V2V-It is an OT subject, Will it be retro for a Model T?

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2015: V2V-It is an OT subject, Will it be retro for a Model T?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Herb Iffrig on Wednesday, December 30, 2015 - 08:11 pm:

From an email.


Subject: V2V Communications

Twenty years ago, the idea of a vehicle with communication capabilities was the stuff of sci-fi and horror novels. Today, vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication is slowly gaining more ground in becoming a reality. V2V communication is the line of information exchange between car to driver, car to car, and car to network. Though it may seem like a sudden leap into a world akin to that of George Jetson’s, the Department of Transportation (DOT) has been researching, engineering, and testing the capabilities of V2V communication for nearly a decade. So what’s all the fuss about? How does V2V communication work, what does it cost, and when will the public get to see the launch of this new technology?

v-to-v-tech

What V2V Communication Is

The August 2014 report Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communications: Readiness of V2V Technology for Application compiled by the Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that the V2V capable automobiles will house a “vehicle-resident,” which is a mesh of technologies designed to assist in crash avoidance, serving as an early warning indicator of possible impending hazards. In essence, the hardware includes an on-board short-range radio communication device that transmits info about a vehicle’s direction, speed, brakes, and more, and can receive the same kind of information from these various sources. Essentially, it informs the driver of what is behind the wall and around the bend before a visual line of sight is able to recognize.

How V2V Communication Works

Since the gist of the V2V communication concept is that cars will be able to “talk” to their respective drivers with the intention of improving safety and preventing accidents. In order to do so, the design aims to allow these vehicles to view the big picture, meaning the other cars on the roads, stoplights, road conditions, bus schedules, weather changes, and other factors that contribute to the potential hazards of travel. (2) These communicative cars will come equipped with sensors that can exchange and collect data, and then analyze these large amounts of data from these numerous information sources, thus resulting in alerting drivers of would-be collisions.

The first generation V2V vehicles, expected to premier in 2017, will not be robotically controlled, meaning that the network of intelligence collectors, or “vehicle resident,” cannot seize control of the car. In later generations (those manufactured in 2020 and onward) the artificial intelligence operator will possess the capability to captain the ship. This means features like self parking and eventually communication with your other smart devices, your house and office will be possible.

What V2V Communication Will Cost

Initial estimates by the NHTSA indicate that first and second generation V2V equipment, along with the necessary supporting communication functions will run about $340 to $350 per vehicle, but the NHTSA also speculates that these initial prices will drop to around $210 to $235 30 years after being on the market. Estimates for yearly costs of manufacturing such equipment are in the range of $300 million to more than $2 billion in the year 2020. The costs are expected to peak at $1 billion to $6.4 billion in the years between 2022 and 2024, but will slide down to the $1 billion to $5 billion range is the years after.

In short, what was once only conceivable in the realm of imagination will be rolling off the racks in 2017, or rather, will roll itself off the racks onto a potentially safer road.

Are you ready for a car that can basically drive itself? Click here to let us know in the comments.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Henry Petrino in Modesto, CA on Wednesday, December 30, 2015 - 08:52 pm:

I'm all for it. When Henry Ford and Ford Motor Company got started many people believed traveling faster than 20 or 30 MPH was harmful to your body. They were wrong and needed an adjustment in thinking. The same thing applies in this situation.

Not only is it the next logical step, in my opinion it's the only way we will ever get control of the way many idiots drive. I'd rather trust a well designed and well built system (V2V) than some nineteen-year-old with much more horsepower than brains. I bet after full implementation and future refinement highway deaths will all but disappear.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Sullivan on Wednesday, December 30, 2015 - 09:50 pm:

I wonder if you will still be able to rear-end a Model T Dave in Bellingham, WA


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack Cole ---- Earth on Wednesday, December 30, 2015 - 10:27 pm:

Us that drive older stuff will be vulnerable to these self driving cars as they basically won't know we are there and crash into us full speed.
A lightning strike would have it parallel parking on I40
When I was in college I was working on a idea using the paint markings in the road and sensors on the car bumpers to warn the driver if they were getting close to the edge of the lane. The system could use metal flakes and a magnetic sensor or more of the glass beads and reflect light to a sensor. It was to be a totally passive system that would warn the driver with a light or buzzer. The concept of a machine operated by software taking control of the steering is just scary to me.

In a controlled environment like a industrial plant,if a robut fails and starts spinning around and around or puts 2 testickles on a Tickle me Elmo doll,chances are no one will die.
But if a robut parallel parks a Cadi in the middle of I40,folks could die.There is just not a way to fail safe every situation.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Wayne Sheldon, Grass Valley, CA on Thursday, December 31, 2015 - 12:12 am:

Short and sweet.
Technology has the capability to solve all our problems.
Human stupidity has the ability to destroy all solutions.
Regardless of any proposed technological solution? Until MOST human beings accept THEIR responsibility in the equation? All potential solutions will fail for the majority of people.
Sorry.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Stroud on Thursday, December 31, 2015 - 01:14 am:

Mack, you just about caused me to choke on that Tickle Me Elmo doll comment!!!!! I have to agree with you about the glitches. Remember the Toyota's( I think it was them) that would suddenly accelerate without warning a few years ago? As far as I'm concerned, computers have too much control now. But I'm just an old fart that is probably too much set in my ways. I'm glad I grew up in the '50's-'70's when cars were cool. JMHO Dave


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By G.R.Cheshire on Thursday, December 31, 2015 - 11:15 am:

19 year old in command of a V2V conveyance, is texting while listening to tunes on his ipad and "skyping" with sweet young thing. V2V equipped conveyance hits something. Who is at fault? The software developer? The Conveyance manufacturer?
The 19 year old? The person driving a non V2V compliant vehicle on the road that was rear-ended?
Oh well I guess this will give the lawyers something to do on their coffee break! :-( :-(


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Norman T. Kling on Thursday, December 31, 2015 - 11:22 am:

It's difficult to accept another human driving and controlling a car. I would not want to trust a robot to drive me around. I do use cruise control, but I have my feet ready to disable it whenever I need to stop, or go faster. I also have my hands ready to switch it off. I would not like a self steering car or a self braking car. I also like to have at least 3 independent braking systems on my Model T. Just in case!
Norm


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.
Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration