# The "car train" revisited. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 15, 2009, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381 "2009-01-15T04:10:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Red\_Wiggler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/red_wiggler/32/13190_2.png) [@Red\_Wiggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Wiggler)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/81 "2012-10-19T20:57:51Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > Most Americans (or at least, a large minority) would rather keep their lives in their own hands than trust it to some system, even if the odds are better with the system. I would like to address this particular objection as it is one that pops up with regularity whenever this topic is discussed. As confidence in whatever system we develop grows, and it will, personal distrust will diminish. It’s a natural part of technology evolution. Your grandchildren will be amused, and maybe a little impressed, by the fact that you drove yourself everywhere. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2012, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/82 "2012-10-21T03:06:25Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Plus, if you knew where every car was, you could greatly improve the efficiency of traffic lights. You could delay traffic to prevent jams, keep the lights green in one direction if no traffic was coming towards the side streets, detemine when and how long to turn on left-lane turning signals, etc. you don’t need connectivity to have a reactive traffic light system. This should have been done years ago given the computing power we have to work with. There are certainly some well organized traffic light systems in various cities but I think this is one of those areas where the Federal Government could spend tax money on something with a high ROI. “High tech” traffic light systems should be a priority because it saves time, money and the environment. I’m going out on a limb and suggest that if the technology isn’t already on the shelf it’s a small contract away from happening. It would add considerably to fuel economy across the board regardless of vehicle. There is no excuse for driving from red light to red light to red light to red light to red light on a major road yet I’ve experienced this in cities large and small. My 2C. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2012, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/83 "2012-10-21T03:17:45Z")
The problem with an autonomous system built into a car that allows for close quarter driving is that it can’t be used in all driving conditions. If people get use to seeing their vehicle driving in a linked manner to the car in front then they will not recognize this as a dangerous condition when operating the car themselves. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/84 "2012-10-22T21:18:33Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > you don’t need connectivity to have a reactive traffic light system. This should have been done years ago given the computing power we have to work with… I don’t know if it can be done without connectivity or not but it is indeed an early target in the [new connectivity standards](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2012/10/rita-20121022.html). > [@](#): > > 22 October 2012 > The United States and the European Union (EU) have been working together under a 2009 implementation agreement to develop coordinated research programs to foster international connected vehicle technology and international harmonization of the technology and standards necessary for broad deployment of connected vehicle systems. > > To highlight the progress of this bilateral effort, the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) and the European Commission Directorate General for Communication Networks, Content and Technology (CONNECT) have now published the report “International Deployment of Cooperative Intelligent Transportation Systems: Bilateral Efforts of the European Commission and United States Department of Transportation.” … > > … The Working Group’s specific activity goals are to define and develop an operational concept for an environmental signal phase and timing (SPaT) application and to focus on the development of joint standards for a possible “environmental message set” to support this application. > > Four SPaT applications have been proposed for joint research: Smart Start/Stop Assistant to optimize the automatic start/stop assistant in vehicles in a transparent way to the driver; Energy-Efficient Intersection Control, intended to reduce the number of stops at controlled intersections and to avoid unnecessary acceleration and deceleration; Traffic Information and Strategic Routing to allow reduced congestion and travel times, optimize the network load, and aligns individual route guidance and navigation to infrastructure systems to avoid conflicting driver information; and Eco-Driving Support to assist a driver with information to make better decisions about driving behavior and/or vehicle operation in support of environmental goals (whether personal or system-wide). … ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/85 "2012-10-22T22:11:12Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > I don’t know if it can be done without connectivity or not but it is indeed an early target in the [new connectivity standards](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2012/10/rita-20121022.html). Well it makes sense to have worldwide standards but it’s not necessary for traffic lights. Cameras are being used to replace magnetometers now so it’s something that we can be doing without the need for cars that communicate with the traffic light system. ---
**Author:** ![toadspittle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c0e974/32.png) [@toadspittle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/toadspittle)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/86 "2012-10-22T22:18:00Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > And the emerging place of car sharing programs … how about an app that let’s you order up the vehicle you need for the occasion and it drives to meet you at the designated time and place? That would be the dream, I think. At that point, cars become like mass transit. Just on-demand, personalized mass transit. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/87 "2012-10-22T22:49:40Z")
> [@toadspittle](#): > > That would be the dream, I think. At that point, cars become like mass transit. Just on-demand, personalized mass transit. Well at least the news stories will finally be accurate. “SUV kills family of 4”. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2012, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/88 "2012-10-24T01:43:52Z")
Pretty amazing how quickly the technology [is maturing](https://www.media.volvocars.com/global/enhanced/en-gb/Media/Preview.aspx?mediaid=46386). > [@](#): > > Volvo Car Corporation has taken another step on the journey towards autonomous driving - self-driving vehicles - by demonstrating a new traffic jam assistance system. The new system, whereby the car automatically follows the vehicle in front in slow-moving queues up to 50 km/h, will be ready for production in 2014. … ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2012, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/89 "2012-10-24T04:25:42Z")
My prediction is that once autonomous vehicles get underway (and I think it’s going to happen surprisingly soon) in urban areas the price of unmanned taxis will fall - and their convenience will rise - to the point where most urbanites won’t have a car. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2012, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/90 "2012-10-24T12:03:45Z")
[The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration](http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121024/AUTO01/210240331/1148/rss25) starts to take notice. > [@](#): > > The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Tuesday it is preparing regulations setting performance standards for autonomous cars — the next “evolutionary step” for the nation’s fleet of vehicles. > > NHTSA Administrator David Strickland said at a forum that the agency is working on a two- to three-year research project before it begins writing rules to oversee driverless cars in the next few years. He hopes the technology could one day save “thousands of lives.” … ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2012, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/91 "2012-10-25T02:33:16Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > My prediction is that once autonomous vehicles get underway (and I think it’s going to happen surprisingly soon) in urban areas the price of unmanned taxis will fall - and their convenience will rise - to the point where most urbanites won’t have a car. I predict the liability of an autonomous car will keep it off the street. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2012, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/92 "2012-10-25T02:51:22Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I predict the liability of an autonomous car will keep it off the street. That’s not likely. I would buy an autonomous car if the cost of the driving unit was less than 5k over a similar car. There are plenty of people just like me, and dollars will make it happen. That said, I think this is what the government should be subsidizing. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2012, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/93 "2012-10-25T03:00:47Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > That’s not likely. I would buy an autonomous car if the cost of the driving unit was less than 5k over a similar car. > > There are plenty of people just like me, and dollars will make it happen. That said, I think this is what the government should be subsidizing. I don’t think you understood what I was referring to. It doesn’t matter what you want or how much it costs if the product is vulnerable to liability issues. If it crashes autonomously then the maker of the car is the driver. ---
**Author:** ![temp\_user](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9de053/32.png) [@temp\_user](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/temp_user)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2012, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/94 "2012-10-25T05:37:42Z")
An externally mounted speedometer always seemed like a good interim solution [http://www.google.je/patents?id=7C8lAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false](http://www.google.je/patents?id=7C8lAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false) ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2012, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/95 "2012-10-25T06:58:37Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I don’t think you understood what I was referring to. It doesn’t matter what you want or how much it costs if the product is vulnerable to liability issues. If it crashes autonomously then the maker of the car is the driver. I’m not entirely sure you are wrong. However, almost all damage caused by motor vehicle crashes is currently borne through motorists’ insurance, the cost of which is spread across motorists through premiums. If part of that cost is instead built into the purchase price of a vehicle - on the basis the manufacturer will now often be liable - then so be it, it isn’t a new cost. It will just fall somewhere slightly different. And given that the vast majority of MVA’s happen through human error, the accident rate may well go down dramatically with autonomous cars, and if so, so will the overall financial cost of accidents, whether borne by motorists or built into the price of vehicles. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2012, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/96 "2012-10-25T12:48:33Z")
Which brings the thread full round back to the claims of the quote in the op - the claimed potential for these systems to eventually improve safety to such a degree that car weights can even safely decrease. Connected autonomous systems cannot completely eliminate things like trees falling down, or the actions of others who do not participate in or who disable the systems. But they can make it such that a claim of negligent driving, of being “at fault” in an accident, is highly unlikely to prevail. True, anything that can go wrong will so quality control and redundancy of safety systems will be vital and likely highly regulated, but while IANAL I would think that exposure in a rare case of an accident due to the “one in million” case of all systems failing at the same time (not due to manufacturing or design negligence) would be small, especially spread out over the complete system. Again, the penetration of these systems is likely to be staged. The first applications will focus on ones at least risk - interstate highway platooning especially for trucking (really just a step up from cruise control), creeping along in heavy traffic jams, automatic parking in lots, information on suggested speed to hit all the lights, wider adoption of automatic safety systems that prevent accidents by having the car take over if one is about to occur (slowing down or braking if approaching another vehicle too quickly for the conditions, identifying the lane drift of someone falling asleep at the wheel and correcting the drift while also dinging an alarm, stopping a car backing up if something has entered the area, avoiding a collision by preventing a rapid lane change into another vehicle in the blind spot …). Then wider applications, greater intervehicle coordination, and increasing autonomy will take off. Time course? Well ten years ago when I bought my last car I stated that my next car would be one I plugged in. Many of my family and friends scoffed at me. (Even knowing I tend to own cars longer than average.) Tomorrow I am going to order my C-Max Energi (and I’ll be declining the automatic parallel parking option) and once it arrives will indeed power all my daily commutes and a majority of my future yearly miles off the grid just plugging in at home at night. I today state my next car after this one will at least mostly drive itself. We’ll see. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2012, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/97 "2012-10-25T23:47:04Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > I’m not entirely sure you are wrong. However, almost all damage caused by motor vehicle crashes is currently borne through motorists’ insurance, the cost of which is spread across motorists through premiums. If part of that cost is instead built into the purchase price of a vehicle - on the basis the manufacturer will now often be liable - then so be it, it isn’t a new cost. It will just fall somewhere slightly different. > > And given that the vast majority of MVA’s happen through human error, the accident rate may well go down dramatically with autonomous cars, and if so, so will the overall financial cost of accidents, whether borne by motorists or built into the price of vehicles. motorist insurance only covers the risk of the owner. If the car is driving itself then the manufacturer and any intermediaries will take on additional liability. lawsuits will follow the deepest pocket. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2012, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/98 "2012-10-26T03:31:52Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > motorist insurance only covers the risk of the owner. If the car is driving itself then the manufacturer and any intermediaries will take on additional liability. lawsuits will follow the deepest pocket. You completely miss the point. All that would change is the path by which MVA liability is funded. Motorists would pay more insurance built into the price of a car and less insurance directly. Overall, the total societal bill for MVA’s won’t go up merely because manufacturers get sued instead of motorists. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2012, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/99 "2012-10-26T12:28:36Z")
Every product is subject to liability issues; every innovation creates unknown exposures. The simple truth, as [this expert analysis](http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1170&context=facpubs) posits, is that “nobody knows anything” about how it will play out. He takes a very interesting historical perspective though and hazards some informed speculations. He concludes: > [@](#): > > It is possible that the development of these vehicles will succumb to an onslaught of tort suits, or that the prospect of ruinous liability will chill investment to the point that research on these devices stalls. But I doubt it. Assaults on this technology may not be intuitive, and the types of claims especially feared by Professor Marchant will emerge only gradually, if ever, such that the technology will have an opportunity to evolve and further reduce its risk profile prior to encountering a wave of tort litigation. It strikes me as at least as likely that autonomous vehicles will benefit from a “honeymoon period,” and even after that span expires, the innovations incorporated within autonomous vehicles may confer upon them a competitive advantage relative to conventional automobiles—which, after all, also may be attacked insofar as they fail to incorporate the safetyenhancing devices that appear within autonomous cars. > > But, then again, nobody knows anything. What we can say with some confidence is that the total number of accidents and road fatalities would decrease by something like one order of magnitude (given that over 90% of accidents are felt to be due to human error and negligence). And that there are models for encouraging actions that have societal benefit but that have potential individual company liability exposure. In my field the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program comes to mind right off. Suits, usually without merit but still costly, against vaccine manufacturers for alleged harm from the old pertussis vaccine, were driving manufacturers out of the business. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 responded to that by simultaneously creating the means to better monitor/enforce vaccine safety standards, a Federal “no-fault” compensation system for those whose injures were by a relaxed standard of evidence _possibly_ caused or triggered by vaccines, a means for deciding such claims, and a funding mechanism by way of an excise tax. The system works. Again no such system would be needed for those initial phases. Initial phases are more semi-autonomous driving systems that are safety innovations but that in no way abrogate the responsibility of the driver. New cars coming out with forward collision and lane departure warning systems, even when coupled with automatic braking, do not allow a driver defense that the car should have worked to avoid a collision, nor are those injured in an accident involving such a car likely to go after the manufacturer because the car still somehow managed to be in an accident. “Car trains” as envisioned by the SATRE project still involve a professional driver a the head of the queue. Even ones that I envision, ad hoc car trains of “connected” vehicles which also have their own semi-autonomous safety overrides, will have application only once in a highway condition and require active disengagement from the system and the queue, limiting any manufacturer exposures. Even traveling in a hyped up cruise control in which the vehicle maintains the lane and the safe distance as well as the speed for an individual vehicle and lower speed traffic jam creep, and automatic parking in lots will be low risk for serious accidents. Those sorts of applications will drive the initial roll out, innovations, and acceptance. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2012, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381/100 "2012-10-26T14:34:03Z")
One other thought - manufacturer may want to build in a black box of sorts, saving all data from one minute prior to any collision, which could then be used to provide evidence of their vehicle’s lack of fault. But even without I still aver that the safety, fuel saving (and commensurate decreased CO2 and increased energy independence), and decreased congestion societal advantages of even those initial roll-out applications should incentivize potential solutions to any imagined tort exposures. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-car-train-revisited/481381.md?page=6)