Self-Driving Freightliner Licensed in Neveda

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Recent info about Google self-driving cars and accidents just came out. Here it is. While self-driving car skeptics like to talk about safety and liability, show me another fleet of human-driven cars that logs as many miles and has better safety stats. The fact is, a self-driving car or truck is much safer than one driven by a human because human error, fatigue, distracted driving and emotions are eliminated. A self driving car has no ego. It does not care if it is late for a meeting. It never takes its eyes off the road. It never has to hurry because it has to pee.

With trucks, they can run almost continuously because they will not be subject to hours-of-service rules. One truck can easily cover twice as many miles as a human-driven truck can simply because it is not required by a log book limitation to stop.

When you halve the amount of time a truck is under load, you essentially double the size of your fleet by making that truck available that much sooner. And you double the size of your fleet without spending one additional penny on an additional truck. While these high-tech trucks may be more expensive, their increased productivity will more than make up the difference.
 

Moot

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
The more technology appeared in the trucks, the lower driver pay went. Bit by bit, technology is transforming drivers into steering wheel holders, and over time technology will replace drivers.
It was this advancement in technology that made it possible for you and Diane to enter into the wonderful world of trucking.
 

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
It was this advancement in technology that made it possible for you and Diane to enter into the wonderful world of trucking.

You are exactly right. If trucks did not have automatic transmissions, power steering and air conditioning, Diane and I never would have left life in the suburbs to take up life on the road. Had the creature comforts of our custom sleeper not been available (including internet access that enabled us to remain connected to our information and communities of choice), we may not have stayed in the business as long as we did.

Technology advanced in the 10 years we were in the industry, transferring more and more driver duties to machines (location reporting, log book keeping, temperature monitoring, etc.). The less a driver has to do, the less valuable that driver is to the motor carrier and the more easily that driver is replaced.

Now, technology is being used to eliminate drivers and reduce costs. Consider the caravan technology in which a human driver leads a caravan of robotic trucks that follow the leader.

Except for the additional technology that enables the following trucks to follow the leader without a human driver in them, the trucks are identical in every respect to a human-driven truck. But in an automated caravan, the cab AC can be left off in the following trucks. The following trucks can draft the trucks ahead truck. The technology operates the truck in a more efficient manner than any human can do. Fuel is saved. One driver is paid for the caravan instead of one driver for each truck.
 
Last edited:

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
and just what happens if the computer screws up and the truck hits something or kills someoneo_O who's responsible the manufacture or the owner?? I feel that once this tech is perfected insurance companies will plumit and go out of business as well as a lot of police will loose there jobs to:rolleyes:

This question is partially addressed in the report above about Google car results. As required by law, these cars are insured. Who pays in the event of an accident? Not the manufacturer and not the owner. The insurance company pays.

You make an interesting point about the increased safety self-driving vehicles provide. With risk being lower, insurance rates may indeed decrease. Further into the future, as this technology becomes more widely used and accepted, the liability question may not be so much about who is at fault but about why did the trucking company allow the truck to be driven by a human when self-driving trucks are so much safer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gotto_03801

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
and 1 software malfunction and the system comes to a stop...as we are aware ECM failures with software are a fault for us to deal with...imagine a truck unmanned with a software problem and can not be controlled...we will not see this in our lifetime nor our childrens lifetime...heck RC trains and planes have been around for years,,,they could fly a commercial plane with no pilots but we appear not to use the technology...

to add: I could see them doing what they do with triples on the interstate tho....from interchange to interchange....hooked up and unhook....dedicated lane from point A to point B and then a driver takes over into the city...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: gotto_03801

paulnstef39

Veteran Expediter
Fleet Owner
Brings the terms "Blue screen of death" into reality. Sit back and think about a hacker who figures out how to bust into self driving software. All Hino trucks, jam on breaks now, or make a hard left turn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gotto_03801

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
Brings the terms "Blue screen of death" into reality. Sit back and think about a hacker who figures out how to bust into self driving software. All Hino trucks, jam on breaks now, or make a hard left turn.
we've had driverless trains and planes for years and we still can't take the hands off the wheels....how long do you think it'll be for trucks barrelling down the road?......
 

paulnstef39

Veteran Expediter
Fleet Owner
we've had driverless trains and planes for years and we still can't take the hands off the wheels....how long do you think it'll be for trucks barrelling down the road?......

20 years both cars and trucks, with about $1 trillion dollars in intelligent highway improvements
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moot

paullud

Veteran Expediter
and 1 software malfunction and the system comes to a stop...as we are aware ECM failures with software are a fault for us to deal with...imagine a truck unmanned with a software problem and can not be controlled...we will not see this in our lifetime nor our childrens lifetime...heck RC trains and planes have been around for years,,,they could fly a commercial plane with no pilots but we appear not to use the technology...

to add: I could see them doing what they do with triples on the interstate tho....from interchange to interchange....hooked up and unhook....dedicated lane from point A to point B and then a driver takes over into the city...

A totally unmanned truck will be a great thing for freight hijackers. They could create a problem like a flat tire that would tell the truck's warning system to pull over and clean it out before any call to the police was made.
 

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Brings the terms "Blue screen of death" into reality. Sit back and think about a hacker who figures out how to bust into self driving software. All Hino trucks, jam on breaks now, or make a hard left turn.

Hypothetical scenarios are addressed with hypothetical solutions. Hypothetical hacker risk? That's easy. Create hypothetical software that is hacker-proof.

In the real world, every computer now in use is at risk of being hacked, including systems that operate the electrical grid, air traffic control systems, GPS systems, banking and credit card systems and many other mission-critical/safety-critical systems. Yes, they are at risk of being hacked but people choose to use them every day. As with those systems, so too with driverless vehicles in the years ahead.
 

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
A totally unmanned truck will be a great thing for freight hijackers. They could create a problem like a flat tire that would tell the truck's warning system to pull over and clean it out before any call to the police was made.

Certain kinds of trucks now and even certain kinds of freight are equipped with surveillance and tracking devices that would instantly alert security services under the scenario you pose. Human drivers have been known to fail in their security functions by going in to eat when they should be attending the truck. Human drivers have been known to become part of an inside job and actually cooperate with the crooks. Robots don't do that.

Hijackers already force manned trucks to stop or take them over when stopped. An unmanned truck can be remotely shut down if it is taken over by a human. If a truck of any kind is on the road, it is subject to hijack risk but the argument can be made that a robot truck is more secure because it makes fewer stops and it would instantly alert the appropriate people if something is wrong. Also, live video surveillance systems on robot trucks can be used to deter hijackers. If anyone approaching the rig is on tape, hijacking is deterred; not prevented but deterred.
 
Last edited:

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Phil! You know better than that.

With risk being lower, insurance co profits increase. IMO, of course.

With no driver in the truck, there is no risk of driver injury. With that risk eliminated, the insurance company cannot charge money to insure against such losses. With accident rates reduced because robots drive better than humans, the insurance company that does not reduce it's rates will lose business to the insurance companies that do.

They do it now. They charge less to insure a 45 year-old female driver than an 18 year-old male driver because young males have higher accident rates. When robot trucks are commonly seen on the road, insurance companies will charge less to insure them than they will to insure human-driven trucks. They know a robot will never speed, become enraged behind the wheel, get drunk, fall asleep or decide that doing the laundry and making up time on the road is more important than simply driving sure and steady at a slower speed.

Humans object to be monitored and treated like robots. Robots don't care. Insurance companies and motor carriers can monitor every aspect of a robot truck's operation. Even today, if a human allows the insurance company to place a monitoring device in his or car, lower insurance rates are offered. Robot-driven vehicles simply carry that to its logical conclusion.
 
Last edited:

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
I happened upon a CSPAN broadcast the other day about driverless vehicles. One of the points made was that policy makers need to prepare to deal with unemployed truck drivers. It was interesting to see inside-the-beltway types already assuming that driverless vehicles will become the norm.

The question was not "how do we protect truck drivers from technology?" It was "what are we going to do with all those unemployed truck drivers?" Clearly, the bias is pro-technology. While no one is taking any joy in the demise of the driver, drivers are viewed as people who will go the way of buggy whip makers and family farmers as technology advances.

People in this thread who say "not in our lifetime" may be right.

Personally, I hope I live to see the day. I would LOVE, LOVE, LOVE to make my daily commute to work in a driverless car. It would give me 45 minutes each way to work while I am on my way to the gym and back home. When going to a mid-day meeting or sales presentation, I could review my notes and prepare for the meet while leaving the driving to the car. When I need club supplies from Sam's Club, I could send the car to the store where people there would load my order instead of driving myself to complete that task.

I could co-own the car with my neighbors with scheduling and costs being allocated by an app to each co-owner according to usage. The car could take me to work in the morning, drive itself to my neighbor's house to take that retiree with vision problems to a doctor's appointment, drive itself back to take me to an afternoon meeting, drive itself to get an oil change while the meeting is underway and then take me home at night. I can see a group of ten people getting along just fine with five cars instead of ten people owning 10 or more cars to get the transportation they want.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
from concept cars in the 50's Popular Mechanics....I thought I'd live to see the days that wheels were none existent with cars being all of the hoovering type....
 
  • Like
Reactions: paullud

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
The Jetsons takes place in 2063. Give it time. A briefcase flying car requires nano technology, which we've just begun to explore. But we already have the flat screen TVs and portable video chat devices, interactive newspapers with moving pictures in them, and robot vacuum cleaners.

As for autonomous vehicles: Mars Rover
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
The Jetsons takes place in 2063. Give it time. A briefcase flying car requires nano technology, which we've just begun to explore. But we already have the flat screen TVs and portable video chat devices, interactive newspapers with moving pictures in them, and robot vacuum cleaners.

As for autonomous vehicles: Mars Rover

well...there is no ambulance chasing lawyers out there......yet....LOL
 

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
"In the year 2525, If man is still alive, If woman can survive, They may find..."
 
Top