Vehicle to Vehicle Communications Soon to be Possible

[ionbasa]

Transportation officials today released a report that highlights the safety benefits of vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications tech, and asked the public to submit their thoughts on how the Department of Transportation should regulate it.

The report, from the DOT's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), found that V2V tech like left-turn assist and intersection movement assist could stop up to 592,000 crashes per year, saving more than 1,000 lives.

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2463238,00.asp

 

For years, transportation wonks have been waiting for automated technologies that will make cars safer and easier to use, cutting down on traffic jams and lowering the risk of deadly crashes. Now we're one step closer to that future: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has unveiled a plan to require vehicle-to-vehicle communications technologies in all new passenger cars. Adopting these technologies, the agency says, could prevent nearly 600,000 car crashes every year once the rollout is complete.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/08/19/this-smart-technology-could-prevent-half-a-million-car-crashes-a-year/

 

Official resource links: http://www.its.dot.gov/research/v2v.htm

 

Official regulations and/or legislation won't be released until around 2016. Honestly I can see this as a great benefit to our society. Everyone benefits from this, from teens learning to drive, to older peoples whom may not have fast response times. I am all down for preventing accidents, improving the flow of traffic, and technologizing our everyday society. 

 

But I am most excited about the infrastructure. With self driving cars just on the horizon within the next decade or two, a reliable and safe standard of communication has to be in place. It is going to be interesting to see how automobile makers will use the system. At first I would imagine it being used for 'heads up display' scenario; such as when passing a on a single lane highway, your car can alert the driver of how much time is needed to pass and how far away oncoming traffic is in relation to the car. Another scenario would be to improve the flow of traffic by letting drivers know of traffic jams and suggest alternate routes.

 

I can't wait to see this implemented along with autonomous cars.

[scaryjam823]

So we keep getting one step closer to irobot? That's cool.

[Lord Pantaloons]

I don't want my car associating with terrible things like these, I WILL NOT ALLOW IT!!!

 

 

 

[dlf]

This remind anyone of the 10th episode: Gridlock?

[ionbasa]

So we keep getting one step closer to irobot? That's cool.

Yes, but on a technical scale, I would be surprised if that level of automation is achievable within the next century.

 

I don't want my car associating with terrible things like these, I WILL NOT ALLOW IT!!!

 

 

-snip-

 

-snip-

I think you are missing the point of this. Think of it as nothing more than a driving aid. I for one would feel more safe if this helped people become better drivers. If you read my OP maybe you'd get what I mean. In my opinion:this tech will only make teens and elderly drivers safer. More experienced drivers also enjoy the benefits.

[Lord Pantaloons]

 

I think you are missing the point of this. Think of it as nothing more than a driving aid. I for one would feel more safe if this helped people become better drivers. If you read my OP maybe you'd get what I mean. In my opinion:this tech will only make teens and elderly drivers safer. More experienced drivers also enjoy the benefits.

 

 

[ionbasa]

-snip-

 

 

-snip-

Oops. Sometimes sarcasm is relayed better verbally and in person, rather than strangers on the Internet and with text...

[Ruostunut kokis]

Opps. Sometimes sarcasm is relayed better verbally and in person, rather than strangers on the Internet and with text...

Sarcasm tags do help, like

[TheKDub]

- snip -

nvm

[Lord Pantaloons]

Sarcasm tags do help, like

too easy

[mr moose]

and asked the public to submit their thoughts on how the Department of Transportation should regulate it.

 

 

 

I nearly fucking died...       Like the public would have any idea how to implement and regulate such a project,  call for submissions from the auto industry and road safety experts. fuck the public. 

 

Public submission number one:  "Smaller cards should automatically give way to cars with more expensive paint jobs, like , you know, flames n shit down the side or like any wif  a tops skull n' naked chic on the bonnet. their cars should get right of way coz their like tops cool n' stuff n' clearly they've spent more on it, like, they love their car more."

[ionbasa]

I nearly fucking died...       Like the public would have any idea how to implement and regulate such a project,  call for submissions from the auto industry and road safety experts. fuck the public. 

 

Public submission number one:  "Smaller cards should automatically give way to cars with more expensive paint jobs, like , you know, flames n shit down the side or like any wif  a tops skull n' naked chic on the bonnet. their cars should get right of way coz their like tops cool n' stuff n' clearly they've spent more on it, like, they love their car more."

That sentence is a little misleading in my opinion.  They aren't necessarily reaching out to the public for suggestions on implementation and regulation, but rather to get a general 'feel of what people think' about the system.

 

Afterall, you can't just say that as of tomorrow this system is going to exist and there is nothing you can do about it. They are trying to spin (media reference) the new idea in a positive light, so consumers find the idea good, even though in reality their opinion isn't worth $.02. Everything in government is based off of manipulation of how you present ideas. In this case, the DoT wants people to feel good, knowing that their concerns or statements are addressed. Meaning less people whining over the new standard(s).

[mr moose]

That sentence is a little misleading in my opinion.  They aren't necessarily reaching out to the public for suggestions on implementation and regulation, but rather to get a general 'feel of what people think' about the system.

 

Afterall, you can't just say that as of tomorrow this system is going to exist and there is nothing you can do about it. They are trying to spin (media reference) the new idea in a positive light, so consumers find the idea good, even though in reality their opinion isn't worth $.02. Everything in government is based off of manipulation of how you present ideas. In this case, the DoT wants people to feel good, knowing that their concerns or statements are addressed. Meaning less people whining over the new standard(s).

 

Shit, in Australia they would, they pass laws all the time that puts requirements on new cars. They may not do it that quick, but they would still do it.  They also wouldn't bother the public, submissions would be to a senate inquiry by invitation.

[bcredeur97]

think about intersections with this with self driving cars.... every car at all 4 corners could go through an intersection with perfect timing so none of them hit. and the cars could be going really fast.... we would get everywhere faster

[polke45]

They already use this technology for commercial aircraft so it is not something new

[KamiKatze]

I hope my car won't get emotional and have a crush on another car.

[juretrn]

I don't want my car associating with terrible things like these, I WILL NOT ALLOW IT!!!

Beautiful specimens. /sarcasm

[Andrew48]

I hope my car won't get emotional and have a crush on another car.

and it will start following that car

[werto165]

So what happens when a crash is inevitable, does the car have to decide which persons life is more valuable? 

[ionbasa]

So what happens when a crash is inevitable, does the car have to decide which persons life is more valuable? 

I would imagine that both cars de-accelerate drastically to prevent the crash, and then authorities and rescue workers could automatically be informed?

The whole point of this tech is to prevent accidents, but in the event one does occur, an automated system should have a faster reaction time comparative to the driver.

An example of how this could work:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3fxQxPVd4s

And that was in 2010.

[werto165]

I would imagine that both cars de-accelerate drastically to prevent the crash, and then authorities and rescue workers could automatically be informed?

The whole point of this tech is to prevent accidents, but in the event one does occur, an automated system should have a faster reaction time comparative to the driver.

An example of how this could work:

And that was in 2010.

I was talking specifically about someone walking in front of a vehicle suddenly(not giving enough time to brake) and the only way to save that person is to swerve into another lane, that other lane has on coming traffic and would cause a collision. So then would it hit the person who was stupid for crossing suddenly or risk more fatalities by going into the other lane. Yes I know it would be much better than a human, but there are still issues like this. Another thought came to mind, would the person who walked into the road suddenly be responsible for the death of the people in the car(If the car went into the other lane for a head on collision). I know I'm making up silly scenarios but anything is possible. 

[KamiKatze]

and it will start following that car

 

Or rear end it, if you know what i mean.

[ionbasa]

I was talking specifically about someone walking in front of a vehicle suddenly(not giving enough time to brake) and the only way to save that person is to swerve into another lane, that other lane has on coming traffic and would cause a collision. So then would it hit the person who was stupid for crossing suddenly or risk more fatalities by going into the other lane. Yes I know it would be much better than a human, but there are still issues like this. Another thought came to mind, would the person who walked into the road suddenly be responsible for the death of the people in the car(If the car went into the other lane for a head on collision). I know I'm making up silly scenarios but anything is possible. 

like: 

Yes, over 25mph and it won't be pretty. As always whenever driving in a vehicle, the driver should be vigilant to his or her surroundings.

 

If the cars in the next lanes have audible or visual cues, the drivers in that lane could be alerted and react fast enough to allow you some room. at least 2 seconds of reaction time is better than none.

 

A better question to ask is: What would you do? The police or transportation board would probably decide who was at fault, just like what happens now. Also the system could provide investigators with more usable data about the accident rather than relying on witnesses. Which could bail you out as being responsible. An infrared camera feed or sensor information could show that someone purposefully jumped out in front of a car to possibly commit suicide, it could also be used to classify collisions as true 'accidents' (ie: neither party is at fault). Though if you purposely ran someone over, the system could also be used against you (just saying).

 

The point I am trying to make is: If a collision does happen, more data is available to investigators. Also I am trying to point out that as a driver, these tools will be used as aids for the for the time being. Meaning that as a driver, you are still in control of how you operate the vehicle. 

[dlf]

I know it's unlikely, but if the roads has pressure sensors, perhaps they could differentiate between a human (or animal) and a vehicle, perhaps send some of that to the car in that lane(s) - probably some audio q in vehicle.

[werto165]

-snip-

You seem to know a lot about the subject, do you know whether you can drive the driverless cars yourself? Anyway driverless cars could be really interesting in the future, as they become more mainstream.