BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

where to watch

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events

Topic: RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Topic: RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Author

Message

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,280

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 4:03:39 PM

mid70sbobcat wrote:

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

mid70sbobcat wrote:

If you think driverless cars will eliminate deaths on the roads you're living in a fantasy world. What about when a Category 3, 4 or 5 hurricane approaches either the Gulf or the East Coast? Your supposedly adequate supply of vehicles will be overwhelmed and people would be in a state of panic with no transportation. And you speak of 30,000 traffic deaths a year? A hurricane can put millions at risk for injury or death. That's just one problem.

And I, and many others, will want to continue to drive as it is convenient. And no, I wouldn't want to wait 6 minutes for a ride. I've done enough work in both optimization and AI to know there are, and will be, limitations regardless of the approach.

Last, owning a car may be a lot more affordable than being driven around by a driverless car.

So driverless cars won't be as safe as regular cars because of hurricanes? You don't think that contingency plans will be created around transportation in the event of natural disasters? That city and state and federal governments will completely shirk their responsibilities around keeping their citizens safe? What about the implementation of autonomous vehicles makes you assume that?

Somebody already addressed the cost, so I won't bother. But you're really grasping at straws here.

Wow! You don't get it. It's NOT about safety it's about supply and demand. Let's take Hurricane Hugo as an example in 1989. It was heading towards Hilton Head Island. So if we had driverless cars we then stockpile more in that area. But then WHOOPS ... it drifts a bit and hammers Charleston and nearby areas further up the coast.

Second, when they decide to do a mandatory evacuation that means NOW! People can't say "my driverless car won't be here for 2 days". Well, they could although they may become a statistic in that time.

No, cost was not addressed. Someone made some assumptions. Not all people drive $50K SUV's. And cars, driverless or otherwise, have operating costs. Take the hurricane example. Who pays for the vehicles to be sent to another place possibly hundreds of miles away? So no, owning would not be necessarily more expensive. Maybe for people who sit at home and travel a limited amount but not for those who are active, on the go and who CHOOSE to buy a cost (and fuel) efficient car.

I'll repeat ... my career was in Optimization and AI. I worked on some of the largest problems around. But you can have the last word ... driverless cars can not, and will not, be able to address all of the problems and constraints that exist. Not now and not in 20 years.

Sorry, but who is claiming driverless cars will solve all of the constraints and problems that exist?

For some reason, everybody in this thread who is convinced driverless cars are a far off thing also seem to couple that assumption with the notion that all other forms of transportation will be banned. Car ownership, for some reason, is being talked about as being banned. Hell, there's two particularly far off the reservation people who think that large crowds at football games will have to be banned?

My point about the contingency plans around natural disasters is this: why is it that a widespread implementation of driverless cars assumes no other options? Do you think that because car ownership will inevitably decline, there wont be buses on hand to handle evacuations? That trains will cease to exist? That the exact same contingencies that cities where car ownership levels are very low use today wont still be viable options?

Seriously, why is this conversation being had like it's a zero sum game? There are either only driverless cars or there are none?

MedinaCat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Lakewood, OH
Post Count: 740

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 4:27:44 PM

Open your mind people...we have yet to reach the back half of the chessboard.

http://www.clustre.net/digital-abundance-and-the-second-h... /

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOg5lqpwcUo

Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 5:01:29 PM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

Seriously, why is this conversation being had like it's a zero sum game? There are either only driverless cars or there are none?

Mostly because that's the way your side has presented your argument. You waited until page 4 before you revealed that this is, in fact, a phased solution, one that would allow for current preferences to prevail.

I suppose you could have made that clear earlier, but what fun would that be? When you were presented with the challenge of how do you haul pick-up truck type material, you chose to argue the Uber could handle it, instead of simply saying the above. Smart.

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 6:31:48 PM

Robert Fox wrote:

The Optimist wrote:

Are you people seriously this inept with technology?

Oh, please. Get over yourself. Are you seriously this inept with pulling a trailer. Are you aware of different ball sizes (1 7/8", 2", 2 5/16")? Are you aware of different trailer electrical connections (4-prong, 5-prong, 7-prong)? Are you aware of different trailer brake mechanics?

Are you aware of the different size vehicle it takes to pull these different kinds of loads? Are you aware that loading a trailer with, say, a lawn mower, first requires the trailer to be hitched to the vehicle?

Spare me your brilliance. Shed light on us little people.

Seriously think that people aren't considering these quirks/specific considerations when they devise the driverless system?

Again, if a 2-day discussion on this board raises such good questions, don't you think that the millions of man-hours of design going into such systems will likely consider these things? Sure, some considerations will be missed. But they'll probably be minor and quickly addressed.

Where's the band?!
WHERE"S THE BAND?!

DesignspiritUSA.com
The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags
The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping!

The Optimist
General User

Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,552

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 7:07:35 PM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

Mike Johnson wrote:

Robert Fox wrote:

Imagine a world where, after 100,000 fans exit Neyland stadium, they wait in line for their Uber pick up. Or, imagine you're watching your daughter play soccer. Oops! the game goes into overtime. All parents will need to turn their attention to their phones and make sure Uber is aware of the delay. In a few minutes, the taxi-stand in front of Soddy Daisy High School will be unprecedented!

What do you do if you need to tow your boat or camper or motorcycle or paper mache bust of Che Guevara? You call for the Super Uber Mover!

What if you have an oversize, Donald Trump-ish, obnoxious triple-axle cigarette boat? You call for the Super Duper Uber Mover!

Any of those vehicles are pre-programmed to back your boat into the water so you can enjoy your day on the river!

Geez, Rob, think it thru. By the time driverless cars are in vogue, we'll have federal legislation limiting crowds at college football games to no more than the total of driverless cars within a 30-mile radius of the stadium. See?

It's hilarious to me how many conservatives in this thread are lining up against private enterprise. Hilarious, but not surprising.

I'm a fierce conservative on economic issues. I don't view those against technological innovations like this coming from billions in private investment as fellow conservatives. When people start talking about government regulating the auto industry and their development of this technology, that sounds like a liberal stance to me.

There is ample opportunity to make a boatload of money off this. Not just investing in the companies developing this technology, but in appreciating how the lifestyle changes this brings on will ripple across other areas of the economy.

Think about real estate. Jeez. You understand how driverless cars can impact development and you're going to make big $.

I've seen crazier things happen.

The Optimist
General User

Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,552

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 7:11:04 PM

Robert Fox wrote:

The Optimist wrote:

Are you people seriously this inept with technology?

Shed light on us little people.

I don't think it's little people. I think it's old people.

I've seen crazier things happen.

bobcat695
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Parkersburg, WV
Post Count: 1,345

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 7:11:53 PM

I truly enjoy driving. I really like my cars and I like the freedom to go where I want, when I want. I'm not opposed to the technology, but I don't completely trust it right now. If a private enterprise can make money doing this, then it will show there is demand for the product. I definitely don't want to have driverless car mandates, however. I'd be fine with driverless cars being on the road next to me. I know a lot of people who don't enjoy driving and would use this.

I feel like I'm in control of my environment by being able to avoid accidents and immediately react to things that won't show up on GPS like a deer, a fallen tree in the middle of the road, or a child on a bicycle that I see well before any sensor on a bumper would. I have driven in snow all of my life. What happens when a driverless car encounters poor driving conditions? Will the passengers be stuck?

I'm not being a smart ass, I just don't undstand how a computer can handle things like poor weather. I do, however, believe a computer will be better able to handle an interstate merge than 80% of the idiots that still cannot figure it out.

"You can't un-fist a fist pump." - Saul Phillips 1/24/15

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,280

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 7:47:46 PM

Robert Fox wrote:

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

Seriously, why is this conversation being had like it's a zero sum game? There are either only driverless cars or there are none?

My first post on the topic is literally about the implementation phases of self-driving cars. Your reading comprehension, and critical thinking skills, make me embarrassed for OU.

Last Edited: 9/14/2016 7:48:15 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

akroncat
General User

Member Since: 7/23/2010
Location: Akron, OH
Post Count: 189

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/14/2016 8:24:50 PM

Another old person interested in this conversation. I worked as a chemical engineer all my life so I am not against new technology. There was an interesting article in the Plain Dealer today and it was quoting one of Henry Ford's descendants. Ford is spending lots of money on this and he thinks as early as 2020 there will be quite a bit of usage. However, he feels there are many ethical issues that need to be resolved. One was touched on earlier in this conversation about how does the computer decide who lives and who dies if there is going to be an accident. His example was a truck ready to plow into the back of a car. Does the car veer to the right and run over innocent people walking or stay put and potentially killing those in the car? He feels the ethical questions need to be answered before this can go forward.

Since I have lived in NE Ohio for the last 28 years, I don't understand how these cars will drive in the snow. I am not sure you can enter all the inputs that would be needed to drive on icy roads.

By the way I am old, a conservative and a Republican, but I do believe in new technology, especially advances in medicine from which I have benefited.

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 1:07:12 AM

695--I can't give you specifics about such as how driverless cars will be able to recognize and handle such as sudden icy path.

But think about the wonder of your cell phone and modern age photo and video technology. The digits (input..info) are processed at unfathomable speed.

I'm not 100% sold on driverless, but I think that, barring system breakdowns or design faults (oh boy to either of those!), driverless cars will handle driving better than most people. I mean, we've all see some pretty bad driving every day, right?

In California, so very many people drive like they're the only ones on the road...with total lack of awareness of, and concern for, other drivers. Not good.

rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,503

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 7:40:43 AM

There's an article in the Business section of today's (9/15) The Record on Uber's testing of driverless vehicles in Pittsburgh.
(Again,can't get it to link)

Some interesting points:

1.A lot of people don't like the idea of a driverless vehicle,without human back up.

2.The article say "many experts" believe the use of driverless vehicles by the general public is years if not decades away.

3.The article includes 2 quotes from an engineering professor at Carnegie Mellon concerning why he believes widespread use of driveless vehicles is a ways off.

A."Because vehicles are driving at 70 miles per hour on the highway,if something goes wrong,things could go wrong,very bad,very quickly"

B."This technology needs to be ultra-reliable before we can take the human out of the driving equation"

3.What is also interesting,a number of the posts on this thread talk about how driverless vehicles will improve safety and have other altruistic benefits.

Why is Uber doing it ?

The head of Uber's "Advanced Technology Center " said,in part," Removing the cost of the driver is one way to make rides more affordable".

To paraphrase Joe Pesci in "Casino",its about the dollars,always the dollars.

Last Edited: 9/15/2016 7:41:52 AM by rpbobcat

Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 8:38:37 AM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

My first post on the topic is literally about the implementation phases of self-driving cars. Your reading comprehension, and critical thinking skills, make me embarrassed for OU.

LOL! Wow. Brilliant comeback!

Here's your first post:

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

First, driverless cars will be rolled out in closed systems...

Second, driverless cars will be rolled out in Urban environments...

From there, they'll be made widely available nationwide.

I think the one aspect of driverless cars that people misunderstand most is the notion of ownership. It's hard to break the association that we all must own a car. Most people assume they'll eventually own a driverless car. What people fail to see is that driverless cars actually eliminate the need to own cars. They eliminate the need for parking.

I call your narrow mind to your last sentences: "...driverless cars ELIMINATE the need to own cars. They ELIMINATE the need for parking." Not reduce, not mitigate. ELIMINATE!!!!

And where, in your "implementation of phases," do you provide a basic, rudimentary timeline? Not even a general stab at a timeline.

Have you ever driven a car, or is this all conjecture to you? Or how about (Gasp!) a truck? Have you ever done anything that would get your manicured fingernails dirty?

So far, you seem completely incapable of carrying on a productive conversation, unable to tolerate anyone who is not in lock-step with you. God help us if you're a professor. Of course, you'll never say, will you?

Last Edited: 9/15/2016 8:39:35 AM by Robert Fox

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,280

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 9:28:37 AM

Robert Fox wrote:

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

My first post on the topic is literally about the implementation phases of self-driving cars. Your reading comprehension, and critical thinking skills, make me embarrassed for OU.

LOL! Wow. Brilliant comeback!

Here's your first post:

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

I already referenced what I do. In the post you just quoted. In your quest to understand my point of view and find common ground for constructive conversation, you somehow missed that and have decided -- for some truly odd reason -- that I must be a professor. And then arbitrarily attacked the very idea of professors. You won't see how odd that is, or how apparent it makes the close-mindedness with which you've approached this discussion. But everybody else will.

I offered my thoughts, that I've learned from working fairly closely with Google X, on self driving cars. At no point did anybody ask me for a timeline, at no point did I claim I had anything but anecdotal evidence about what that timeline might look like. And now, for no reason at all, you're trying to claim what I've shared as invalid because I didn't take a stab at a timeline?

The fact remains that I have raised very valid points about how driverless cars will impact mobility going forward. You have continued to get hung up on weird details. I still, for the life of me, don't understand why you think Trucks are some sort of trump card here. Uber just acquired a self-driving trucking startup called Otto for 600+ million. They have. . .self driving trucks. Does that answer your question about trucks? Honestly, I have no idea. I have no idea what the question is. Or what you think you're pointing out. You're mostly just raising edge cases and going "see, we're no where even close! I have a boat I need to get places." Of all the perfectly valid concerns about autonomous vehicles, you're hung up on U-Hauls. Take a step back for a second and think about that. You think you've won this argument because sometimes people have to move couches. And that's why the timeline's far away. Because, I guess, Uber/Google/Apple/Tesla will never be able to solve the tangled rubric of making automobiles with large interiors.

And again, I don't know why you think driverless cars are going to lead to a ban on car ownership. Nobody is going to keep you from getting your boat to a lake. I suspect the technology will exist for an autonomous vehicle to help you do so if you so choose. I don't think the problem(s) you're describing are particularly difficult ones to solve. More to the point, they don't at all run contrary to any of what I've said.

Widespread autonomous vehicles will eliminate the need to own a car. Does that mean they'll solve the mobility needs of 100% of the population 100% of the time? Of course not. But in many places, public transportation eliminates the need to own a car. Car ownership is already on the decline, and all reasonable estimates show it declining precipitously over the next 3 decades. That has everything to do with the advancements we've made in mobility, and autonomous cars are the next, inevitable step in that.

Further, the argument I made for the elimination of car ownership was a financial one. My point, made here:

"Think of it this way: your car is a huge investment, one of the most expensive things you'll own, and it loses value almost immediately. And most importantly, it spends 98% of the time sitting still, doing nothing. What purpose does that serve? If other people could be using it during that time, you could eliminate the need for parking, the construction costs around home garages, etc. It literally changes everything. Think of all of the additional land in creates in cities. All of the space that goes to parking which can now be used to extend pedestrian spaces, create green space, build new and essential buildings to provide services."

. . .Is that driverless cars will make car ownership a poor financial decision for many people. I know, I know: government, professors, socialism whatever. You disagree. No need to rehash it. We can agree to disagree, it's fine. No chapped asses, no hurt feelings over our failure to do so. We'll both live through the day.

And what you don't see, is that driverless cars and improved mobility will eliminate the NEED to own cars for a huge, huge number of people. That doesn't mean that many people won't decide that cars (or trucks) aren't a LUXURY that adds value to their lives. But America's reliance on car ownership will be greatly reduced, and I'm hard pressed to see an argument that that won't be a good financial thing for the vast majority of people.

I honestly just don't understand what you're so scared of. I mean, I know that conservatism is actually just fear (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/2011... ). But I'm honestly just baffled as to what has you so riled up about this particular technological advancement. I truly, for the life of me, just can't make any sense out of what you're talking about. You keep harping on these really basic, solvable problems. What the hell do trucks have to do with anything? And you forgetting milk? I think, seriously, that just a little bit of reading on how the technology works and the vision for how these sorts of things would be implemented would go a long way toward addressing the concerns you have.

As I've said, and raised myself, there are very serious issues that need to be solved before self-driving cars are widely available. The issues that you've raised are, frankly, missing the point. You immediately decided to view this conversation -- as you seem to do with many things -- through the prism of right vs. left, and started reacting as if the government is going to steal your car, and college football games wont be as fun anymore because nobody will be able to get to them or whatever. It's truly, truly a weird reaction. At no point in any of this has anybody hinted at either of those things. I suggested that market forces (you might know market forces as the thing conservatives are supposed to masturbate to) will impact the rate of car ownership, and cited some reasons I thought that would be a positive thing.

You lost your mind because your life might change and you're having trouble figuring out what that might look like. Congrats. Keep fighting the good fight. I really, genuinely, hope you never have any issue getting your truck to lakes as long as you live.

Last Edited: 9/15/2016 9:41:46 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 9:51:50 AM

You're as whacky as your ideas. I'm not the least bit scared of this idea. I simply think it's a long way off, as I've stated, quite clearly. You seem to have trouble with that, as in it REALLY makes you mad!

You also have trouble with your own power to communicate. Where have you clearly referenced what you do? Was that where you said you "met" with Google X or BMW? How does that reference "what you do"?

You have an astonishingly short fuse. If there's anything to be afraid of, I suppose it's that. Seriously. How long have these angry outbursts been affecting you?

This entire discussion spiraled out of control because of your weird, spontaneous hissy fit. Go back and read how this thing escalates and then congratulate yourself on providing us with another lunatic melt down.

Maybe back off the caffeine. And consider coming out of the shadows. Quit hiding behind your handle. Man up, if possible.

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 10:08:15 AM

Some peoples are intransigent, won't come off their point of view, won't consider new info.

Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 10:36:08 AM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

Some peoples are intransigent, won't come off their point of view, won't consider new info.

Yes, they are.

.
General User

Member Since: 2/3/2005
Post Count: 2,949

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 1:15:02 PM

I would only expend the typing power of this many words if we were arguing over *FLYING*, self-driving cars. Wake me up when we're airborn, people. Until then, I'm going to split the difference between leisure and driving and steer with my knees while enjoying a Blizzard.

rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,503

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 1:54:39 PM

Brian Smith wrote:

Steering with your knees so you can eat while you drive.
I thought I was the only one who still did that.

For the old guys:
Last year my wife broke her wrist.
I went out and got a "suicide ball",so she could drive.

RSBobcat
General User

Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 4,401

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/15/2016 11:55:23 PM

rpbobcat wrote:

Brian Smith wrote:

Stick shift '94ish - about when I got tying a tie with knee on the wheel down pat. With auto trans it's a piece of cake.........

RS Bobcat

RSBobcat
General User

Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 4,401

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/16/2016 12:00:14 AM

Wow - long thread - about PARKING..... I mean we're talkin' 'bout PARKING this long? And this is not an end of BBall gap to start of FBall season thread? And some of my friends think I have no life when see how much time I spend on BA? :)

RS Bobcat

rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,503

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/21/2016 7:09:17 AM

For anyone whose interested,the Associated Press put out an article about the Federal Government issuing guidelines (112 pages worth) for driverless vehicles.

The A.P. article says that the guidelines include a 15 point Safety Assessment.

The article goes through some of them.

Pretty much in line with the concerns raised here.

MedinaCat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Lakewood, OH
Post Count: 740

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/22/2016 5:06:05 PM

rpbobcat wrote:

Once they figure out how to grease their palms and maximize the taxes, the federales and politicians will fast track such vehicles.

Scott Woods
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: On the banks of the Ohio, OH
Post Count: 226

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/26/2016 10:41:30 AM

Why aren't trains autonomous? Takes too long to stop? Seems like they'd be easier to make driver-less, but I know nothing about the technology.

Religion morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

So enter that daily thou mayest grow in knowledge wisdom and love. So depart that daily thou mayest better serve thy fellowmen thy country and thy God.

rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,503

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/26/2016 11:53:26 AM

Scott Woods wrote:

Why aren't trains autonomous? Takes too long to stop? Seems like they'd be easier to make driver-less, but I know nothing about the technology.

I agree that,if the issue was limited to starting/moving/stopping a good first step in driverless vehicles would be trains.Especially since you only go forward,no turns,no swerving.

Where it gets tricky is the fact that,at least around here in North Jersey,trains make multiple,frequent stops to pick up and/or discharge passengers.

That requires a person to determine when its safe for a train to move.

I guess you could set it up so a conductor pushes a button when its all clear for a train to move,and a computer takes over from there.

Last Edited: 9/26/2016 11:55:26 AM by rpbobcat

DelBobcat
General User

Member Since: 8/26/2010
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 1,135

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Posted: 9/27/2016 1:46:45 PM

Scott Woods wrote:

Why aren't trains autonomous? Takes too long to stop? Seems like they'd be easier to make driver-less, but I know nothing about the technology.

Actually many rapid transit systems around the world have some level of automation. Systems like the Copenhagen Metro don't have drivers at all. The automated system can actually stop the train much better than a human driver and allows for shorter headways between trains. That is, when the stops are expected. It's the sudden, unexpected stops that the automated system is bad at. A car stuck on the tracks, for example. That's one reason that longer, at-grade, commuter routes need to have drivers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_met...

BA OHIO 2010, BS OHIO 2010, MA Delaware 2012

Showing Replies:	76 - 100 of 300 Posts
Jump to Page:	< Previous 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 \| 5 \| 6 \| 7 \| 8 \| 9 \| 10 \| 11 \| 12 Next >

View Other 'General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events' Topics

There are 197 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

197 Guests
0 Registered Users

There are no other users looking at this page.