Singapore To Use Driverless Buses 'From 2022'

Singapore plans to introduce driverless buses on its public roads by 2022. From a report: The government says they will be piloted in three new neighbourhoods which will have less-crowded roads designed to accommodate the buses. The buses will be used to help residents travel in their communities, and to nearby train and bus stations. Densely-populated Singapore hopes driverless technology will help the country manage its land constraints and manpower shortages. "The autonomous vehicles will greatly enhance the accessibility and connectivity of our public transport system, particularly for the elderly, families with young children and the less mobile," the Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan said. The autonomous buses are expected to complement existing manned bus services, and will initially operate during off-peak hours. Additionally, the government plans to let commuters hail on-demand shuttles using their mobile phones.

Driverless trolleybuses

[b0s0z0ku]

Driverless vehicles could follow specific routes and get power from wires -- they could have almost no battery capacity. Minimizing the meet for batteries could be environmentally great. Basically trams without the rails.

Re:

[iTrawl]

One could even suggest the paths be made of metal and do away with the clever AI. Something like the DLR in London.

Re:

[SirSlud]

That's significantly more expensive.

Re:

[mjwx]

Driverless vehicles could follow specific routes and get power from wires -- they could have almost no battery capacity. Minimizing the meet for batteries could be environmentally great. Basically trams without the rails.

There are already trams that run on wheels. Same overhead wires, but a converted bus underneath like this one from Holland [wikimedia.org]. I believe that there are even ones that can cross from road to rail.

However in Singapore I still see a Chinese taxi driver hanging out the window shouting "what you do, lah" at the bus. Seriously though, this could work in Singapore because they have such little traffic because the number of vehicle registrations they give out are so low. So it's a perfect proof of concept that can

driverless is stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

This is stupid. Autonomous vehicles are nowhere close to being ready. Many engineers believe that driverless cars just aren't possible, yet they're being ignored. Cab anyone justify that?

Re:

[b0s0z0ku]

Fixed route in a city with no snow would be a nearly perfect test application. Basically a tram without tracks.

Re:

[DontBeAMoran]

Hum, déjà vu.

Re:

[MightyYar]

That's misleading. A human-driven truck ran into a stopped automated bus at creeping speed. No injuries and there was a human "attendant" on board, which obviously did not help since the bus already detected the hazard and stopped.

Re:

[fluffernutter]

But it still emphasizes the issue at the heart of self-driving. The truck driver has probably made this maneuver successfully hundreds of times because humans understand the situation well and can anticipate the movement of the truck and how do prevent it from turning into an accident. How can a self driving vehicle be on a public road if it cannot be like a human in a very straightforward way? It doesn't really matter what the law is here, self driving shouldn't be turning normal human driving scenarios

Re:

[MightyYar]

Please... humans crash into each other several times a minute. The automatic bus in question was back on the road the next day and there have been no further incidents. Perfection is not the bar here, human drivers are the bar to meet or exceed. It's not as high a bar as you are implying.

Re:

[fluffernutter]

Funny, the last time I got in an accident, no one said "you know what, many people get in worse accidents. We're not going to penalize you for this one."

Re:

[fluffernutter]

I'm not sure what to make of your comment since I'm holding self-driving to the same standard as other drivers. If someone stopped behind a truck backing up I would call them an idiot too. You realize, the only reason why this technology is 'working' now is because the accident has made everyone shit-scared of these buses and they are tip toeing around them. At some point someone is going to get in an accident with another human driver solely because they were worried about avoiding the self-driving vehi

Re:

[MightyYar]

If you want to change the rules, then change the rules and the programmers will make the appropriate changes. Don't blame a robot for taking the laws literally. For this particular robot, they'll change the rules for horn blowing. The trucker is liable, just like if he hit any other immobile object. A robot truck probably would not have backed into the bus.

Once more of these idiot vehicles are released, driving may become more dangerous for everyone.

Oh, please. Pretty soon we'll have data and this kind of absurd statement will die down. Autonomous vehicles will become just another road feature - and

Re:

[fluffernutter]

If self driving vehicles take rules literally, it will make driving impossibly for everyone else. This is a problem with salf-driving cars and not everyone else. This is all I'm saying. If self-driving cars were being put on their own separate track, then fine. But they need to be able to drive with people, and that means they need to anticipate what people will do and not cause in accidents, whether it is their fault or not.

Re:

[fluffernutter]

The person legally at fault is not necessarily the person who caused the accident.

Re:

[fluffernutter]

Pruck drivers have to do these things because of the places businesses need them to load. Roads are not made for truck drivers, especially drop off points in back alleys. Fine then, every city should really be making roads for truck drivers. Let's tear down buildings and widen back alleys. That should only cost a hundred billion dollars or so.

Re:

[SirSlud]

And then resumed a day or two after.

Re:

[fluffernutter]

While I agree, I hear Singapore is very clean and the type of place where lines get repainted and signs fixed in short order. It may be the only place in the world where self driving can work, especially on fixed routes like buses have.

Re: driverless is stupid

[Type44Q]

Can anyone justify that?

Sure; MBA's, marketing drones and politicians - notable programming geniuses, every last one.

Re:

[Neuronwelder]

Not only stupid. But what about crime on unmanned buses? Anything can be hacked. What happens then?

Amazing

[maxbuzz]

Wow! That's amazing. But how did they get driverless buses from 2022?

Woops!

[boudie2]

Singapore has the third highest population density in the world. If a few people get run over and killed that's not a bug that's a feature.

Maybe it will work in Singapore/Not anywhere else

[mykepredko]

Years ago, my brother was involved the design of a light rail program here in Toronto (the "Kenney Line" to Scarborough Town Centre) with the idea that they would run without any transit employees on board.

The idea got nixed when somebody asked what happens if a woman gets assaulted?

Re:

[CastrTroy]

What happens on the subway if a woman (or man) gets assaulted now? The driver isn't going to stop the train and go all the way back to stop them. Last time I was in Toronto, I don't remember seeing security guards on the cars. Don't they just have emergency buttons [theglobeandmail.com] for this very purpose? The train could just stop at the next station until the problem is resolved. Most likely the other passengers would put a stop to any assault, and if they didn't, I don't see how the driver (who might also be a person of

Re:

[mykepredko]

IIRC correctly, a transit employee on the train was sufficient to deter and attack and at least mitigate one if it happens by moving to the car where the problem is happening.

Re:

[fafalone]

Encountered that situation a couple months back in NYC. An off duty detective took out his gun and beat a homeless man with it (with the barrel pointed at me 2' away, yay nypd) for yelling at him. The train was stopped and the conductor came to investigate, as they always do. The situation had ended, and they had both walked away, and it was made very clear to us that if anyone wanted the police called, the train would not be moving. We all shut up and moved on, and it went unreported. One other person got

Re:

[MightyYar]

In NYC, they pay the "conductor" (the guy who closes the doors to separate you from your family) more than a rookie cop. Turn on the automatic doors and put a rookie cop on each train. Problem solved.

Re:

[Kjella]

The idea got nixed when somebody asked what happens if a woman gets assaulted?

Emergency buttons and a live 911 camera feed? With the ability to speak over the intercom to let them know the police is watching them right now and officers are on the way to the next stop. If they're smart they might release the fire alarm so the emergency exists must open, but still. Of course it wouldn't help if the one being assaulted is alone and nobody is there to push the button, but how is that different from a woman assaulted anywhere else? It's not like we can have stewards watching all women at