UK to allow driverless cars from January.

Huskaris said:

cantersaddick said:

valleynick66 said:

cantersaddick said:

valleynick66 said:

cantersaddick said:

Jints said:

AddicksAddict said:

valleynick66 said:

cantersaddick said:

valleynick66 said:

cantersaddick said:

seriously_red said:

jimmymelrose said:

uncle said:

Will driving test become a thing of the past?

Yes. I’ve already said to my children (oldest is 17) that it’s probably not worth bothering.  I reckon that driverless cars will be available to buy by 2030 or otherwise it’ll be more like all driverless cars are effectively like taxis.

I read about this after the Brexit vote and at that time there were predictions that 80% of urban journeys would be completed by driverless cars in ten years time... so 2026/27.

We are behind that curve but the use case remains the same: why learn to drive and why invest £10-30K in a car that sits around most of the time when one can simply use an Uber App or competitor to summons a driverless car for any trip? And let's not forget fuel, maintenance and insurance.

It may soon become much, much cheaper to live in a built up area?

The transformational effect it could have on cities and suburbs too. The amount of space dedicated to car related infrastructure just to accommodate them being parked for the majority of the time. We could see much more outdoor  seating for dining and eating at restaurants like in European cities. More greenery instead of parking spaces. Nicely done front gardens instead of drives. Trees giving shade to combat the urban heat island effect and improve air quality. 

Of course our weather may dictate otherwise for outdoor dining!

More seriously though if more of us use these driverless cars that will still see a lot of cars on the road and in need of infrastructure as you put it. Not sure how it translates to saved space  significantly. 

It was in response to the suggestion of calling a driverless car via an app or subscription service rather than owning it. 

The vast majority of cars spend more than 90% if the time parked. Of we move the the above model then a) there would be far fewer cars needing to be parked as theybwill be off on another job for another customer and b) cars wouldn't need to be parked in residential or city centre areas as they can drive themselves to a suitable parking place in a less busy area. 

Therefore more space

All round a much better allocation of resource.

Hmmm. I’m not sure that in Greater London this fleet of cars can all overnight park up in country lanes further out!

Maybe we will build huge car parks on the borders of the M25 and see a swarm of cars all driving in to London in the early hours ready for the morning rush hour. That wound be eerie!

long term they will be the norm I’m sure but likely some time beyond that before any material change to re purposing road space. 

There will be far fewer cars. If cars spend 90% of their time parked, in theory you need about 90% fewer cars if they’re being used all the time. 

Only if the 10% when they are being driven is evenly spaced. In fact that will be peaks of demands at commuting times but you would still see a significant reduction- I'd guess more like 50% though

Yes, likely about right. But thats still 50% fewer cars needing ton e parked and therefore 50% or more of existing parking spaces that can be repurposed.

But….

Most parking is in side / suburban roads who maybe don’t have a driveway. I don’t see how that changes materially those areas. Likewise in city centre areas wound still be needed to arrive at / load etc. 

As said a long time before any land us reclaimed to change the look and feel of areas even when such cars are commonplace. 

Sure it wont be immediate but there is definite scope for this to happen. Its happened in cities like Amsterdam and Paris in areas where they have discouraged car use. In places where there arent drives on street parking is common (many places have both drives and on street parking). If we move away from the car ownership model then that on street parking is not needed to the same extent at all. There will need to be some spaces for loading, unloading, delivery, pick ups etc but if these are all generally short stops then there is a massively lower need for these. So space previously given to street parking can either be given to road space to improve flow (likely to be unnecessary in many cases in suburbia) or to grass verges and trees. Or many a bit of both, street parking on one side of the road given to road space and the other side given to trees and verges with pull in spaces every 100 yards?. I saw a graphic a few months ago showing what proportion of cities are used for parked car infrastructure. Not moving cars but parked. Its a scary proportion of the land space in cities. I'll try and dig it out.

What you describe is simply what roads looked like a generation ago when homes did not typically have more than one car and many had none. 

It may well transpire and will be influenced by what  happens to public transport and how affordable these shared cars are or if they become the privilege of the wealthy. Only time will tell.

Yes and returning to such would be transformational and of huge benefit. 

I've said enough on this forum about funding and improving public transport so I wont get started down that route! Given the lack of up front costs and admin such as insurance maintenance and tax these subscription services (as seen with Uber etc) have much lower barriers to entry compared with purchasing a car. Better public transport would reduce the need for them which is ideal but these are good options.

If they could make longer distance drives economical rather than equivalent of an existing taxi, as well as being able to get bigger van size ones to load stuff into, I could see it really transforming. 

Could supercharge the move to electric, if let's say, you go 300 miles in car A then get out a service station, hope straight into car B and get going... 

If both of the above could happen I would consider giving up my car. 

Long distance travel - train 

Local travel - autonomous car 

Large payload vehicle - electric van  

DaveMehmet said:

Huskaris said:

Chizz said:

Huskaris said:

cantersaddick said:

valleynick66 said:

cantersaddick said:

valleynick66 said:

cantersaddick said:

Jints said:

AddicksAddict said:

valleynick66 said:

cantersaddick said:

valleynick66 said:

cantersaddick said:

seriously_red said:

jimmymelrose said:

uncle said:

Will driving test become a thing of the past?

Yes. I’ve already said to my children (oldest is 17) that it’s probably not worth bothering.  I reckon that driverless cars will be available to buy by 2030 or otherwise it’ll be more like all driverless cars are effectively like taxis.

I read about this after the Brexit vote and at that time there were predictions that 80% of urban journeys would be completed by driverless cars in ten years time... so 2026/27.

We are behind that curve but the use case remains the same: why learn to drive and why invest £10-30K in a car that sits around most of the time when one can simply use an Uber App or competitor to summons a driverless car for any trip? And let's not forget fuel, maintenance and insurance.

It may soon become much, much cheaper to live in a built up area?

The transformational effect it could have on cities and suburbs too. The amount of space dedicated to car related infrastructure just to accommodate them being parked for the majority of the time. We could see much more outdoor  seating for dining and eating at restaurants like in European cities. More greenery instead of parking spaces. Nicely done front gardens instead of drives. Trees giving shade to combat the urban heat island effect and improve air quality. 

Of course our weather may dictate otherwise for outdoor dining!

More seriously though if more of us use these driverless cars that will still see a lot of cars on the road and in need of infrastructure as you put it. Not sure how it translates to saved space  significantly. 

It was in response to the suggestion of calling a driverless car via an app or subscription service rather than owning it. 

The vast majority of cars spend more than 90% if the time parked. Of we move the the above model then a) there would be far fewer cars needing to be parked as theybwill be off on another job for another customer and b) cars wouldn't need to be parked in residential or city centre areas as they can drive themselves to a suitable parking place in a less busy area. 

Therefore more space

All round a much better allocation of resource.

Hmmm. I’m not sure that in Greater London this fleet of cars can all overnight park up in country lanes further out!

Maybe we will build huge car parks on the borders of the M25 and see a swarm of cars all driving in to London in the early hours ready for the morning rush hour. That wound be eerie!

long term they will be the norm I’m sure but likely some time beyond that before any material change to re purposing road space. 

There will be far fewer cars. If cars spend 90% of their time parked, in theory you need about 90% fewer cars if they’re being used all the time. 

Only if the 10% when they are being driven is evenly spaced. In fact that will be peaks of demands at commuting times but you would still see a significant reduction- I'd guess more like 50% though

Yes, likely about right. But thats still 50% fewer cars needing ton e parked and therefore 50% or more of existing parking spaces that can be repurposed.

But….

Most parking is in side / suburban roads who maybe don’t have a driveway. I don’t see how that changes materially those areas. Likewise in city centre areas wound still be needed to arrive at / load etc. 

As said a long time before any land us reclaimed to change the look and feel of areas even when such cars are commonplace. 

Sure it wont be immediate but there is definite scope for this to happen. Its happened in cities like Amsterdam and Paris in areas where they have discouraged car use. In places where there arent drives on street parking is common (many places have both drives and on street parking). If we move away from the car ownership model then that on street parking is not needed to the same extent at all. There will need to be some spaces for loading, unloading, delivery, pick ups etc but if these are all generally short stops then there is a massively lower need for these. So space previously given to street parking can either be given to road space to improve flow (likely to be unnecessary in many cases in suburbia) or to grass verges and trees. Or many a bit of both, street parking on one side of the road given to road space and the other side given to trees and verges with pull in spaces every 100 yards?. I saw a graphic a few months ago showing what proportion of cities are used for parked car infrastructure. Not moving cars but parked. Its a scary proportion of the land space in cities. I'll try and dig it out.

What you describe is simply what roads looked like a generation ago when homes did not typically have more than one car and many had none. 

It may well transpire and will be influenced by what  happens to public transport and how affordable these shared cars are or if they become the privilege of the wealthy. Only time will tell.

Yes and returning to such would be transformational and of huge benefit. 

I've said enough on this forum about funding and improving public transport so I wont get started down that route! Given the lack of up front costs and admin such as insurance maintenance and tax these subscription services (as seen with Uber etc) have much lower barriers to entry compared with purchasing a car. Better public transport would reduce the need for them which is ideal but these are good options.

If they could make longer distance drives economical rather than equivalent of an existing taxi, as well as being able to get bigger van size ones to load stuff into, I could see it really transforming. 

Could supercharge the move to electric, if let's say, you go 300 miles in car A then get out a service station, hope straight into car B and get going... 

If both of the above could happen I would consider giving up my car. 

Long distance travel - train 

Local travel - autonomous car 

Large payload vehicle - electric van  

I don't want to spend an hour and a half getting to Paddington to then get on a train to Wales, I'd rather drive. 

I'd rather not go full stop.

Nathan, Nathan, look at what Dave just said. 

Dippenhall said:

Can imagine it happening initially only in designated areas where all signage and infrastructure has been designed and tested and no complicated temporary diversions are operating.

Will need to read temporary road diversion instructions, follow cones and temporary speed limits not relying only on GPS related speed limits. My Audi will often wrongly pick up a 30 mph sign positioned on the corner of a side road if it’s angled facing oncoming traffic, so intelligent reading of signage could pose issues.

To avoid mixture of driven and autonomous vehicles could also see urban driverless zones excluding driven vehicles.

I think motorways may be where driverless cars are allowed first rather than urban zones.

Let's hope they can spot a pothole from 20 yards , else the suspension and wheel shop will be doing a brisk business 

One thing I remember reading recently is that drivers have started to notice that the driverless vehicles will always yield, so drivers can just pull out in front of them as long as there's enough time.

Another is that in the US, the number one job in every state for non college graduate men is truck driving. So the next step of driverless trucks would have massive repercussions.

Symptomatic of 21st thunking!

What a fucking stupid idea, just for the sake of it as usual.

Got all the boomer bases covered in the comments here

Yours, a boomer. 

EveshamAddick said:

Driverless cars - the solution to a problem no one knew existed.

Speak for yourself. I’m well aware of the problem of an hour wasted during my daily commute when I could be replying to emails, making calls or getting admin done. The solution will free up more of my evening.

Is the intention to roll these out nationwide? Because, the more I think about it, the more it seems these cars will only operate successfully in cities — and even then, primarily on main roads — or between services on motorways. I struggle to see how installing the necessary support infrastructure on every road across the UK could be financially viable or practical.

There's a lot of optimism on these pages. I hope it's precient optimism, but it really doesn't feel it to me. I think the first real big change is that it will put more power into the hands of the few organisations who can afford to be early adopters on a grand scale, cutting out the middle man in providing services to the public. Fast forward to taxi drivers, and their more humble counterparts, Uber drivers, being put out of work. Fast Forward to delivery companies wringing more out of their staff who will no longer be drivers but mobile parcel sorters. Fast forward to automated juggernauts relentlessly criss crossing the country whilst the lorry drivers of old sit at home on benefits funded by a dwindling number of tax payers.

As for automated cars solving our traffic problems, maybe there'll be a slight decrease in traffic in city areas, but here's the thing. Cities are already the places with the best public transport and still people choose to keep cars. People like cars and they like owning them. That's not going to change just because you can hire a Johnnycab to get somewhere. You can already get a cab. You might not have to pay for a driver in future, but you'll still have to pay for the billionaire class to make their profits.

Finally, I think some of the problems mentioned in above posts have been brushed over very glibly. It's not just Hyde Park Corner and A2 turn-offs that will be the problem, there are places all over the country where you have to be so bullish that you just couldn't possibly negotiate them without exceeding the bounds that the DVSA considers safe. Stating that driverless cars will be better because they can attend to more information doesn't even come close to solving the problem that sometimes you need to take risks when driving. So, either you'll need to allow for some element of risk taking, or you need a completely automatic system with no human drivers or you need to accept that some intersections may see far worse congestion because driverless vehicles won't get out.

Dippenhall said:

Can imagine it happening initially only in designated areas where all signage and infrastructure has been designed and tested and no complicated temporary diversions are operating.

Will need to read temporary road diversion instructions, follow cones and temporary speed limits not relying only on GPS related speed limits. My Audi will often wrongly pick up a 30 mph sign positioned on the corner of a side road if it’s angled facing oncoming traffic, so intelligent reading of signage could pose issues.

To avoid mixture of driven and autonomous vehicles could also see urban driverless zones excluding driven vehicles.

Toyotas, maybe others, pick up '80' of the back of foreign lorries.

Jokes aside, ideas like this are terrible. AI, automation, robot work etc. People's laziness towards it all winds me up.

Without sounding like a meme, the robots will end up taking all our jobs. Jobs like taxi driving, delivery drivers, truck drivers, pilots, train drivers etc are essential to the economy. You start taking away these jobs, where do these workers go? 

And it won't be as simple as "they'll do the picking/packing" as at some stage companies will use AI or some form of robot/technology for that too. 

Even things like music, films, TV. The creativity will soon go and people will be using automated websites to get ideas. 

The world is in a state of de-evolution imo. What people may see as convenience, I see as social fracture.