Future of transport

[mavhc]

Flying is way too cheap for the pollution it causes.

 

Train tickets pay for rails, car tax doesn't pay for roads

[dcwhitworth]

Realistically unless there's a fairly fundamental restructuring of the way elements of society work and our expectations, we're heading over a cliff. Better public transport and everyone driving electric cards is just papering over the cracks.

[LeMarchand]

Realistically unless there's a fairly fundamental restructuring of the way elements of society work and our expectations, we're heading over a cliff. Better public transport and everyone driving electric cards is just papering over the cracks.

 

We had a slight Covid-enforced restructure with wfh. Now, despite evidence that productivity didn't suffer, big bosses are wanting people back in where they can be lorded over and middle management, no doubt seeing that they aren't actually needed, are supporting this.

[dcwhitworth]

We had a slight Covid-enforced restructure with wfh. Now, despite evidence that productivity didn't suffer, big bosses are wanting people back in where they can be lorded over and middle management, no doubt seeing that they aren't actually needed, are supporting this.

 

This is a neat microcosm of the overall problem. The wider systems in society keep trying to drag things back to 'how things were'

[stevejp]

In theory, public transport to work for me should be a doddle - 5 minutes walk to the bus station, 10 minutes walk to work the other end. In practice, it’s a different story. When I finally gave up on public transport and went back to the car, I immediately gained an average of two hours on my day - and that’s before thinking about how crowded and unpleasant the buses are. I got fed up with the 30/45 minutes wait for a bus in the evening coming out of Birmingham city centre - and there were plenty of days when it was worse than that. I console myself with the fact that the car is rarely empty - two members of staff live en route, so most days I have at least one of them in the car, if not both.

[mikes]

Wouldn't society moving to a 4 day week cut down a lot of pollution? Automation and computers were supposed to give us a better standard of life (see science fiction in the 50's predicting a 20 hour work week) yet we are still being driven like slaves. I'm not saying a 4 day week would cut down 20% of pollution but it would help ?

[Andrew_C]

Just like the mass movement of people into cities during the industrial revolution, and the move out to the suburbs in the 30's - 50's, I think we will see another huge upheaval. We'll probably only know what actually happens in 50+ years.

 

Maybe something like:-

 

Those that can, WFH more

Those that can't move nearer work, or work moves nearer the people

Public transport is developed to support something near the current model for many more people

Computers actually start delivering on some of those promises from way back when

AI takes over and either a) delivers on the rest of the promises, or b) eradicates the infestation doing so much harm to the planet

[stevejp]

Wouldn't society moving to a 4 day week cut down a lot of pollution? Automation and computers were supposed to give us a better standard of life (see science fiction in the 50's predicting a 20 hour work week) yet we are still being driven like slaves. I'm not saying a 4 day week would cut down 20% of pollution but it would help ?

I'd love to see schools move to a 4-day week - but the cynic in me is telling me not to hold my breath...

[mavhc]

We are due for a move to 4.5 days a week, based on moving from 6 to 5.5 days a week about 1850 (half day Saturday), and 5.5 to 5 in about 1930.

 

But UK is one of the least automated rich countries

 

"The UK has a robot density of just 85 – which is extremely low when compared with Sweden (240), Denmark (230), the US (200), Belgium (192), Italy (190), Netherlands (172), Canada (161), Spain (157), Finland (139), and France (137) – the nine countries that have similar manufacturing levels. All have significantly higher productivity."

 

https://transformindustry.com/sensors/uks-low-automation-and-robotics-use-makes-it-20th-most-productive-nation-claims-report

 

We still have hand built houses made by local artisans.

 

Schools are a different question though, so much to learn. I propose 4 day work week, but then everyone goes to school for 1 day a week, if you left school 20 years ago you have a lot of new things to learn/relearn

[6Foot2]

Link: Bristol electric 'flying taxi' firm gets £39m cash lifeline - BBC News

 

A company developing a new electric aircraft has announced a major new investment, ensuring its survival.

 

Vertical Aerospace, based in Bristol, is testing a so-called electric flying taxi which can carry four passengers up to 100 miles (161km).

 

The firm had been struggling financially, but has secured a $50m (£39m) investment from the US investor, Mudrick Capital.

 

Stuart Simpson, chief executive of Vertical, called it a "really exciting, pivotal day for the company".

 

Vertical is one many companies around the world trying to develop an all-electric vertical take-off aircraft, or eVTOL.

 

Its goal is to create an aircraft that is as convenient as a helicopter but which is cheaper to run and does not emit carbon and contribute to climate change.

 

Vertical was founded in 2016 by British businessman Stephen Fitzpatrick, who also founded the energy firm Ovo.

 

Mr Fitzpatrick claims the company’s VX4 aircraft will be "100 times safer and quieter" than a helicopter, for one fifth of the cost.

 

Earlier this month the firm’s engineers passed a new milestone at Cotswold Airport, in Gloucestershire.

 

For the first time, they flew the aircraft "untethered" - without a safety line to the ground.

 

It marks the next phase of their testing programme, overseen by the Civil Aviation Authority.

 

Mr Simpson said: "We are one of only two flying taxis that have a tilt-rotor to have done this in the world, and we’re doing this in the south west of England.

 

"It’s a phenomenal achievement."

 

Offering flights without carbon emissions is something of a holy grail for the aerospace industry.

 

Airbus, GKN and other big aircraft makers are experimenting with hydrogen powered planes.

 

Another small start-up company is testing hydrogen fuel-cells on small propellor-driven aircraft.

 

The vertical take-off aircraft requires some very sophisticated engineering.

 

Eight small rotors mounted on small wings initially lift the aircraft off the tarmac, like a helicopter.

 

They then tilt to propel the vehicle forwards, offering more stability, and also more engineering risk.

 

But the finance is almost harder than the physics.

 

Persuading investors to dig deep enough to keep the company going through long periods of testing and regulation has proved difficult.

 

Many firms have already folded.

 

American take-over?

 

Mr Simpson believes the $50m (£39) injection from Jason Mudrick will keep Vertical running until the end of 2025.

 

Vertical had racked up £260m of debt and the new deal sees half of that debt converted into equity, owned by distressed debt investor Mudrick Capital.

 

This means that Jason Mudrick will now own 70% of Vertical’s shares, replacing founder Stephen Fitzpatrick, who is left with 20%.

 

Mr Fitzpatrick will remain on the board, providing "strategic direction".

 

Mudrick Capital has been involved for three years already, and both sides denied talk of a takeover.

 

Mr Mudrick said: "This agreement underscores our appreciation of Vertical Aerospace’s position in the eVTOL sector and a team that has demonstrated its ability to deliver groundbreaking solutions for the future of sustainable aviation."

 

Mr Fitzpatrick said: "The additional equity and stronger balance sheet will enable us to fund the next phase of our development programme and deliver on our mission to bring this amazing electric aircraft to the skies."

 

The company has already sold the first 1500 aircraft to blue chip aerospace firms and plans to achieve full CAA certification by 2028 - giving its aircraft permission to fly.

[6Foot2]

Link: First full-size driverless bus trials to begin in Scotland - BBC News

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]65322[/ATTACH]

 

Link: Fife to Edinburgh driverless bus service to stop in 2025 - BBC News

 

A driverless bus service thought to be the first of its kind in the world is to be pulled because of a lack of passengers.

 

CAVForth has operated the full-size, self-driving buses between Fife and Edinburgh on the Stagecoach timetable since May 2023, with an estimated capacity of 10,000 passengers a week.

 

Five single-decker vehicles, which required two drivers on board even when operating autonomously, have been making the 14-mile journey between Ferrytoll park and ride in Fife and Edinburgh Park train and tram interchange.

 

However, the company said "passenger adoption" on the government-funded pilot project "did not meet expectations" and it would end in February 2025.

 

CAVForth is a collaboration between Fusion Processing Limited, Alexander Dennis, Edinburgh Napier University and the University of the West of England.

 

It was estimated to cost £6.1m, external, with more than two-thirds of that coming from the UK government's £100m Intelligent Mobility Fund with other investment from bus operator Stagecoach, Transport Scotland, and industry partners.

 

Their driverless buses have sensors enabling them to travel on pre-selected roads at up to 50mph.

 

On each trip they switch between autonomous and manual driving, being controlled by computer across the Forth Road Bridge, and from the M90 and M8 to the A720 in Edinburgh.

 

A "safety driver" remains in the driver's seat to monitor the technology even when the computer is controlling the bus, and a "bus captain" helps passengers with boarding, buying tickets and queries.

 

A spokesperson for CAVForth said they were "proud to have achieved a world first" and to have demonstrated the "potential for self-driving technology on a real-world registered timetable".

 

"This groundbreaking trial project has delivered invaluable insights, with partners working together to shape the future of public transport," they said in a statement.

 

"Although passenger adoption on the AB1 route did not meet expectations, the trial has significantly advanced the understanding of the operational and regulatory requirements for autonomous services, delivering what was expected from this demonstrator project."

 

It added that the project partners would explore new opportunities for self-driving technology in other parts of the UK.

Edited December 18, 2024 by 6Foot2

[HarryMonkey]

"A "safety driver" remains in the driver's seat to monitor the technology even when the computer is controlling the bus, and a "bus captain" helps passengers with boarding, buying tickets and queries."

 

The old bus driver and bus conductor system.

[mavhc]

It's a test system, to be expected

[mavhc]

@Ditto my figures are for deaths, not accidents

 

2 billion FSD miles https://digitalassets.tesla.com/tesla-contents/image/upload/IR/TSLA-Q3-2024-Update.pdf

 

10 trillion is an estimate, there's 1.4 billion cars, uk average is 7000 miles, usa drives 3.3 trillion miles etc.

 

2 FSD deaths is NHTSA's data, plus one Cruise and one Uber which were widely reported.

[Ditto]

@Ditto my figures are for deaths, not accidents

 

2 billion FSD miles https://digitalassets.tesla.com/tesla-contents/image/upload/IR/TSLA-Q3-2024-Update.pdf

 

10 trillion is an estimate, there's 1.4 billion cars, uk average is 7000 miles, usa drives 3.3 trillion miles etc.

 

2 FSD deaths is NHTSA's data, plus one Cruise and one Uber which were widely reported.

Aha! That's an extremely valid point. Given @Koldov quoted accident rate per mile, what's the autonomous equivalent? I think it would be interesting to compare accidents and deaths separately. I haven't researched this much at all, but I have seen suggestions that self driving have a higher rate of low speed accidents but perhaps the opposite is true of high speed and potential fatal accidents.

 

For me, the biggest challenge with autonomous during is two-fold and shouldn't be ignored or underestimated, and that's social acceptance. The second aspect is autonomous driving mixing with human drivers. I can imagine if all vehicles were autonomously driven, all synched in to a GPS system we could, have cars driving at up to 100 mph and just a few feet apart. Trouble with that is when things go wrong, it's going to be spectacularly wrong. Even allowing normal distances, I could see far more vehicles on roads being massively more efficient in a synchronised world. But how do you get to that point?

[NegativeKillDeath]

I don't particularly trust Musks figures of 2 billion FSD miles and that is cumulative miles, if you look at the chart in the PDF its probably closer to 1.5B for Sept 23 to Sept 24. That gives a fatalities per 100m VMT of 0.13. Compare that to US fatalities from here Motor vehicle fatality rate in U.S. by year - Wikipedia for 2023 of 1.27 then it looks like FSD is 10 times safer.

 

I imagine that most FSD miles are highway driving and if the US is like the UK then highway miles are the safest type of driving so the gap would probably narrow a bit more.

 

Its not a surprise the autonomous driving and safety aids increase safety. However it does remind me of this quote,

 

• Miles Dyson : Imagine a jet airliner with a pilot that never gets tired, never makes mistakes, never shows up with a hangover.
  [pats the model of the chip]
  Miles Dyson : Meet the pilot.
  

[Dos_Box]

Link: Fife to Edinburgh driverless bus service to stop in 2025 - BBC News

 

We have driverless busses in Preston. It's just a shame that the actual bus needs them so they don't turn up.

[mavhc]

What we need to realise is the 3000 people dying every day from humans drivers that's not headline news. It's just normal and ignored.

 

ADAS systems avoid hitting 100s-1000s of people a day

[Dos_Box]

What we need to realise is the 3000 people dying every day from humans drivers that's not headline news. It's just normal and ignored.

 

ADAS systems avoid hitting 100s-1000s of people a day

 

As someone who has pretty much every driving licence (bar coach and road roller), was a driving instructor, skid instructor (as well as a raft of other qualifications), and has driven in pretty much every environment known to man, I have to say that is not exactly true.

If you look at the map on this wikipedia page here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate#/media/File:Road_traffic_death_rate_(per_100_000_population)_-_WHO_2019.svg - you will see that the most deaths occur in developing countries, where they can neither afford, or maintain, vehicles with these systems, and I'd very much like to see how they perform on dirt tracks, or in jungles or crowded cities (I suspect they would just refuse to move).

In the developed world, where pedestrian deaths are generally quite low, they will drop the accident figures a tiny bit, but in other places, not a chance. In fact, and having driven some quite shocking vehicles in some parts of the world, I would suspect drivers would try and bypass them as soon as they could, or else they simply wouldn't be able to drive.

[LeMarchand]

I don't think it will be just the "developing world". If/when a system comes in that prevents exceeding the official speed limit you can bet that there will be "mod kits" available so that those who are in "total control" of their driving can still feel like real men.

[southhamster]

I don't think it will be just the "developing world". If/when a system comes in that prevents exceeding the official speed limit you can bet that there will be "mod kits" available so that those who are in "total control" of their driving can still feel like real men.

Good point. You can see that already with e-scooters that are chipped to run at mad speeds, but without brakes or a rider able to cope with that.

[mavhc]

As someone who has pretty much every driving licence (bar coach and road roller), was a driving instructor, skid instructor (as well as a raft of other qualifications), and has driven in pretty much every environment known to man, I have to say that is not exactly true.

 

Both statement are true. Plus technology gets everywhere eventually once it's cheap enough, most people have a smartphone now, hook it up to the brakes and you're half way there

[Koldov]

Sorry wrote this yesterday, but got caught up in actual work so forgot to post and I see some of the points have already been covered...

 

I haven't looked into the detail beyond the headlines (and I know the first hit on a Google search is Wikepedia and then the Guardian), but this has been widely reported, so I'm not certain whose figures to believe (I believe Musk less for some reson)...

 

In April 2024, the NHTSA released the findings of a 3-year investigation of 956 vehicle collisions in which Tesla Autopilot was thought to have been in use that found that the system had contributed to at least 467 collisions including 13 that resulted in fatalities.

 

I mean there's wiggle room, in that it 'was thought to have been in use'...

 

@Ditto - my figures were literally the top of a Google search... Most of my knowledge is anecdotal, from the news and watching numerous YouTube clips and obviously most of those only make it to the headlines when it goes wrong (that's life). I haven't done exhaustive research, I wasn't trying to prove a point as such, it was accidents, RE: my comment saying about their 'safety and reliability' and not fatalities so wasn't a direct response to @mavhc who had escalated into talking about fatalities. But I don't think it can be extrapolated so easily, you can say A,B, or C manufacturer has driven X, Y, or Z amount of miles with whatever number of fatalities, but how many of those miles were in 'testing', were truly autonomous, with no 'safety driver', in busy or fast moving traffic, etc.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the tech per se and I'm not anti-AI... would I trust a computer to write 10,000 lines of code with no mistakes more than I would a human...? Yes, I would.

 

I'm certainly with @mavhc on a lot of the issues. Would I trust a computer not be distracted by pretty girl walking by, the kids in the back of the car, the fact that I'm late to work, the guy on the left trying to cut in at the roundabout even though he's zoomed up in the wrong lane (clearly marked for turning left, with an arrow), or being pre-occupied with what I've got to do at work today, or what I'm having for dinner tonight...? Yes, I would! Would I trust it to obey the speed limits and road markings, not overtake on the wrong side of the road? Possibly not so much, but ALL of the above (and many more) happen every second of everyday, with human drivers. So essentially computers are more likely to do follow their programming more consistently, obviously.

 

The trouble is, ethically, I believe we are more 'programmed' ourselves to think people killing people is more acceptable than machines killing people... I mean not really acceptable, but is an accepted fact, 'accidents happen', the general public somehow just expect that a computer shouldn't make mistakes... of course any IT tech knows different. The more complicated the code, the more complicated the task, the more variables it has to deal with, the error rate is obviously going to rise.

 

It's certainly a predicament, we are quite used to putting our lives in the hands of another human, we are less used to putting it solely in the hands of a machine. You could say we fly in planes, ride in cars and trains etc. All machines, for sure, but with a human element at the helm, so when the machines go wrong, the human can (sometimes) still save the day. We tend to think less about the times when it's actually the human who makes the error that kills us...

Edited December 20, 2024 by Koldov

[mavhc]

Or the human pilot who deliberately kills everyone on the plane. I'd rather the computer flew the plane than the sleep deprived depressed alcoholics we seem to get too often

 

Only time the DLR crashed is when humans were driving

 

Pretty much all spaceflight is computer controlled, all elevators (the most reliable form of transport)

 

The computer can learn from billions of miles of data, way more than the 100s of miles you have to practise before getting a licence

[mthomas08]

Not as often as they should be. I'm planning a trip by train to Italy this year. Flying would be much cheaper.

 

Same for a trip to Paris for a colleague.

 

I used to regularly travel to Glasgow for work and it was almost always more expensive to take the train.

 

I choose to take the train as I'm happy to make the compromise of traveling less often.

 

Yep!

 

The mrs had two weekends away, 1 to Belgium and 1 to Cardiff.

 

I'll give you 3 guesses as to which was the cheapest by far......... it was Belgium. Now, you add up the amount of people going which was about 9 of them.... that price difference grows.