US wants rules new cars must ‘talk’ to each other within 5 years

[gearhead204]

Damn B.C. if your Winnebago wheel holders cant scare them to death ........doubt much else will work!  I know they make me want to learn how to fly!!!!

1 hour ago, BC Mack said:

who needs a licence anyway...!!!!!

I drive around all day dodging hoards of Range Rovers and BMW's driven by "visitors" with no jobs and 10 million dollars houses, cops tried to nail them so the gov changed the rules.... they can now trade for a free Canadian licence and use a language translator to process the transaction... no test, no need to identify a road sign, no wonder the rcmp tried to clamp down on it but got their butts spanked.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china-insider/article/1496481/canadian-police-agree-let-chinese-drivers-use-mainland-licences?page=all

evidently they are "assisting" our economy by coming here and buying everything...!!!

just another element to this discussion.... so keep away from Hongcouver, and I'm sure many other cities, if you are a courteous driver...!!!!!

but if you are getting too upset with our north american drivers and traffic, go to youtube a look up "russian car crashes".... (sorry Vlad).... and you will see our problem here is far less serious than you thought...!!  LOL

BC Mack

 

[41chevy]

If the drivers training was a real training course like for a CDL and the tests were a real tests, things would be a hell of a lot better. I'd like to see added to the road tests entering and exiting a expressway and merging "at speed", changing lanes, collision avoidance, panic braking and the ability to actually back up a vehicle. Add the ability to do basic vehicle checks like tire pressure and lights. I'd also slam the morons who drive with a pee hole in the snow to look out of at 65 mph and leave all the snow on the car till it blows off. The ability to understand english would be nice too.   But these things have as much chance of ever happening as HRC telling the truth.     Paul

[mrsmackpaul]

I have been told that they dropped the parallel parking from the driving tests in some Australian states because people find it to hard these days 

 

Paul

[hatcity]

9 hours ago, BC Mack said:

who needs a licence anyway...!!!!!

I drive around all day dodging hoards of Range Rovers and BMW's driven by "visitors" with no jobs and 10 million dollars houses, cops tried to nail them so the gov changed the rules.... they can now trade for a free Canadian licence and use a language translator to process the transaction... no test, no need to identify a road sign, no wonder the rcmp tried to clamp down on it but got their butts spanked.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china-insider/article/1496481/canadian-police-agree-let-chinese-drivers-use-mainland-licences?page=all

evidently they are "assisting" our economy by coming here and buying everything...!!!

just another element to this discussion.... so keep away from Hongcouver, and I'm sure many other cities, if you are a courteous driver...!!!!!

but if you are getting too upset with our north american drivers and traffic, go to youtube a look up "russian car crashes".... (sorry Vlad).... and you will see our problem here is far less serious than you thought...!!  LOL

BC Mack

That's a normal "season" here.

most of the bad drivers are from up north...of the border

plates have the motto-"bring me souveniers"

[hatcity]

9 hours ago, BC Mack said:

who needs a licence anyway...!!!!!

I drive around all day dodging hoards of Range Rovers and BMW's driven by "visitors" with no jobs and 10 million dollars houses, cops tried to nail them so the gov changed the rules.... they can now trade for a free Canadian licence and use a language translator to process the transaction... no test, no need to identify a road sign, no wonder the rcmp tried to clamp down on it but got their butts spanked.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china-insider/article/1496481/canadian-police-agree-let-chinese-drivers-use-mainland-licences?page=all

evidently they are "assisting" our economy by coming here and buying everything...!!!

just another element to this discussion.... so keep away from Hongcouver, and I'm sure many other cities, if you are a courteous driver...!!!!!

but if you are getting too upset with our north american drivers and traffic, go to youtube a look up "russian car crashes".... (sorry Vlad).... and you will see our problem here is far less serious than you thought...!!  LOL

BC Mack

That's a normal "season" here.

most of the bad drivers are from up north...of the border

plates have the motto-"bring me souveniers"

[hatcity]

9 hours ago, BC Mack said:

who needs a licence anyway...!!!!!

I drive around all day dodging hoards of Range Rovers and BMW's driven by "visitors" with no jobs and 10 million dollars houses, cops tried to nail them so the gov changed the rules.... they can now trade for a free Canadian licence and use a language translator to process the transaction... no test, no need to identify a road sign, no wonder the rcmp tried to clamp down on it but got their butts spanked.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china-insider/article/1496481/canadian-police-agree-let-chinese-drivers-use-mainland-licences?page=all

evidently they are "assisting" our economy by coming here and buying everything...!!!

just another element to this discussion.... so keep away from Hongcouver, and I'm sure many other cities, if you are a courteous driver...!!!!!

but if you are getting too upset with our north american drivers and traffic, go to youtube a look up "russian car crashes".... (sorry Vlad).... and you will see our problem here is far less serious than you thought...!!  LOL

BC Mack

 

 

 

[Freightrain]

Yup, I watch those Russian videos.  Ya, glad I'm in Ohio(I guess?).

Was down in Mexico a week back, wow, the drivers down there aren't much better. Road signs are just vague inferences to what you are suppose to do.  BUT, I did notice the cops drive around at night with their flashers on constantly.  Not really sure why?  To be noticed?  Kinda strange as cops around here hide in the dark til they spot you doing something wrong.

[Freightrain]

4 hours ago, mrsmackpaul said:

I have been told that they dropped the parallel parking from the driving tests in some Australian states because people find it to hard these days 

 

Paul

I go over to the lake in the center of town(big pond more like it) at lunch and eat during the summer.   Jeezus you should see how BAD some(most) of these drivers are at parallel parking.  WOW>   Real entertainment, just like watching a boat ramp on the weekend.

I know my g/f is horrible at parking/backing up, she admits it.  She cringes when I back my truck into tight spots and not hardly look over my shoulder.  I tell her there are MIRRORS on the vehicle for a reason!

[kscarbel2]

Automotive News  /  December 18, 2016

Advocates for V2V communications systems are looking at Donald Trump's calls for infrastructure funding as a fresh opportunity to embed highway corridors and cities with the technology needed to link connected cars together.

At the intersection of two presidential administrations, there's new hope for making cars more connected to one another and the world around them.

Advocates for vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems are looking at President-elect Donald Trump's calls for an ambitious infrastructure funding bill as a fresh opportunity to embed highway corridors and cities with the technology needed to link connected cars together, or so-called vehicle-to-infrastructure communications systems.

"Things are sort of lining up in a way that is useful and is going to help "vehicle-to-infrastructure' get deployed," said Steven Bayless, vice president of public policy for the Intelligent Transportation Society of America, a Washington, D.C., trade group. "We think there's an opportunity for vehicle-to-infrastructure in the bill, so we're going to push for that. The path is pretty clear." 

Policymakers, safety advocates and automakers have longed for a fleet equipped with vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems, linked together by a smart infrastructure, to reduce crashes and ease traffic congestion. But the pace of the technology's rollout, more than a decade in the making, has been hindered by several factors, including a lack of federal standards for the in-vehicle systems and limited funding for infrastructure deployment to link connected cars. 

Yet the Obama administration took key steps to advance the technology's rollout last week. 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's proposed mandate for all new cars to have vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems calls for a shared set of standards to ensure that connected vehicles can communicate with one another in a common language and sets a timetable for the technology's rollout. NHTSA estimates the mandate will take full effect in 2023, assuming the proposal becomes a final rule in 2019. 

"A lot of folks were worried about sticking their nose out there without a standard," Bayless said. "With a standard, it gives automakers confidence to move forward." 

NHTSA said it plans to issue guidance soon for how state and local governments could deploy vehicle-to-infrastructure systems, adding another measure of clarity. 

NHTSA has said a connected fleet and infrastructure could prevent some 80 percent of vehicle crashes involving nonimpaired drivers. The systems use dedicated short-range communications radios to relay basic vehicle data -- such as speed and direction -- between vehicles 10 times per second. If the communications indicate an impending collision at a stoplight, for example, the vehicles can warn drivers to take action to avert it. 

Automakers likewise view V2V technology as a key enabler of autonomous vehicles [that virtually no consumers have asked for], which they see as a principal means of reducing the number of crashes caused by human error. Dedicated short-range communications messages have a range of about 300 yards, which NHTSA says is about triple the effective range of the radar, cameras and sensors of modern automated driving systems. V2V and V2I can also "see" around corners, allowing drivers to be warned of risks beyond their line of sight. 

Autonomous vehicles also need clear lane markings and smooth roads to operate safely, which means Trump's infrastructure ambitions are shaping up as an important turning point for the technology.

[TeamsterGrrrl]

Why is it that despite antilock brakes, stability control, airbags, etc.... The accident and fatality rates aren't dropping?

[beatngu]

This whole concept reminds me of "Demolition Man" self driving cars, Taco Bell is every restaurant... cryogenic prisons and nobody gets their feelings hurt.

[41chevy]

3 hours ago, beatngu said:

This whole concept reminds me of "Demolition Man" self driving cars, Taco Bell is every restaurant... cryogenic prisons and nobody gets their feelings hurt.

The good talking cars

[gearhead204]

7 hours ago, TeamsterGrrrl said:

Why is it that despite antilock brakes, stability control, airbags, etc.... The accident and fatality rates aren't dropping?

have you driven on any of your union maintained roads lately ?......in order to maintain control of the vehicle all tires must maintain contact with the road surface!........good luck with that !

[HeavyGunner]

13 hours ago, kscarbel2 said:

Autonomous vehicles also need clear lane markings and smooth roads to operate safely, which means Trump's infrastructure ambitions are shaping up as an important turning point for the technology.

So if I'm reading that right autonomous vehicles won't work in the winter (snow and ice covering the lane markings)?

[TeamsterGrrrl]

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 5:23 PM, gearhead204 said:

have you driven on any of your union maintained roads lately ?......in order to maintain control of the vehicle all tires must maintain contact with the road surface!........good luck with that !

First off, unions don't have much to do with it. The legislature and governor decide how much to spend on road maintainence.

Second, suspension function is a whole 'nother largely unrelated issue.

[gearhead204]

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 7:17 PM, TeamsterGrrrl said:

First off, unions don't have much to do with it. The legislature and governor decide how much to spend on road maintainence.

Second, suspension function is a whole 'nother largely unrelated issue.

Perhaps.......but the quality of the repairs do! .....they must be on a quota pays scale, don't square the pot hole or even make sure its dry just throw in some cold mix back the truck over it  and on to the next one! then do them all again the next week ! 

Suspension function can only function properly with a proper road surface and proper repairs.

[TeamsterGrrrl]

The lousy roads are more a function of cheap construction to start with, followed by underfunded maintenance.

American trucks got away with lousy "suspension" for years because we had new roads that were billiard table smooth, even rubber block works on smooth roads! But worn roads demand good suspension design, and the Europeans were way ahead of us in that department.

[Phase 1]

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 9:26 AM, TeamsterGrrrl said:

Why is it that despite antilock brakes, stability control, airbags, etc.... The accident and fatality rates aren't dropping?

Cell phones.

[41chevy]

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 9:09 PM, gearhead204 said:

perhaps.......but the quality of the repairs do! .....they must be on a quota pays scale, don't square the pot hole or even make sure its dry just throw in some cold mix back the truck over it  and on to the next one! then do them all again the next week ! 

Suspension function can only function properly with a proper road surface and proper repairs.

You have municipal workers who could care less about the quality, can't fire them so why care.

Plus road construction in much of Europe, particularly Germany, the construction must be guaranteed for a specific number of years (25 comes to mind). Any defects in design or construction comes out of the companies pocket and /or performance bond. 

Watched an inspector on the L.I.E. do a slump test, the results were just below acceptable. He okayed the load because he was going home after the test.

[blackdog2]

Like Ron White (tater salad) said, you can't fix stupid.

[beatngu]

If you ever end up in Plattsburgh try a cruise by the projects on south Peru Street. That road is cut up and patched so many times it will shake you out of the cab. I work for the NYSDOT bridge department. The equipment we have is minimal towards getting any task done. Some of the interstate bridges in this area can be rough on trucks because the approach slabs sunk years after they were built one really shitty one is southbound by Keeseville.

[TeamsterGrrrl]

17 hours ago, 41chevy said:

You have municipal workers who could care less about the quality, can't fire them so why care.

Plus road construction in much of Europe, particularly Germany, the construction must be guaranteed for a specific number of years (25 comes to mind). Any defects in design or construction comes out of the companies pocket and /or performance bond. 

Watched an inspector on the L.I.E. do a slump test, the results were just below acceptable. He okayed the load because he was going home after the test.

Minneapolis Public Works is union through and through, and they do construction as well as repairs. Over a couple decades they graded and repaved almost every street in the city. That project ended about 15 years ago when a dumb mayor shut down the concrete plant, sold off the mixer trucks and quit replacing drivers and skilled construction workers when they retired. Despite that neglect, the streets they built are still holding up very well, though the short staffed department can't plow snow like they used to. BTW, the only union rebuilt streets that are showing significant wear are the truck routes...

[gearhead204]

cant say that our state highways  hold up very long, the state engineers keep playing with asphalt mix designs, had some that resembled a "brownie mix" the state was trying to utilize waste from the bag house, it never seemed to cure. tried "superpave" it hauled water level in the dump boxes. "Low spray" actually appears to be working  ( open matrix design allows water to penetrate the asphalt) but it was used in a very arid area of the state, but when it does rain trucks produce very little spray. our concrete roads are riddled with broken segments and driving a rw 713 with pad rear suspension  I can tell where every defect is !  Have dealt with bone head inspectors that wanted the meet line to be in the center of the wheel track, others that wouldn't allow us to fix failed sub grade, just pave over it ! they would say. Our internal quality control stopped multiple jobs on state oversights, we like to produce a QUALITY product that would LAST.....guess that maybe why we were awarded the "contractor of the year award" from the state.

[BillyT]

Once again I agree with all of your insights! As  far as devices that disable cell phones on cars, the technology exists but I believe the electronics lobby has blocked the implementation of it in motor vehicles,because people want to talk when they drive, and it sells phones! Also talking on a cell phone isn't illegal in many states. In Florida texting is illegal  While driving,but it is a secondary offense! That means you must be pulled over for something else to get ticketed! Or the officer must see you cause an accident while texting!  I forget the fine for a  first offense but it's low enough that many strokes are willing to take the chance! The other problem is the emphasis on texting took the "heat" off talking on the phone while driving! Statistically it is at least as dangerous as driving drunk! The only people who should be allowed to talk while driving  are law enforcement and First responders! They generally have training in defensive driving, and they generally talk in response to an emergency situation or pertaining to a detail they are on not casual bullshit! It used  to be illegal to talk on the phone in Connecticut for a motorist, but I  think it must be a secondary offense as almost every motorist seems to be talking on the phone!

[kscarbel2]

Federal V2V mandate meets growing resistance

Bloomberg  /  April 17, 2017

A once-popular idea to equip cars with technology to communicate with one another and avoid collisions is encountering unexpected potholes in Washington.

An array of forces, from free-market groups opposed to government mandates to cable providers angling for greater access to high-speed wireless airwaves, have mounted opposition to a proposal that all new cars have vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems.

"This technology faces a huge number of hurdles, not the least of which is whether it’s even needed," said Mike Ramsey, an analyst with the technology research firm Gartner Inc. "There are a number of reasons why it may never get off the ground."

The Obama administration proposed the rule in December, saying it could eliminate 80 percent of vehicle crashes involving unimpaired drivers. If the rule is finalized, all new light-duty vehicles would be required within four years to be equipped with vehicle-to-vehicle communication systems. The technology will work hand-in-hand with new automated safety devices, such as automatic braking, in another step toward making driverless vehicles a reality, the Department of Transportation said at the time.

More than 400 people and organizations filed formal opinions with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration by last week’s deadline, reflecting a wide range of viewpoints.

The proposal enjoys broad support from safety advocates, with the National Safety Council commenting that the technology adds a layer of awareness and redundancy to on-board vehicle sensors "that will be critical as higher levels of automation are deployed."

But automakers are split on the virtues of the plan, with some voicing strong support and others pointing out flaws in the government’s approach.

The Association of Global Automakers, a trade group that represents foreign-owned automakers including Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co. and Hyundai Motor Co., says that more than $1 billion in private and public funds have been spent developing the systems. The group says the mandate is "the best way to ensure nationwide deployment" as soon as possible, according to its filing with NHTSA.

Major automotive industry companies, including General Motors, Denso Corp., Delphi Automotive and Toyota, have spent more than a decade developing vehicle-to-vehicle, or"V2V," communications systems.

"The safety benefit of V2V is undeniable. It will save lives, and everybody knows that," said Harry Lightsey, executive director of federal affairs for connected cars at GM. "A delay in rolling out V2V will cost lives, and that’s a tragedy."

GM, One of the mandate’s loudest cheerleaders, earlier this year launched the first V2V-equipped vehicle, the 2017 Cadillac CTS. NHTSA’s proposed mandate is the best way to quickly advance the technology and to put a dent in the number of car crashes, Lightsey said.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents a dozen automakers, including GM, Ford Motor Co. and Volkswagen AG, said NHTSA’s proposal needed additional clarity on several issues, including how security would be addressed, and asked for more time to implement the mandate than the proposal provides.

In its comment, Tesla Inc. said policy guidance and industry cooperation would be a better approach for encouraging V2V, calling NHTSA’s V2V strategy "too antiquated and vague" to protect the privacy of V2V messages.

Those messages are sent between cars 10 times per second using "dedicated short range communications" on airwaves reserved by the Federal Communications Commission in 1999.

Alternative systems

BMW AG says the proposal would require automakers to use those airwaves to comply with the rule, even as alternative systems using cellular networks emerge. In its comment, the automaker urged NHTSA to take a technology-neutral approach, saying "many of the shortcomings of DSRC can be efficiently and cost effectively addressed" using cellular-based systems.

One company offering such as system is Israel-based startup Nexar Ltd. It began operating a smartphone app-based V2V network in New York City that now includes about 2,500 vehicles, CEO Eran Shir said. Data collected from the phone’s camera, GPS and internal gyroscope are analyzed in Nexar’s cloud system to warn drivers of impending collisions.

Shir says that NHTSA’s mandate would put cellular-based V2V technology like Nexar’s at a disadvantage because companies would prioritize investments to comply with the rule.

"I would totally understand if NHTSA said, ‘We’re interested in safety and we want these safety features,’" Shir said. "There are millions of lives at stake. What I think is less reasonable is if NHTSA comes and says we want to regulate the technology. That doesn’t make sense."

Old technology

The failure to consider alternative technologies is a significant shortcoming of the proposal, says Marc Scribner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who co-authored a letter with four other free-market advocacy groups asking regulators to suspend the proceeding.

"You’re betting on something that at its core is 10-year-old technology that isn’t going to have much of a difference on safety for 20 years," Scribner said. "By the time it’s effective it will be out of date by 30 years."

The Internet and Television Association, the primary cable industry trade group, criticized the proposal for overstepping NHTSA’s authority by seeking to indirectly influence wireless spectrum policy overseen by the Federal Communications Commission. That agency is studying how vehicles and other Wi-Fi-enabled devices could share airwaves amid a lobbying push by cable and tech companies hungry for additional wireless bandwidth.

"NHTSA proposes to race to impose new regulations without developing a full record on alternatives, all in the hopes of narrowing the regulatory options available to the FCC," the cable group said.

Whether the proposal advances is now up to the Trump administration, which has erected hurdles to new regulations, including issuing an executive order requiring the cost of new rules be offset by savings from repealing others. The administration also hasn’t nominated a leader for NHTSA, the Transportation Department agency responsible for the rule.

Transportation Department spokeswoman Allison Moore said the proposed rule is still under "careful review," adding that "all views will be considered in the decision-making process."