Toyota Recalls - Observations?

[Big_Ed]

JTR, well a person can predict human behavior better than a computer can. Algorithms aren't going to be able to outdo humans just yet. They aren't going to say, hmmm, there's a dog standing in the grass by the sidewalk and he may jump out into the street to chase that squirrel on the other side of the road. Sorry, I'm not buying the fact that a computer will be better at a human at things like that.

And your observations are exactly what I expect from people in big cities. People are really ruthless behind the wheel in large cities, like NY, Chicago, and LA. I live in a small town outside of the suburbs. Drivers out here are way better, less pushy and more courteous. I drive into Chicago weekly and see it all the time. So, yes, people are definitely less than careful. Some people definitely should not be behind the wheel. But not everyone is a bad driver.

I doubt I will ever see self driving cars in my lifetime. Even if they did come out, they'd be too expensive, and largely unneccesary. I'd never have one. I think you may like the idea of these self driving cars because you don't drive a car yourself. There are many, many thousands of people who really enjoy driving. I happen to be one of those people.

 

[jtr1962]

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, and then see what the future holds. You're completely disregarding the exponential advances in both computer power and programming taking place. It's not only possible, but virtually certain, we'll have computers which learn soon. Take such a machine, let it learn expert driving techniques beyond its initial programming for a few months, and then put that algorithm in the self-drive system of production cars. It'll be better than any human could possible program it, and better than any human could drive. That dog chasing a squirrel thing is a red herring. Sometimes there's nothing either a human driver or an automated one can do to prevent a fatality.

Suffice it to say also I think you're 100% wrong with the "largely unnecessary" comment. See here.

Similar list for all modes

Fatalities and injuries per passenger mile by mode

Interesting how the total of motor vehicle deaths for 2009 is over an order of magnitude higher than ALL of the other modes combined. Also note how the fatalities and injuries per passenger mile are much higher.

I think you may like the idea of these self driving cars because you don't drive a car yourself. There are many, many thousands of people who really enjoy driving. I happen to be one of those people.

There's nothing enjoyable about driving on public roads given the expense, the low speed limits, the other drivers constantly getting in your way doing dumb things, the exhaust fumes, well, you get the idea. I did have a permit once and tried driving a little. I couldn't legally drive how I wanted to, so I said screw it. The fact that I really can't afford a car anyway, plus don't go places where I would need one, kind of clinched the deal for me. The only place I imagine driving might be remotely enjoyable would be in deep rural areas. Problem is that would be about the only thing I might find enjoyable in such an area, so no thanks.

I like the idea of self-driving cars because I like anything which will keep me safer while walking or biking, and reduce the taxes I pay to keep a huge highway patrol on the payroll. More public transit, coupled with restrictions on car use in city limits, would work just as well for me except it's not as politically viable at this time.

And your observations are exactly what I expect from people in big cities. People are really ruthless behind the wheel in large cities, like NY, Chicago, and LA. I live in a small town outside of the suburbs. Drivers out here are way better, less pushy and more courteous.

A lot of the aggressive driving you observe comes about because other drivers do stupid things. Someone double parks maybe, then half a block later a taxi cuts you off to drop off a passenger. Now you get stuck at a red light you would have made if not for those two things. So next few blocks you try and make up those 45 seconds you lost, perhaps even run a light if you can. Or maybe even if nothing happened you preemptively try and make up time in case you get delayed down the road. If you live in a slow place 45 seconds or even 10 minutes may not matter. Here it does to a lot of people ( not me personally, but I've known people who get pissed if something delays them for 15 seconds ). That's why people go crazy trying to make a light, or get the best position when the light changes. Maybe if some small percentage of awful drivers didn't delay everyone else with their stupidity, driving times here would be more predictable, and people would drive more sanely. I'm not saying I agree with what I see on the roads, but I understand the reasons behind it. I kind of do the same thing cycling against the clock, except my options to make up time are much more limited.

What it amounts to really is the same thing which happens when anything becomes accessible to the masses. Once something goes from an exclusive "club" with its own unspoken courtesy to something the masses have, it degrades to the least common denominator. That probably happened with the auto soon after WWII. We really should have kept the trains and trolleys. Something similar happened to the Internet once AOL made it accessible in the late 1990s, or so I've heard from people who were online in the 1990s ( I wasn't - couldn't afford a PC at the time ).

If car drivers were as professional as this guy, I wouldn't have any complaints.

 

[Badbeams3]

I see where some shareholders of Toyota stock are suing Toyota. Their claim is Toyota knew there was a problem but did not come forward with it. So they had purchased the stock under the belief things were fine, only to see it drop in value. Might have a case...we shall see.

I think we could see some level of self driving cars. But only on highways in between cities...not in cities. And only on 4 lane ones. The 2 most left lanes will be the auto drive ones. The most right lane will be self drive with one next to it used as a transition lane (from self to auto)...but mostly empty as a buffer.

"Auto control engaging...please remove you hands from the wheel" :shakehead

" Auto highway ending...Please place you hands on the wheel within two miles and move to the right lane".

If you don`t take control, the car will exit left into a rest area and park ... :tired: There, you will be subjected to one minute of punk rock at a rather loud level (in the future considered punishment for a variety of minor offenses and crimes) and then allowed to go on your way.

Myself...think I`ll just find back roads 😉

But I don`t know...I can see a lot of problems as others have pointed out with auto driving cars. I`m still waiting for those flying cars everyone was suppose to have by now. And those hot robot women :naughty: 😱

 

[jtr1962]

I`m still waiting for those flying cars everyone was suppose to have by now.

Putting aside that flying cars are a solution waiting for a problem, I read that the reason we won't have them any time soon is ( surprise ) because we lack the means to automate their control. You would need an enormously complex, failsafe system to deal with millions of vehicles moving in three dimensions, probably several orders of magnitude beyond what would be needed to automate cars. You couldn't allow human control of skycars and hope to sell them to the masses. Most people are utterly incapable of thinking in 3 dimensions. Many can't even deal with the 2 needed to drive a car.

Getting back to Toyota, this whole automated car scenario came up because of the liability situation. It's entirely likely given how our court system works that Toyota will be found liable even in cases where operator error is clearly the cause of a crash. Whether or not an actual known defective design exists will be secondary. Given that reality, what would you do if you were Toyota? Or an automaker, period? Remember, you would now be legally responsible for any crashes, even those caused by human error, if there was even a hint of a defect in your product. Since you really can't make a perfect product, you would seek to minimize the number of crashes. Other automakers would follow lest it leaves them at a competitive disadvantage. You might start by doing what can easily be done right now, such as automatically adjusting the speed if you're following another vehicle too closely, applying the brakes if the driver tries to run a red light, perhaps using GPS to prevent the car from physically exceeding the speed limit, maybe even limiting acceleration rates except on highway entrance ramps. Later on, as technology allows, you'll automate the entire driving process. Not because you want to, but because it'll reduce your exposure to liability.

IMO, all these Toyota lawsuits just opened a huge can of worms which we'll see crawling all over the automotive landscape in the coming years.

 

[Badbeams3]

Putting aside that flying cars are a solution waiting for a problem, I read that the reason we won't have them any time soon is ( surprise ) because we lack the means to automate their control. You would need an enormously complex, failsafe system to deal with millions of vehicles moving in three dimensions, probably several orders of magnitude beyond what would be needed to automate cars. You couldn't allow human control of skycars and hope to sell them to the masses. Most people are utterly incapable of thinking in 3 dimensions. Many can't even deal with the 2 needed to drive a car.

Getting back to Toyota, this whole automated car scenario came up because of the liability situation. It's entirely likely given how our court system works that Toyota will be found liable even in cases where operator error is clearly the cause of a crash. Whether or not an actual known defective design exists will be secondary. Given that reality, what would you do if you were Toyota? Or an automaker, period? Remember, you would now be legally responsible for any crashes, even those caused by human error, if there was even a hint of a defect in your product. Since you really can't make a perfect product, you would seek to minimize the number of crashes. Other automakers would follow lest it leaves them at a competitive disadvantage. You might start by doing what can easily be done right now, such as automatically adjusting the speed if you're following another vehicle too closely, applying the brakes if the driver tries to run a red light, perhaps using GPS to prevent the car from physically exceeding the speed limit, maybe even limiting acceleration rates except on highway entrance ramps. Later on, as technology allows, you'll automate the entire driving process. Not because you want to, but because it'll reduce your exposure to liability.

IMO, all these Toyota lawsuits just opened a huge can of worms which we'll see crawling all over the automotive landscape in the coming years.

Honestly? Um...perhaps I would include an option for the customer to purchase a defective product insurance. If they don`t choose this option, they understand and agree that my company can only be held accountable for willful negligence (very hard to prove) and repairs are limited to the terms of the warranty. Another words...if you do not choose to buy my insurance and the throttle sticks and your injured...you are out of luck. I have no other liability beyond repairing the throttle.

They would have to choose and sign either way at the point of purchase. Pay and accept...or decline and run the risk.

The bulk of people will decline...the middle class and poor...the wealthy will pay. So the poor loose out if something happens like the Toyota situation...but the rich come out just fine. Same as always 😉

 

[gadget_lover]

JTR, well a person can predict human behavior better than a computer can. Algorithms aren't going to be able to outdo humans just yet. They aren't going to say, hmmm, there's a dog standing in the grass by the sidewalk and he may jump out into the street to chase that squirrel on the other side of the road. Sorry, I'm not buying the fact that a computer will be better at a human at things like that.

I think you are highly over estimating the skill and attention span of the average driver. I spend a couple of hours a day in the car, and I see thousands of people who are barely paying attention to their driving, much less the hazards near the roads.

Just as an example of how flawed humans are, we have to put automated crossing guards at rail-road crossings because people don't look out for trains. They miss locomotives the size of a house moving at 30 to 50 mph at marked intersections, even when they blow their whistles. Or they try to go around the gates to beat the train and a few dozen get killed every year (that I hear on the news).

People are NOT good guidance systems. They are unpredictable. Send 10 people though a marked hazard course and you will see 10 different sets of reactions. Send several people at the same time and you are likely to see a lot of accidents.

Now imagine if we can segregate the automated and the manual systems. The cars follow a strict program. They are predictable. They can communicate via cameras, light, RF, etc. That makes it easy to program in avoidance systems. All of them can react like the individual birds in a flock of swallows, moving in unison.

Automated systems will allow a lot more cars per mile than we have now. According to the experts, you should leave 160 feet between cars at 65 MPH. That's the 2 second rule. That means the road is over crowded at just 29 cars per mile. If you have automated systems that signal the need to brake, that gap can be safely cut to just 50 feet, adjusted based on the car's ability to stop. So you can triple the number of cars per lane AND maintain the speed.

If you say "but what if a car can't stop, or if one crashes?" Well, the same thing that happens now, except instead of a 100 car pileup you have 5 or 6 cars and the rest (being notified by radio) stop gracefully or change lanes before hitting anything. With human pilots we have multiple car crashes every day in every part of the country.

It will happen if population continues to grow, Most of the pieces are available. It's just a matter of selling it.

Daniel

 

[Monocrom]

Thanks! I'm glad I make sense to at least one person here. And apologies to all if I took the thread a little off track. I love talking about stuff like this!

Quite a bit of what you post makes sense. However, I must admit that I feel you are a bit too willing to trust in the suspect reliability of modern technology. Even here in our little community, how often do we see topics made in referrence to a brand new light that folks have been eagerly anticipating? It comes out, and then problems & glitches galore!

While the above can be greatly reduced simply through Beta-Testing, who's going to do that if an automated system goes into production?

 

[was.lost.but.now.found]

A lot of the aggressive driving you observe comes about because other drivers do stupid things. Someone double parks maybe, then half a block later a taxi cuts you off to drop off a passenger. Now you get stuck at a red light you would have made if not for those two things. So next few blocks you try and make up those 45 seconds you lost, perhaps even run a light if you can. Or maybe even if nothing happened you preemptively try and make up time in case you get delayed down the road. If you live in a slow place 45 seconds or even 10 minutes may not matter. Here it does to a lot of people ( not me personally, but I've known people who get pissed if something delays them for 15 seconds ). That's why people go crazy trying to make a light, or get the best position when the light changes. Maybe if some small percentage of awful drivers didn't delay everyone else with their stupidity, driving times here would be more predictable, and people would drive more sanely. I'm not saying I agree with what I see on the roads, but I understand the reasons behind it. I kind of do the same thing cycling against the clock, except my options to make up time are much more limited.

I hear what you're saying, and I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but this almost comes across as justifying bad driving, which I completely disagree with in all circumstances. I hear all the time people (who I know to be reckless drivers) say things like "yeah, he was going so slow I just HAD to pass him on the right lane" when the driver in question was probably going the speed limit or even over.

 

[jtr1962]

Quite a bit of what you post makes sense. However, I must admit that I feel you are a bit too willing to trust in the suspect reliability of modern technology. Even here in our little community, how often do we see topics made in referrence to a brand new light that folks have been eagerly anticipating? It comes out, and then problems & glitches galore!

While the above can be greatly reduced simply through Beta-Testing, who's going to do that if an automated system goes into production?

I've been in the electronics business for a long time. There are two things I've found which often compromise products. One is lack of beta testing as you said. The other is pressure from the buyer to get down costs. I recently had a lot of problems with a new regulator I made. Why? First off, I would rather have had the customer beta test it for a year in a few cars before production, but he wanted to get the device it was in out sooner. Second, he pressured me on costs, so I had to use an electrolytic cap instead of a solid polymer cap. It also didn't help that I had limited information ( not really his fault ) about the circuitry powering the device. End result? A ton of field failures. He issued a recall, I'm currently doing a redesign.

Bottom line-this pressure to get things out to market in a hurry, and cut costs to the bone, has to end if we want reliable products. Sure, there's always an off chance someone will beat you to market, but chances are good they'll have a piece of junk which won't last anyway. When their product breaks, you'll sell their ( former ) customers your better version.

I hear what you're saying, and I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but this almost comes across as justifying bad driving, which I completely disagree with in all circumstances. I hear all the time people (who I know to be reckless drivers) say things like "yeah, he was going so slow I just HAD to pass him on the right lane" when the driver in question was probably going the speed limit or even over.

What it comes down to is people don't like a lot of variability in their trip times, especially for things like their commute to work where they have a certain scheduled arrival time without much flexibility. Thanks to a relatively small percentage of really bad drivers doing things like slowing down for no apparent reason right in the middle of a street, or double parking, or cutting others off, there is far too much variability in driving times these days. What exactly is a driver supposed to do if someone needlessly delays them and they need to be at work at such and such time? I don't buy the usual line "leave earlier", either. That might mean 3 days out of 5 you'll arrive 15 or 20 minutes early and have to sit there twiddling your thumbs with no pay. In a year it comes to over two full days of wasted time. If you have more or less consistent trip times then everyone wins. For example, prior to working at home I had to be at work at 8 AM. I didn't get paid if I came early, and there was a 5 minute grace period for lateness. Thankfully the subway and connecting bus line were pretty consistent that time of day. If I left my house at 7:20 AM and everything ran good, I would get to work more or less at 8 on the dot. Occasionally I might arrive a minute or two early, other times a minute or two late ( which was fine by my employer ). About once a month the trains might get screwed up and I would get to work 15 or 30 minutes late, sometimes even more. Not a big issue since it happened rarely. Now what if the same thing happened once or twice a week? My employer likely wouldn't tolerate me arriving that late once or twice a week. I could leave 30 minutes early, and eliminate most ( but not all ) of my latenesses. Problem is 3 or 4 days out of 5 I would get to work at 7:30, then have to waste 30 minutes of my life twiddling my thumbs ( not to mention losing valuable sleep as I often got home from work at 10 or 11 PM previous day ). This is why car drivers do what I mentioned in the city. Trip times by car are highly variable on account of the human factor. Now imagine how different it would be if you know it takes you exactly, say 45 minutes and 20 seconds to get to work, plus or minus 30 seconds? Sometimes even if a trip takes longer, people would prefer it over a usually shorter, but highly variable trip time. That's often why people in NYC will take the train even at off-peak times when driving might be faster. Sometimes it will be, sometimes not. The trains are generally pretty reliable, especially off-peak, even if we love to complain about them.

 

[tino_ale]

Quite a bit of what you post makes sense. However, I must admit that I feel you are a bit too willing to trust in the suspect reliability of modern technology. Even here in our little community, how often do we see topics made in referrence to a brand new light that folks have been eagerly anticipating? It comes out, and then problems & glitches galore!

While the above can be greatly reduced simply through Beta-Testing, who's going to do that if an automated system goes into production?

I understand your scepticism about modern technology and I don't think we should blindly thrust it either.

On the other hand it seems you completely overlook how high reliability systems are made and how they share so very little with the stuff you are used to deal with, and see fail on a regular basis. You just can't compare a flashlight which has basically 0% failure tolerance, redundancy, backup or defense mechanism with a system that will have to implement them.

Yes a new system always need to mature and yet ultimately will never reach a 100% reliability.

About maintenance. Thousands of airplanes are in the air at any given moment. Do you see one fall very often ? No. So without being at 100%, they ARE freaking reliable. Yet do you think the people who are working on their maintenance are all PhD? I don't think so.

Now it's all about "what is enough" and how much failure leading to death the public can bear. But for some reason, the public will be much less forgiving with an automated system, even if the manual version leads to the exact same number of killed.

 

[was.lost.but.now.found]

What it comes down to is people don't like a lot of variability in their trip times, especially for things like their commute to work where they have a certain scheduled arrival time without much flexibility. Thanks to a relatively small percentage of really bad drivers doing things like slowing down for no apparent reason right in the middle of a street, or double parking, or cutting others off, there is far too much variability in driving times these days. What exactly is a driver supposed to do if someone needlessly delays them and they need to be at work at such and such time? I don't buy the usual line "leave earlier", either. That might mean 3 days out of 5 you'll arrive 15 or 20 minutes early and have to sit there twiddling your thumbs with no pay. In a year it comes to over two full days of wasted time. If you have more or less consistent trip times then everyone wins. For example, prior to working at home I had to be at work at 8 AM. I didn't get paid if I came early, and there was a 5 minute grace period for lateness. Thankfully the subway and connecting bus line were pretty consistent that time of day. If I left my house at 7:20 AM and everything ran good, I would get to work more or less at 8 on the dot. Occasionally I might arrive a minute or two early, other times a minute or two late ( which was fine by my employer ). About once a month the trains might get screwed up and I would get to work 15 or 30 minutes late, sometimes even more. Not a big issue since it happened rarely. Now what if the same thing happened once or twice a week? My employer likely wouldn't tolerate me arriving that late once or twice a week. I could leave 30 minutes early, and eliminate most ( but not all ) of my latenesses. Problem is 3 or 4 days out of 5 I would get to work at 7:30, then have to waste 30 minutes of my life twiddling my thumbs ( not to mention losing valuable sleep as I often got home from work at 10 or 11 PM previous day ). This is why car drivers do what I mentioned in the city. Trip times by car are highly variable on account of the human factor. Now imagine how different it would be if you know it takes you exactly, say 45 minutes and 20 seconds to get to work, plus or minus 30 seconds? Sometimes even if a trip takes longer, people would prefer it over a usually shorter, but highly variable trip time. That's often why people in NYC will take the train even at off-peak times when driving might be faster. Sometimes it will be, sometimes not. The trains are generally pretty reliable, especially off-peak, even if we love to complain about them.

Ok, no more need to beat around the bush; you are without a doubt justifying bad driving.

I don't agree with your math; you are exagerating the benefits of driving above the speed limit. You've implied that you can "make up" 20 minutes over a 45 minute commute. Let's make some assumptions and say that you have 5 minutes of 35mph in town driving, then 35 minutes of 60 mph highway driving, followed by 5 more minutes at 35mph in town. Do you think these are fair assumptions? Driving 10mph over the speed limit for both in town sections would yield a 2.3 minute gain total over both sections, meaning you'd have to make up the other 17.7 minutes on the highway, at a speed of 121mph. That is giving you the best case scenario of having the entire commuter to bridge the difference.

I think the more likely answer is that most drivers (aggressive or not) are slowed down throughout their journey by just a few miles per hour at occassional moments. Some new math: same trip, slowed down by 5mph for 30 seconds once every 5 minutes would result in being delayed by about .37 miles behind the same driver going the constant speeds assumed before. That comes out to one minute or less (at worst).

 

[Steve K]

About maintenance. Thousands of airplanes are in the air at any given moment. Do you see one fall very often ? No. So without being at 100%, they ARE freaking reliable. Yet do you think the people who are working on their maintenance are all PhD? I don't think so.

heavens, you really don't want a PhD fixing your aircraft! They could prove that it should work, but they just don't know the first thing about which end of the wrench to hold. 🙂

Prior to getting my engineering degree, I spent 4 years in the Marine Corps fixing electronics on tactical jets. You need to be a reasonably smart person to do the job, but there are tools to help diagnose the various potential failure modes. Actually, it's getting to be more and more similar to fixing a modern car. The onboard diagnostics can get you close to figuring out what has failed, but you need to have a good understanding of how the system is supposed to operate in order to efficiently figure out what part is bad or out of adjustment.

Anything can be made reliable, but it takes a certain amount of money, development time, etc. to do so. Just think about how reliable a cheap LCD watch is, compared to a mechanical watch built 50 years ago. Almost no parts to wear out, nothing to adjust, nothing to wind, just replace the battery every seven years or so. And think about how many different technologies had to mature in order for this to happen!

Steve K.

 

[jtr1962]

I don't agree with your math; you are exagerating the benefits of driving above the speed limit. You've implied that you can "make up" 20 minutes over a 45 minute commute.

I'm not saying they CAN make up 20 minutes they might lose in a 45 minute commute, only that they'll die trying ( both figuratively and literally ). You eloquently proved that with your example. BTW the 121 mph on the highway isn't far from what I've seen some here do trying to make up time. 🙁 I've seen 100 mph driving on one of the local arteries which has a 30 mph limit and lights every few blocks. I wish I was kidding but I'm not.

I think the more likely answer is that most drivers (aggressive or not) are slowed down throughout their journey by just a few miles per hour at occassional moments. Some new math: same trip, slowed down by 5mph for 30 seconds once every 5 minutes would result in being delayed by about .37 miles behind the same driver going the constant speeds assumed before. That comes out to one minute or less (at worst).

It's a little more complicated than that. Sometimes a delay of a few seconds means you get stuck at the next traffic light which you might have made. Now you could suddenly be 45 seconds or a minute behind. 3 blocks later it happens again. Now you're 2 minutes behind. Not hard to lose 10 or 20 minutes this way. You might even get delayed 5 seconds, then get stuck at a light for a minute. Perhaps an accident just occurred on a highway you planned to take. If you made the light you may have gotten on the highway, and went past the point where the accident occurred before it happened. Now you hit the light, then get stuck in traffic behind the accident for 15 minutes. Small delays in the city easily compound into big delays.

Another example has to do with the psychological effects of this. I cycle purely for exercise and pleasure. I don't have to be anywhere on a schedule when I cycle. However, I'm used to certain trips taking certain amounts of time. I often start my rides with a warm up down the local bike path. From my house to where I turn around is 2.99 miles on the nose with a roughly 60 foot gain in elevation. It usually takes about 12 minutes. With bad weather or headwinds or if I'm weak it might take 13. On my better days it can take under 11. Not much more variance than that due to the fact that I ride when traffic is relatively light. There is usually a spot where the road is rough enough to need to slow down. I might also encounter a few minor slowdowns, perhaps one red light as well. But this doesn't bother me much as it doesn't affect the travel time by much.

A couple of times I made the mistake of riding midday or rush hours. Ironically, I found myself doing exactly the same things I see drivers do. The situation quickly got frustrating. One block someone slows down for a turn, and right after I reach a double parked car I can't swing around due to traffic. Now I'm stuck at a light I easily could have made, and traffic is too heavy to go through even if I wanted to. Next few blocks more BS, and another light. When I come to the bumpy spots I run through at full speed trying make up lost time. When all is said and done I get to the turnaround point about 17 minutes after leaving my house. Sure, not a huge delay compared to my normal rides, but constantly having my progress frustrated almost every single block by something or other raised my blood pressure. In the end I did a lot of things I might otherwise not do in a futile quest to make up the lost time. Little doubt the same psychology applies to driving in heavy traffic. Everyone can deal with a few minor delays amounting to a couple of seconds. It's when something stupid happens literally every block that you end up with the kind of driving behavoir you see in big cities. The things I encountered which frustrated me all had to do with inconsiderate, stupid driving. Don't double park, don't just stop your car in the middle of the street to yap on the phone, don't drive if you're too ill to keep up with traffic, don't drive if you have brain fog from taking drugs, illegal or not, don't try and jockey for position at every stop light. If everyone was courteous and sure of where they were going, then driving times would be more predictable, and the aggressive behavoir would mostly vanish. Sadly, the opposite seems to be occurring. People are totally clueless of how much their inconsiderate, selfish behavoir frustrates those who need to be somewhere on a schedule.

 

[Monocrom]

I've been in the electronics business for a long time. There are two things I've found which often compromise products. One is lack of beta testing as you said. The other is pressure from the buyer to get down costs. I recently had a lot of problems with a new regulator I made. Why? First off, I would rather have had the customer beta test it for a year in a few cars before production, but he wanted to get the device it was in out sooner. Second, he pressured me on costs, so I had to use an electrolytic cap instead of a solid polymer cap. It also didn't help that I had limited information ( not really his fault ) about the circuitry powering the device. End result? A ton of field failures. He issued a recall, I'm currently doing a redesign.

Bottom line-this pressure to get things out to market in a hurry, and cut costs to the bone, has to end if we want reliable products. Sure, there's always an off chance someone will beat you to market, but chances are good they'll have a piece of junk which won't last anyway. When their product breaks, you'll sell their ( former ) customers your better version.

Unfortunately, you've pointed out the main reason why I believe an automated system would likely be failure-prone. If the Federal government decided to install such a system on the highways, the main issues will be cost and how soon the program can be implamented. The company that promises delivery in the shortest amount of time, at the lowest cost, is going to get the contract. The two worst elements for reliability. Build it fast. (Limited testing, system put in place before it's ready.) Build it cheap. (You clearly know the problems involved in doing that.)

Brings to mind a sign I once saw above an autobody shop:

"Car Repairs.

Cheap, fast, and good.

(Pick from two of the three)."

It's not the dedicated Engineers or Technicians who decide when an automated is ready. It's going to be either an impatient client, or the men at a company who have been promoted because they are good at one thing . . . Making money for the company. They don't have a technical mind. They have one talent. They excel at making money. They get promoted to top positions. They decide when a system is ready. A Head Engineer or Technician can object all he wants. But when Money Man says "Release it or you lose your job," that's going to be the end of the conversation right there. In this world, if your one talent is making money; you're considered more important than folks who make other things.

 

[was.lost.but.now.found]

don't try and jockey for position at every stop light.

I'm glad you said this because I think it has helped to clear some of my misunderstanding. Until now I was under the impression that you WERE the guy jockeying for position. I stand corrected and I think we are on the same page.

Sorry for the misdirection off topic.

 

[jtr1962]

I'm glad you said this because I think it has helped to clear some of my misunderstanding. Until now I was under the impression that you WERE the guy jockeying for position. I stand corrected and I think we are on the same page.

Sorry for the misdirection off topic.

It couldn't be me-I don't have a car or a driver's license. Yes, I do pull closer to a red light on the far right of traffic when I cycle, but I'm supposed to ride there anyway. The cars aren't. It annoys me when they "steal" my lane just so they can gain a couple of car lengths at a traffic light. I also try to be predictable when I ride so cars don't have a reason to say they didn't see me.

On the subject of seconds mattering, you might find this video both educational and enjoyable. The reason here isn't so much that the passengers care if they arrive 15 seconds late. Rather, it's that the line is 2 track, with no room for more tracks, is full of trains, and a 15 second delay can throw the entire operation in disarray.

EDIT:

Very relevant to this topic:

The incompetent shall inherit the roadway

Why do motorists seem increasingly incompetent? Well maybe because the traffic engineers keep trying to design the roads to compensate for irresponsibility and stupidity. Everything and everyone must be gotten out of the way of the incompetent!

When you design the system for minimal attention to the task, guess what you get?

 

[StarHalo]

Buses help reduce traffic

 

[Badbeams3]

😉

Buses help reduce traffic

Improve traffic flow whilst aiding in population control...a win win :twothumbs

Notice the buses left headlight is already out...obviously an experienced driver 😉

 

[Steve K]

😉
Improve traffic flow whilst aiding in population control...a win win :twothumbs

Notice the buses left headlight is already out...obviously an experienced driver 😉

and notice how the driver pulled slightly to one side when he impacted the car... clearly an effort to save the one headlight still functioning! Of course, that one headlight is aimed at a point about 4 feet in front of the bus, so it's not all that valuable.

that is a scary video! As I watch it loop over and over, I can't fight the urge to to tell the pedestrian "don't step into the intersection!" each time. I sorta feel bad that we don't know what happens to him.

Steve K.

 

[Steve K]

It's not the dedicated Engineers or Technicians who decide when an automated is ready. It's going to be either an impatient client, or the men at a company who have been promoted because they are good at one thing . . . Making money for the company. They don't have a technical mind. They have one talent. They excel at making money. They get promoted to top positions. They decide when a system is ready. A Head Engineer or Technician can object all he wants. But when Money Man says "Release it or you lose your job," that's going to be the end of the conversation right there. In this world, if your one talent is making money; you're considered more important than folks who make other things.

in larger companies, there are also corporate lawyers who understand that if they ship an unsafe product, the company will be bankrupted from the lawsuits.

In mature industries, there are also regulations that limit what can be produced. The regulations are a result of products that were unsafe. In a new industry such as automated machinery, there will certainly be an early period where we learn how smart the manufacturers are, and how much oversight and regulation they need.

In my current position, I can see that the EU is much faster at instituting regulations, while the US is content to let manufacturers do whatever they think is appropriate and will keep them out of court (mostly regarding electro-magnetic compatibility issues and RoHS, "reduction of hazardous substances").

Steve K.