Self driving car hits motorcycle cop

[Laser Dude]

You know what else reduces congestion? More lanes. That's a sore subject for me since I live not too far from DC. It's a disaster of a place to drive. They have been working on Interstate 95 for over 60 years. Know how many lanes go in both direction now? Same number as 30 years ago, 3 each way. What have they spent the last 30 years doing? Putting HOV lanes in the middle that only go one direction at a time, meaning if you are going the opposite direction, you are screwed. However, using the same real estate to put 6 lanes going each direction would have solved the congestion problem decades ago. No self driving car is going to fix that level of congestion.

Counter-intuitively, more lanes makes traffic worse

https://www.wired.com/2014/06/wuwt-traffic-induced-demand/

You can point to anything you'd like, the fact is there are more cars than roads. They've been "improving" I95 for at least 60 years. The traffic is far worse now than at any time in my life. My Dad remembers them working on it when he was a kid and he's 80. The problem is that they have a fender bender in 1 lane and now you have too much traffic trying to get through 2 lanes. If you had 6 lanes, a fender bender wouldn't shut the interstate down for 2 hours like it does now.

Whatever they are doing, it ain't working. If you've ever had the pleasure to be stuck in DC traffic, you'll know how much it stinks.

 

[eflyguy]

You do know that most modern aircraft actually can manage all phases of flight - from takeoff to touchdown. That said, the pilots are absolutely necessary and their attention is critical. Those systems are designed to reduce pilot "workload" but that doesn't mean they can take naps! Even during steady cruise at altitude, one pilot has to be at the controls and monitoring the aircraft and outside conditions.

So the reliability and complexity of these types of systems - as with most modern electronics - has increased dramatically, and the self-driving cars are really not very complicated, it's just that all scenarios have not been tested and proven. Then there are ethical/moral issues that nobody wants to touch!

 

[HotRodZilla]

Anyone stupid or naive enough to think these chees-**** cars being put on the road are anywhere near dealing with today's road issues needs to have their empty head examined.

Well, we certainly know that humans can't deal with the roads...to the tune of something like 40,000 deaths a year in N America!

We need some kind of technology to step in and help.

Might not be ready for prime time yet but will be soon, and I for one, can't wait. Perhaps not fully automatic but, at least, something to control the cars on a freeway.

All this stop and go traffic ********* is strictly caused by humans and our traffic problems would run smoother with some non emotional intervention.

The unfortunate thing is you are exactly right. I cannot understand what is going on in people's cars these days. I don't get why traffic is moving at 35mph, and then for no reason, it's suddenly back up to 65. Why did it slow in the first place? The shenanigans I see going on in cars blows me away.

The problem is, politicians can make laws all they want, and cops can issue citations all they want. Until judges get on board, and force people to be responsible for their actions, the rest of us are just moving targets.

Ride and drive accordingly!

 

[mech 1 twa]

Can you get a DWI in a self driving car ?

I wasn't driving

Can it drive in a snow storm ? ETC!!!!

Amount of air traffic is so much less than road traffic. Plane has 3 dimensions to travel through. on ground only 2.

Can't make it to work today Boss, my car won't boot-up.

 

[phroenips]

You know what else reduces congestion? More lanes. That's a sore subject for me since I live not too far from DC. It's a disaster of a place to drive. They have been working on Interstate 95 for over 60 years. Know how many lanes go in both direction now? Same number as 30 years ago, 3 each way. What have they spent the last 30 years doing? Putting HOV lanes in the middle that only go one direction at a time, meaning if you are going the opposite direction, you are screwed. However, using the same real estate to put 6 lanes going each direction would have solved the congestion problem decades ago. No self driving car is going to fix that level of congestion.

Counter-intuitively, more lanes makes traffic worse

https://www.wired.com/2014/06/wuwt-traffic-induced-demand/

You can point to anything you'd like, the fact is there are more cars than roads. They've been "improving" I95 for at least 60 years. The traffic is far worse now than at any time in my life. My Dad remembers them working on it when he was a kid and he's 80. The problem is that they have a fender bender in 1 lane and now you have too much traffic trying to get through 2 lanes. If you had 6 lanes, a fender bender wouldn't shut the interstate down for 2 hours like it does now.

Whatever they are doing, it ain't working. If you've ever had the pleasure to be stuck in DC traffic, you'll know how much it stinks.

I appreciate you completely ignoring the link I provided, but your anecdote proves its point. More lanes = worse traffic. I'm not saying traffic is good, I'm saying...no, I'm not saying it, the civil engineers are saying...that adding more lanes is not the answer. More lanes simply mean even more traffic will fill those lanes as people change their habits due to the increased capacity. The answer probably lies in better public transportation, which is quite difficult.

 

[eflyguy]

The unfortunate thing is you are exactly right. I cannot understand what is going on in people's cars these days. I don't get why traffic is moving at 35mph, and then for no reason, it's suddenly back up to 65. Why did it slow in the first place? The shenanigans I see going on in cars blows me away.

It's called the accordion effect, and it occurs in many systems, even nature.

One person brakes a little, the one behind brakes a little more, and it escalates until someone further back stops completely. Then as people start moving again, each one takes a little longer to get going, Just like at traffic lights.

 

[BigOgre]

phroenips, your posts reminded me of a bio of Robert Moses I read quite some time ago. (It might be time to pick it up again.) Your point was a revelation to many who gave him free reign back then and I now get to live with his legacy. I write this after just today travelling on many of his congestion improving roadways to check out an Aerostich pop-up sale in NJ. Two hours and 55 minutes to go 39.8 miles. From Wikipedia:

In New York, it was clearly seen in the highway-building program of Robert Moses, the "master builder" of the New York City area. As described by Moses' biographer, Robert Caro, in The Power Broker:

During the last two or three years before [the entrance of United States into World War II], a few planners had...begun to understand that, without a balanced system [of transportation], roads would not only not alleviate transportation congestion but would aggravate it. Watching Moses open the Triborough Bridge to ease congestion on the Queensborough Bridge, open the Bronx-Whitestone Bridge to ease congestion on the Triborough Bridge and then watching traffic counts on all three bridges mount until all three were as congested as one had been before, planners could hardly avoid the conclusion that "traffic generation" was no longer a theory but a proven fact: the more highways were built to alleviate congestion, the more automobiles would pour into them and congest them and this force the building of more highways which would generate more traffic and become congested in their turn in an ever-widening spiral that contained the most awesome implications for the future of New York and of all urban areas.[4]

The same effect had been seen earlier with the new parkways that Moses had built on Long Island in the 1930s and 40s, where

...every time a new parkway was built, it quickly became jammed with traffic, but the load on the old parkways was not significantly relieved.[5]

Similarly, the building of the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel failed to ease congestion on the Queens-Midtown Tunnel and the three East River bridges, as Moses had expected it to.[6] By 1942, Moses could no longer ignore the reality that his roads were not alleviating congestion in the way he expected them to, but his answer to the problem was not to invest in mass transit, it was to build even more roads, in a vast program which would expand or newly create 200 miles of roads, including additional bridges, such as the Throgs Neck Bridge and the Verrazano Narrows Bridge.

 

[wetwolf]

yarp, build it and they will come

 

[Nanahanman]

You know what else reduces congestion? More lanes.

Nope!

You need to do some research on this.

I live in a city where the freeway is constantly upgraded with more lanes....up to 16 at one point.

Still balls deep in traffic.

We need to get the human component out of the way.

 

[Kelvininin]

You know what else reduces congestion? More lanes.

That solution is probably the most obvious and likely the one has the least probability of happening. Places like Seattle literally don't have the physical space. Cost of new infrastructure has out paced inflation for years, and most Americans are very resistant to increased taxes or tolls. Also, as it has already been pointed out, increasing the number of lanes doesn't necessarily increase traffic flow. In addition, a lot of infrastructure is considered to be at acceptable levels for the traffic density required. The wild card is human error. Drivers these days are paying less attention, period. They are not anticipating traffic condition changes, they don't anticipate their exit, they don't keep right, They don't maintain their trailing distance. In high traffic density, just tapping your brakes can have a miles long effect. And one of the biggest question marks to me, is american resistance to public transportation. When it comes to urban commuting the human element needs to be eliminated. Autonomous cars are win win. The cost is on the consumer, traffic flow improves without infrastructure expansion, accident levels decline, human error is significantly reduced, and Americans get to keep their safe space.

Oh and fender benders shut down traffic in the opposing lanes. Humans can't help but stare at a train wreck

 

[Uncle Hud]

Counter-intuitively, more lanes makes traffic worse
https://www.wired.com/2014/06/wuwt-traffic-induced-demand/

If you build it, they will come. Wider highways only create wider traffic jams.

Urban sprawl happens because, "You can live in the quiet countryside, only 15 minutes from your office!" Every time the freeways to suburbia get widened, that 15-minute boundary gets pushed out a little farther, and Grandpa Smith sells his cattle ranch to a developer that puts 300 homes on it.

Compare the growth in number of licensed vehicles against the amount of road widening in any urban area. It's not balanced.

 

[red2kcbr]

Been on both sides of this issue. As a software developer for years, AGVs (automated guided vehicles) were an interesting project of mine for a while. Social issues aside, the concept of removing drudge work is tantalizing. But the technology/cost equation has not yet been solved. The level of automation that allows aircraft to take off and land is at one extreme; a self-guided fork truck with cameras still cannot stack variable materials like palletized cardboard cases of canned goods five pallets high. And cars on public roads cannot juggle all the variables of urban traffic yet, either. It gets worse in a mixed environment of AGVs and human operators. It seems way to early to allow automated cars on public roads. It's just live testing, and irresponsible. But it is the easy way to test. Seems wrong to do live testing given the consequences, but that delves into social and political issues that belong in other venues.

The purely technical issues of centralized traffic control and minimization of congestion can and will be solved, it's just time and money. To HRZ's point, I cringe everytime I see ads for auto-stop, lane warnings, and proximity sensors. Hell, they don't watch out now. They'll watch out even less thinking they are secure in their high-tech cages.

I try to use the GYHOOYA principle: get your head out of your ***. I don't always succeed.

 

[Birdman2010]

The other night I was on my way home, getting onto the freeway, just as it was getting dark. The freeway on ramp there, is a lane that leads to the next freeway exit. As I was accelerating, the guy on my left, moved right, hard. His tail lights were at my driver's door. Well, since he ran me off the road, I pulled him over. He told me I wasn't there, because his sensors didn't indicate anything. Problem is, he didn't even bother to look. I don't know how I avoided him. We had a long conversation about how he is supposed to pay attention, because his stupid gimmicky car obviously can't do it for him. Then I issued him a citation for careless driving.
Anyone stupid or naive enough to think these chees-**** cars being put on the road are anywhere near dealing with today's road issues needs to have their empty head examined. I'll tell you what, let's figure out how to send a vehicle into space without blowing it up, and then I'll give some credence to cars that can self drive. We're not nearly as far along as Google and Uber would like us to think.

HotRodZilla, you are a police officer. You know first-hand how many impaired and distracted drivers are out there. The fact is that over 50% of all fatal highway crashes involving two or more cars are alcohol related. In addition, my wife and I see cars weaving and crossing the lane lines. We play a guessing game: drunk driving or texting! If it is day, it is usually a person texting. My wife looks at me and says, "That is why I don't want you to ride a motorcycle. There are too many dumb-***** out there." Do I quit riding my motorcycle? No. I logged over 20,000 miles on my FJR and Venture last year commuting and road-trips. Why? For me, the fun of riding outweighs the risk of riding, even with the drunk and distracted drivers.

Now, let's talk about road rage. Computers do not experience road rage. When changing lanes, I turned on my turn signals. Invariably, the *** next to me sped up to closed the gap! Are you kidding me? What an ***! The problem is that here in Arizona, the majority of drivers do this ***** move. How am I supposed to change lanes to get on or off the freeway? Slow down and let ten cars pass me and hope there is a nice person in one of those cars? Now, I just flip on my signal and start coming over right away. My motorcycle is small enough that I still have room even when they close the gap. One time, when I was driving a car, the *** closes the gap and I cut him off and came over anyway. He started doing some road rage moves and it almost escalated to a roadside fight. All because he did not want to lose 10 seconds of his life that it would have cost him by just letting me come over when I turned on my signal. As a police officer, you should watch people for this dumb-*** move and write them a ticket. If I turn on my signal to obey the law, the a-hole next to me should not floor it and close the gap. This is a serious safety issue.

Finally, self-driving cars are insanely safe compared to human drivers. Google's self-driving car has logged over 1.8 million miles with zero at-fault accidents. It has experienced minor fender-benders caused by distracted humans. For example, some of the minor fender-benders were caused by distracted humans rear-ending the car while it was stopped at a light! How many people can make a safety claim of 1.8 million miles with zero at-fault accidents?

Here are my references to document my facts (yea, I am a college professor):

* https://www.mail.com/news/us/5080126-witness-driver-crash-admitted-texting-collision.html#.7518-stage-mostviewed1-5

* https://www.faddintl.org/pr/p5.html

* https://www.madd.org/drunk-driving/about/drunk-driving-statistics.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

* https://bigthink.com/ideafeed/googles-self-driving-car-is-ridiculously-safe

* https://www.pcworld.com/article/2932534/google-reveals-its-self-driving-car-accident-record.html

 

[Bounce]

The fact is that over 50% of all fatal highway crashes involving two or more cars are alcohol related.

While a "fact" the complete definition of the above phrase is misleading. Having worked part of my career with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), I occasionally went down the hall to help the folks at the regional National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA). Over the years I spent many a visit small-talking the folk there as I worked on their computers and supporting gear. This specific thing came up so I asked them what does "alcohol related" really mean.

It didn't take long for my education with the following example.

Driver A has been at a bar and is heading home. If stopped he may or may not blow above the state standard but his blood alcohol level will be elevated during an autopsy. Driver B and his/her family in another car are completely sober, but it's been a long day as they try to make it home on their last day of vacation. After all, why pay for another night on the road when they are so close? Driver B falls asleep, crosses the center line and punches vehicle A; killing everyone (or only a few). This will be logged in a database as "alcohol related" even though there isn't even a contributing factor for alcohol WRT the wreck.

So keep in mind the above when tossing that phrase around. It's highly politicized for various reasons (budget-ly, legislatively, and MADD-ishly).

 

[Bounce]

The other night I was on my way home, getting onto the freeway, just as it was getting dark. The freeway on ramp there, is a lane that leads to the next freeway exit. As I was accelerating, the guy on my left, moved right, hard. His tail lights were at my driver's door. Well, since he ran me off the road, I pulled him over. He told me I wasn't there, because his sensors didn't indicate anything. Problem is, he didn't even bother to look. I don't know how I avoided him. We had a long conversation about how he is supposed to pay attention, because his stupid gimmicky car obviously can't do it for him. Then I issued him a citation for careless driving.
Anyone stupid or naive enough to think these chees-**** cars being put on the road are anywhere near dealing with today's road issues needs to have their empty head examined. I'll tell you what, let's figure out how to send a vehicle into space without blowing it up, and then I'll give some credence to cars that can self drive. We're not nearly as far along as Google and Uber would like us to think.

I had a loaner Impreza while my car was having an air bag replaced under recall (probably the same subcontractor that made the air bags for Gold Wings because they also had a recall).

It had that adaptive cruise. I thought it was a neat trick but before the 2 days were over had HUGE misgivings in the above "big picture" of things.

It sets speed at a max of your own choosing (like setting a well-known cruise). You can then adjust a "gap" with max/min allowable distances. When it sees an obstruction it will slow and match-speed to the object in front (or stop). When the obstruction speeds up so will the car - up to the max you set with the cruise. Kinda neat. It also has lane position sensors that warn of drift. There is no steering control. The driver still (kinda) drives.

The issues:

1. You have to enable adaptive apart from CC. I could see someone setting CC and assuming adaptive was on when it wasn't. BAM!

2. Will it see bikes/pedestrians? (Something MRF is trying to address at the legislative level with a member on the oversight board).

3. You still have to "hover" over the brake in case it doesn't see something which is more tiring than just driving.

4. In just 2 days it was already a siren song trying to lull you into being less observant of your surroundings.

Well ya know, since you can watch a movie on your in dash screen nowadays...

That's already against the law. There has to be an auto-lockout on screens viewable by the driver. If that's been disabled (or not installed in the after market unit) then the operator can be liable; Pimp My Ride collar pops or not.

adding more lanes is not the answer. More lanes simply mean even more traffic will fill those lanes as people change their habits due to the increased capacity.

Traffic, like computer code and gas, expands to fill all available space.

 

[Birdman2010]

So keep in mind the above when tossing that phrase around. It's highly politicized for various reasons (budget-ly, legislatively, and MADD-ishly).

You are quoting an exception to argue against the overwhelming facts. I had a kid tell me that a college education and studying in school is not important because Bill Gates is a college drop-out. Another kid told me that his retirement plan is to win the lottery. Are these kids right? We can always find examples to contradict the facts. At the same time, an intelligent person will look at the statistics and do the right thing. If the overwhelming odds show something, then an occasional example that contradicts the obvious is not relevant. It is called an "outlier". Arguing for the outliers is simply arguing to argue. I dated an alcoholic for six years. I was addicted to her. I went to Al-Anon support groups and finally learned that I cannot help people who do not want help. I was finally able to let her go. I met my wonderful wife and we have been married for 25 years.

If someone wants to point to the exceptions to contradict the facts, then that is their choice. I cannot help people who do not want help. I can only point to the statistics and let them have the life that they choose. All I know is that if I see a car weaving, I move over two lanes when possible and pass them. I get the hell out of their way. They are stupid and I need to stay alive to raise my kids and provide for my family.

https://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm

https://www.webmath.com/lottery.html

 

[Bounce]

It's not an exception. It is how they collect statistics for the column they report on.

Given the bias it throws into the system, the next question is HOW biased it is. The one example above may be rare but the totality of misreported events aren't when you lump in any case where the non-contributing driver had a higher-than-background-noise BAL that resulted in the event being lumped in with those cases where DUI was a contributing factor.

To dismiss the bias and the error it throws into the system is cavalier at best.

The issue of defensive driving, etc. is still valid and a separate issue from that of an intentionally biased reporting tool meant to influence traffic laws and enforcement.

 

[HotRodZilla]

I'm my 20 years at this, I have been to exactly one crash where the drunk guy didn't cause the crash. I have been to hundreds where the drunk guy did cause the crash. I have also been to hundreds of hit and run crashes. This includes single vehicle crashes, where a fence or pole was taken out and the car was left behind, and crashes involving a sober victim hit by a driver that either ran away on foot, or drove away and wasn't found. NONE of those hit and run crashes are reporated as alcohol related.

In those cases, the "Sobriety Unknown" box has to be checked, because even thought we KNOW the driver is probably drunk, we can't PROVE the driver is drunk. Because of the requirement of proof, alcohol related crashes are severely UNDER-REPORTED..

Again, Bounce, you have false information about how law enforcement is actually done, but spout off like it's fact. You should go to a citizen's academy in your area, and go on some ride-alongs. You'll only begin to understand how much you actually don't know, and how much Internet lore you have actually bought into.

There is no bias in Uniform Crash Reports. Sorry.

 

[Bounce]

I was talking about how NHTSA works their database; not law enforcement.

 

[HotRodZilla]

NHTSA's database is based on reports submitted my law enforcement. So, maybe a misunderstanding, but NHTSA gets our crash reports and converts them to statistical data, but they're not the only one's who do that. In NM, our crash reports leave the Motor Vehicle Division and go to University of New Mexico, where a team of engineers, professors and students look for trends. They also look for mistakes in our reporting and get back to us about issues.

On the same note, the FBI takes our Offense Incident reports, compiles them and comes up with crime data nationwide. Very little if any of either agencies' stats are based on anything but law enforcement reporting.