conditions and the truck's reaction to the road -- to the point where any slippage of any wheel on the truck or trailer can be detected and compensated for. A professional driver might be able to do better in some conditions after a good night's sleep, but not when he's already exhausted from spending hours sitting in the truck waiting for the roads to be open, then hours more trudging along slowly in the snow.
For chains, many roads that have chain restrictions (at least in California) already have chain installers waiting on snowy days to help motorists that don't know want (or don't know how) to chain up their own car -- these same crews could be used to chain up trucks.
Or automatic chains [onspot.com] can be used.
Re: (Score:2)
Or automatic chains can be used.
Holy crap, that's about the simplest thing that does something slick like that I've ever seen. And if you get on eBay you get many fat pictures that show you precisely how they're put together.
dur, edit (Score:2)
s/eBay/Youtube/
You know, $BIGSITE
Re: (Score:2)
Then when conditions are better, the automated trucks can form a train behind the automated snowplow
Here's a better Idea: Drive those trucks to a REAL TRAIN depot and get them off our roads.
The amount of long haul that is done by trucks in this country is ridiculous, dangerous, and unsustainable. Our roads are being beaten to dust by an industry that doesn't pay taxes at a rate anywhere near sufficient to cover the damage it causes [vabike.org].
We should be mandating rapid train routes for any transport distance greater than 500 miles, with computerized and mostly automated loading and unloading facilities instead
Re: (Score:2)
That's great, right up to the point where you don't have the train routes and capacity to handle the loads we currently carry. I can promise you that if it was cheaper to send cargo by train, we would already do it. There is already too much train traffic on the rails, especially on oil/coal routes and along the high-traffic metro corridors.
Given the cost of time and the cost of last mile (or in many cases, the cost of the last 200-500 miles), and the cost to install new track, trucking will be with us for
Re: (Score:2)
We do have the train routes, railroads have been rail-banking surpluss rail lines for years because truck traffic
took all the loads. But in most cases the rail is still in place, and bringing it up to standards is cheaper
than rebuilding all of our freeways every 5 years just to keep truck drivers employed.
Re: (Score:1)
Nonsense, not a barrier to automated trucking at all.
Automated rucks can be used in the 99% of cases where this issue doesn't apply. And consider the possibilty of automated 24x7 plowing, salting and snow removal trucks, no need for human crew that gets tired.
this is definitely the future of cargo transport, including automated freight trains
Re:1.8 million drivers will lose their job. (Score:4, Insightful)
As a truck driver, I think your 99% is a little high. Train drivers, for example, do not have to deal with almost all the situational problems that truck drivers do, and their profession is only just starting to become autonomous, and only in a few limited cases.
I agree it is probably the future of cargo transport... but if we're using automated cargo transport, I think we could come up with a better solution than just big automaton trucks on the road.
Re: (Score:1)
Automatically chaining up is trivial. My friend's F-350 has OnSpot chains that chain and de-chain the tires with a flick of a switch. A computer doing this isn't hard.
Of course, computers will be more useful in the snow than a person. They can communicate with nearby vehicles to check status, and if there is a white-out, can shut down, resuming the trip when conditions are passable. People doing that results in parties... Donner parties.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Min wage when the truck can be haling stuff that is over 2-3 times there yearly pay will lead to stuff disappearing / the lowest trained people taking over when the computer fails over.
Old news (Score:2)
http://www.independent.co.uk/l... [independent.co.uk]
http://www.greenfleeteurope.co... [greenfleeteurope.com]
(etc.)
Highway Only to Speed Deployment (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A trucker who experienced an incidence every 100,000 miles or so would be out of trucking in less than 6 months... or about 300,000 miles.
Most truckers have driven -millions- of miles incident free.
Lets see .. what did I experience in less than 1 hour of driving down an interstate last week?
1. Multiple trucks rapidly changing lanes, in traffic, without indicating because the truck ahead of them was doing maybe 5 mph slower than they wanted to be, and they was "just" enough room between cars in the next lane over. (And I have experienced this in heavy rain just as I was about to pass truck)
2. Multiple trucks attempting to pass other trucks, but totally underestimating the power they have and causing r
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah .. none of these were actual "incidents",
They're all moving violations with associated penalties if prosecuted. They could all reasonably be considered "incidents". The only thing that prevented them from becoming collisions was probably defensive driving on the part of others.
Re: (Score:2)
Fucking hell drinkpoo, get a grip. People who drive for a living generally are better at it, and driving a truck is harder than driving a car.
The only problems truck drivers have on the road are vehicles other than trucks (99.9% of the time). Making it an "us vs them" issue is simplistic and childish.
Re: (Score:2)
Fucking hell drinkpoo, get a grip. People who drive for a living generally are better at it,
That might have been true, once. But record numbers of truckers have very little experience. Even if they want to be better at it, they don't yet know how. And frankly, I have seen too much bullshit driving from clearly inattentive truckers to believe your unsupported nonsense.
and driving a truck is harder than driving a car.
So what? Lots of things are harder than other things, that's not an excuse for doing them wrong — especially when the lives of others depend on you doing them right.
The only problems truck drivers have on the road are vehicles other than trucks (99.9% of the time).
Snicker snort. The biggest problem truck drivers have on the ro
Re: (Score:2)
But record numbers of truckers have very little experience.
What? Are you just saying that there are more truck drivers than there used to be?
So what? Lots of things are harder than other things, that's not an excuse for doing them wrong
Someone has to drive trucks, and driving trucks well is difficult. If you make only expert truck drivers allowed to drive, then you'll have a whole host of goods undelivered. Sometimes you've got to use what you've got.
The biggest problem truck drivers have on the roa
Re: (Score:2)
Here, try this article and its comments [fleetowner.com].
Re: (Score:2)
You didn't reply to the AC's post. They were not incidents, they were potential incidents. If a trucker had an incident every 100,000 miles, they would not be a trucker for long.
I'm not excusing bad driving, there's loads of that about. However, your estimation that truckers generally have more than one incident every 100,000 miles on average is wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
A trucker who experienced an incidence every 100,000 miles or so would be out of trucking in less than 6 months... or about 300,000 miles.
A trucker driving 60 mph 24/7 would not drive 300k miles in six months.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First off, the ping rate for auto traffic is an enormous number of pulse durations or return times -- the radar will ignore returns coming back more than a couple of microseconds after it sends its last ping, and only needs to ping every few tens of milliseconds. That's a window of less than 0.1%.
If a car detects a return in a "forbidden" time slot, it can just switch to not using that frequency. Or use the kind of random backoff that Ethernet has been using now for forty years.
And that's just two solutio
Re: (Score:3)
I've said for a long time that I would much rather be driving next to an automated vehicle that only experiences an "incidents" once every 100,000 miles or so
I'm a trucker. I've driven over 2 million miles accident free. Many truckers have. An incident every 100,000 miles would be one a year for me and at that rate I'd hand in my license.
truck hijacking (Score:1)
id expect that trucks, especially out west would be susceptable to hijacks. thieves might be more inclined to try if there is no witness at the location and police response times would be long.
Re: (Score:2)
Where will this truckers work? (Score:3)
That would replace millions of drivers where are they going to find employment?
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
More logical application (Score:2, Informative)
Trucks represent a more logical application of autonomous driving. Three reasons that come to mind right off the bat - 1- Big trucks represent a significant capital investment, therefore incorporating self driving tech represents a lower percentage cost increase. 2- Big potential to actually save money for the trucking fleet. Payback time frame may be fairly short. 3 - Potential to reduce or eliminate driver fatigue issues. About a half dozen other good reasons are popping into my head.
If we're talking long haul freight ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Why not just start with self driving trains. It would be a whole lot simpler for much the same result.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Look at what happened on one existing self-driving train system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2009_Washington_Metro_train_collision
Even in the simplest possible scenario (closed and tightly controlled metro system), the biggest self-driving train system in North America (not sure about the rest of the world) STILL wasn't able to avoid a fatal accident. This accident makes me wonder if it's simply beyond the capability of humanity to engineer a complex, self-driving train system that won't malfunction and cause fatal accidents.
So how many fatal accidents in manned trains? Let's cut this line of argument short and go straight to the obvious solution: abandon all technology. You go first.
alternative already exists (Score:1)
It is called 'The Train'. Why send a driver on 1000+mile trips when you can put the load on a train and collect it at the other end and have a short journey fro mthe railhead to the final destination.
The distance to railheads in some parts of the US might be a problem but in Europe this might not be.
There was a cartoon in a paper many years ago where a collection of self driving cars were assembled into a 'train'. The Doh moment made me laugh.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a cartoon in a paper many years ago where a collection of self driving cars were assembled into a 'train'. The Doh moment made me laugh.
The advantage of the cars in this model is that they speed up unloading. Go and watch a freight train being unloaded some time, it's a massive endeavour. Now imagine if each of the trucks could just drive off along the roads on its own as soon as the train arrived at its destination.
Re: (Score:2)
.....
The advantage of the cars in this model is that they speed up unloading. Go and watch a freight train being unloaded some time, it's a massive endeavour. Now imagine if each of the trucks could just drive off along the roads on its own as soon as the train arrived at its destination.
Consider extensive automation of the loading and contrast with the extensive automation and risks of
automated trucking.
Scheduling driver pickup and routing is the nut none have cracked yet.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to drive a route, Bury St Edmunds, Kettering, Winchester, then back to Bury St Edmunds every day (along with London on thursdays). It was in a big artic. At the first stop, I was unloaded and reloaded (with tyres), at the second I changed trailers. 340 miles every day, and I was always within tacho law. (for Americans, drivers in the EU are strictly regulated on the hours they can work(
I don't know what you're suggesting as a replacement for this kind of system.
The warehouse in Bury st Edmunds is
Might as well go back to rail (Score:2)
If they make the truckers redundant then we might as well go back to rail for most of our overland transport. Its much more effificient and can ber electified, so a lot less CO2 produced.
The main reason that trucks replaced rail was because of the teamsters.
Re: (Score:3)
Rail does not go to the final point of delivery. Even with rail you have to move it to truck for final delivery. The cost of moving from rail to truck needs to come down a lot. Some of this is done with container shipping. Still in most cases it is easier to centrally load a truck have it driver over a couple of states then do local deliveries to many places. You do this with many trucks from a central warehouse. The cost these days is in loading, unloading and managing what is in the shipment.
Re: (Score:2)
The main reason that trucks replaced rail was because of the
.. enormous subsidy that the USA put into highways starting in the 1950s. It was ostensibly to create a transportation system that would not fold up following a nuclear attack, but like all such things it took on a life of its own.
If you haven't seen this ... (Score:2)
better idea (Score:1)
Use railroads instead. It's much easier to automate. Mixing human operators and autonomous machines on the highways doesn't sound too palatable.
Re: (Score:1)
we're already doing that, I live near the rail hub of the USA and see huge trains full of truck trailers daily.
Someone's going to have a lot of fun (Score:2)
Inherent problems (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
are they going to make the trucks self loading as well?,
Well, we do have the technology. We could have pallets with big fat QR codes slapped on the side (and by "big fat" I mean three inches or so) and robotic pallet jacks unloading the trucks, or trailers with floors that would shove pallets out the back of the truck automatically, and trucks loaded in proper order for that to make sense. For stuff that's delivered by the truckload, a whole trailer or shipping container could be unloaded and just dropped off to be dealt with by someone other than the trucker en
Re: (Score:1)
Well, we do have the technology. We could have pallets with big fat QR codes slapped on the side (and by "big fat" I mean three inches or so) and robotic pallet jacks unloading the trucks, or trailers with floors that would shove pallets out the back of the truck automatically, and trucks loaded in proper order for that to make sense. For stuff that's delivered by the truckload, a whole trailer or shipping container could be unloaded and just dropped off to be dealt with by someone other than the trucker entirely.
Lots of loads can't be palletised. There would also have to be massive investment by the delivery locations as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of loads can't be palletised.
Sure, big stuff. Either a trailer gets dropped off for a time, a massive pallet is invented, or a standard for crane attachment is developed.
Re: (Score:2)
Just increasing the fuel capacity seems to be a lot easier.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
£10 surcharge is equivalent to the tax on £15.63 of fuel... somehow, I am guessing that 2400 L costs more than that.
Unless there is some sort of tax recapture reciprocity/equalization between the UK and the rest of Europe, that fee doesn't do much of anything to level your playing field.
Re: (Score:1)
Prepare Now (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The US needs medical care for all (Score:2)
The job based system needs to go.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, clearly we must protect obsolete industries at any cost.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not about protecting the obsolete industries, because the transition will be inevitable. But we really must begin preparing the public safety net, because the "everyone that wants a job can find one" idea is going to go away, the more we can automate the low-skill work. We can college educate more and more people, we can teach them to be designers and engineers and scientists, but there are still going to be more and more people that just can't find a place. And we are going to have to be prepared, as
Over 3.5 million truckers in the US (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, I am not saying that I am against this technology or the vast multitude of other technologies that are replacing formerly human work--I think technology is a great thing which, used properly, can make life dramatically more enjoyable. However, I don't believe man at the individual level is infinitely adaptable to system that requires he/she hold an economic worth in order to survive (and live a good life) when technology is increasingly rendering nature's several billion year old creations uncompetitive. Our economic system as it currently is will leave these people unable to support themselves, and then you have poverty, crime, and death (and since I have empathy and I am not a sociopath, I think this needs to be avoided...)
Some US conservatives I know claim that this will not happen and man is infinitely adaptable as an individual (and a very small handful of others say the poverty, crime, and death is a good solution). Some US liberals I know claim that we should just drop technology altogether and return to a "simpler time." All three of these "solutions" are incredibly stupid, so fortunately most respond with "I don't know." I personally look forward to a future where both technology and an "innate human worth" (rather than a solely "economic worth") can be embraced, but that inevitably means many people won't be working or will be working very little.
But if the many "trust fund baby"/never-had-to-work-a-day-in-their-lives people that are peppered about my area are any indication of what this future will be like, then it doesn't sound so bad: writing poetry or doing other forms of artwork all day, running very small (and unprofitable) "hobby farms," socializing all day, etc etc (no, they didn't turn to drugs or other antisocial activities because there was "nothing to do"...that stuff stems from poverty, not unemployment)
Re: (Score:2)
There are apparently over 3.5 million professional truck drivers in the US--that's over 1 out of every 100 Americans
holy shit. 1% of us wasting our lives doing a job that a train could do at least 50% of the time. land of the free, indeed.
Re: (Score:1)
deadliest job in USA, over 12% of all work related deaths are of truckers and that usually involving cars. good riddance to people killer
all those lamp lighters had to find another job too, such is progress.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
only immigrants (especially illegals) make the USA population grow, without them it would shrink
The reality is world population will peak about 2070 and then shrink, your claims of how many people can be sustained are without foundation. that is a pure engineering problem with known solutions. Resources aren't disappearing, there is fuel for millenia and any minerals don't disappear. Even the hype about helium is nonsense, most helium just vented from wells at the present. We only have engineering prob
Re: (Score:1)
Not bullshit at all, you mention distribution problem which is just another engineering problem. Then you mention small percentage of people who are in prison for stealing, not relevant at all since most somehow get by without doing that. though if we want to make more opportunity for people then we're back to engineering problems again.
really, it's so simple, while between your ears you make things needlessly complex
Rail? (Score:4, Insightful)
What I do not understand about Germany - indeed this whole region of Europe (I'm in Switzerland) is this: We have excellent rail systems, why not put long-distance cargo on the trains? There are various initiatives to do exactly this, but they meet with a wide range of passive and active resistance. Fact is, given the existing rail system, using trucks for long-distance freight makes no sense at all.
One of the sources of resistance are the truck drivers, but their profession is doomed anyway for long distance transport. The automated trucks are a logical extension of automated vehicles - heck, they may happen before cars. But putting an individual engine on every container is anything but efficient - maybe this will actually be the impetus for getting the stuff on the rails...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
That second part is not true. Bulgaria (which is where the Turkish drivers have to go through) have an excellent rail system, even for freight. Thing is.. Turkish drivers and their unions do not want to pay. Instead they cause incidents daily, run cars off the road, and kill people, violate required rest periods etc...
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Rail? (Score:2)
As the previous AC post alluded, the particular requirements of freight and passenger transport don't mix well. The United States moves a massive amount of freight by rail, with very few long-distance rail lines being totally dedicated to passenger transport. Unfortunately, the unique requirements for passenger and freight traffic don't mix well.
Freight trains travel at lower speeds than the ideal passenger train, and acceleration and deceleration is extremely slow and inefficient. In the USA, the rail line
Re: (Score:2)
What I do not understand about Germany - indeed this whole region of Europe (I'm in Switzerland) is this: We have excellent rail systems, why not put long-distance cargo on the trains? There are various initiatives to do exactly this, but they meet with a wide range of passive and active resistance. Fact is, given the existing rail system, using trucks for long-distance freight makes no sense at all.
Most major rail lines in Western Europe are running at full capacity.
"Autonomous" mining and logging trucks... (Score:2)
...have been around for years. I know they don't generally share the road (except with hapless interlopers who have to get out of the way) but there's still been much knowledge gleaned there. So the 'science' is already eay more advanced than with autonomous cars, for example.
Video of Army autonomous vehicle test (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Maximum Overdrive. (Score:2)
Finally an excuse to re-make the terrible movie Maximum Overdrive. If you're one of the 99% of the population that's never heard of it, it's a movie where the trucks go crazy, drive themselves, and try to kill all of humanity. An interesting concept, but horribly executed. Based on a book by Stephen King, some nut let him direct it.
No subject needed (Score:2)
just another case of technology run amok! (Score:2)
Has nobody at Mercedes considered the collateral damage their "innovation" will cause? Do they not realize what this will do to the truck stop blowjob market?
Will somebody *please* think of the Lizards?
p.s.: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP7sSk3rwm0 [youtube.com]
We in the USA better get EU like healthcare by the (Score:2)
We in the USA better get EU like healthcare by then or the this automation will lead to lot's of people being out of work and in some places having to goto jail / prison just to have a doctor.
I for one welcome our Truckatron overlords... (Score:2)
...because of the lack of concern an automaton has with penis size. In those long upgrades where trucks are grinding slowly up the hill, we will no longer have to sit behind that 20 mph truck ignoring the 'Trucks use right lane' signage in vainly attempting to get past the 19.5 mph truck operating in the designated lane.
Better yet (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I feel a little bit of awe every time I watch a truck driver backing a trailer up to a dock. It's an impressive skill. However, I'm quite certain that this is one area where humans don't stand a chance against an automated system with access to radar/ultrasound/camera data from multiple angles. Same thing, I'm sure, for dropping and hooking. No matter how good you are at what you do, you have only two eyes, constrained to look in a single direction at a time, and you can't pay close attention to more than a