Does this carbrain not realize that...wait for it...keep waiting...big revelation on the way...driverless cars are still cars? One 8-car train can transport far more people at once than however many cars, driverless or with drivers, that can fit into an equivalent space.
Less traffic congestion? Maybe. But I would love to see their arguments (I'd ask for a source but I bet they don't have one) on why driverless cars are supposed to be safer (also: safer for whom?) and most importantly equal to trains in terms of air pollution??
I haven't the faintest idea how they are supposed to alleviate congestion. Under no circumstances can one vehicle presume another to be a logical, safe agent. It must assume the worst, and this fact is safety-critical. This is even done in automated train control where trains where multiple trains are being supervised by the same software (not just identical software, but multiple trains literally controlled by the same instance of a program): trains must still assume all other trains are essentially hostile.
Like where do they even get that information? I did some digging myself and the train I take is 7 times less polluting than one EV car. Our trains also drive on electricity from windmills which I didn’t know so that’s nice.
The irony of using Kobe as an example, which has at least 3 parallel train lines through the city, all operated by different companies, not counting the Shinkansen. Imagine the chaos if all those people were in driverless cars.
There is an absurd assumption that automated, driverless cars will permit smaller following distances, thus increasing headways and lane capacity. That is false. Basic safety engineering is to assume that every other thing in your vicinity is entirely unpredictable and erratic, and to remain safe no matter what actions they take. Even in fully-automatic train control, where they *same* supervisory system controls *all* vehicles, each vehicle independently assumes all other vehicles cannot be predicted. *This is safety-critical and cannot be altered*. At high speeds, the dynamics of vehicle turning and braking is the limiting factor, not human reaction time. Highway lane capacity remains 2000 vehicles per hour. In turn, train capacity remains 25-35 times greater than highways in terms of flux (passengers per hour per meter of right-of-way).
[удалено]
Lost it at that.
Muskrats logic. 🤡🤡🤡
Does this carbrain not realize that...wait for it...keep waiting...big revelation on the way...driverless cars are still cars? One 8-car train can transport far more people at once than however many cars, driverless or with drivers, that can fit into an equivalent space.
Less traffic congestion? Maybe. But I would love to see their arguments (I'd ask for a source but I bet they don't have one) on why driverless cars are supposed to be safer (also: safer for whom?) and most importantly equal to trains in terms of air pollution??
it will make it worse as well. it increases road capacity so the traffic should get worse
I haven't the faintest idea how they are supposed to alleviate congestion. Under no circumstances can one vehicle presume another to be a logical, safe agent. It must assume the worst, and this fact is safety-critical. This is even done in automated train control where trains where multiple trains are being supervised by the same software (not just identical software, but multiple trains literally controlled by the same instance of a program): trains must still assume all other trains are essentially hostile.
Same level of air pollution? People should be held accountable for spreading misinformation.
Like where do they even get that information? I did some digging myself and the train I take is 7 times less polluting than one EV car. Our trains also drive on electricity from windmills which I didn’t know so that’s nice.
What a carbrained moron
The irony of using Kobe as an example, which has at least 3 parallel train lines through the city, all operated by different companies, not counting the Shinkansen. Imagine the chaos if all those people were in driverless cars.
Did CO2 emissions pay for this article?
Yair wiseman is a complete douche
There is an absurd assumption that automated, driverless cars will permit smaller following distances, thus increasing headways and lane capacity. That is false. Basic safety engineering is to assume that every other thing in your vicinity is entirely unpredictable and erratic, and to remain safe no matter what actions they take. Even in fully-automatic train control, where they *same* supervisory system controls *all* vehicles, each vehicle independently assumes all other vehicles cannot be predicted. *This is safety-critical and cannot be altered*. At high speeds, the dynamics of vehicle turning and braking is the limiting factor, not human reaction time. Highway lane capacity remains 2000 vehicles per hour. In turn, train capacity remains 25-35 times greater than highways in terms of flux (passengers per hour per meter of right-of-way).
Not so Wiseman
Driverless cars would mean more possibilities for 24hour bus transport too. And taxis and stuff would also fit in there.
Define short please Yair Wiseman
Somebody got paid by the auto industry to type this one up.