back to article Uber and Volvo take on Ford in race to launch self-driving vehicles

Volvo and Uber are taking on Ford to usher in the next decade with a fleet of self-driving vehicles. The VC-funded ride-sharing service has bought Silicon Valley self-driving vehicle technology start up Ottomotto LLC. Financial terms were not disclosed. Under the deal, Otto’s co-founder Anthony Levandowski will head Uber’s …

  1. AdamT

    So...

    ...given the recent announcement from Tesla about their truck plans, their undeniable speed of getting stuff actually on the road (notwithstanding their tendency to miss their overly ambitious targets) and the fact that they already have more real-world "autopilot" experience than anyone else - doesn't this mean that the first issue Volvo/Uber/Ford will face when they eventually hit the road is trying to merge into a continuous stream of TeslaTrucks ?

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: So...

      Perhaps they will race each other down dual carriageways, both speed limited to 60.

      Volvo's quite far along with autonomous trucks, by the way.

    2. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: So...

      Tesla's "tendency" to ignore the big white truck crossing its path.

      Tesla's "tendency" to sideswipe the car parked along side the road.

      Chair. Popcorn. Sets PVR to start recording the 7pm news.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So...

      I doubt that Tesla has quite the scale of production of the big car companies. Also, America can't make vehicles that go around corners. So - no.

  2. caffeine addict

    I predict that this will give a whole new meaning to "Found On Roadside Dead"...

  3. JohnMurray

    It'll kill dogging.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      dogging while "driving" in rush hour? <shudders>

  4. PNGuinn
    Trollface

    Automated trucks and – gasp! – SUVs could be here in five years' time

    Ah - the rise of the Chelsea Combine Harvester.

    Carry on.

    1. caffeine addict

      Re: Automated trucks and – gasp! – SUVs could be here in five years' time

      Someone has to remake the tractors scene from Cars with XC-90s stampeding...

  5. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. Baldy50

    Got fed up of being flashed.

    Will it insist on putting the side lights on even when it's sunny?

    Easy to bypass with a switch on the dash!

    Can't remember it I told the new owner or not.

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Got fed up of being flashed.

      Not supposed to be able to bypass them on new models released since 2011 in the EU, although northern European countries have had a similar law for donkeys years anyway.

      Daytime Running Lights (DRL)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Got fed up of being flashed.

        Not supposed to be able to bypass them on new models released since 2011 in the EU

        My EU designed and built car has a setting to turn off DRL, and I'm aware of other European makes that do as well. And I turn them off, because I can work out when conditions require me to turn the lights on, so why shorten the life of the H15 halogens without a good reason? At thirty-forty quid a pair, and invariably a PITA to replace on a modern car......

        If the DRL were LED then I'd not bother to turn them off.

    2. Dave 126 Silver badge

      Re: Got fed up of being flashed.

      >Will it insist on putting the side lights on even when it's sunny? Easy to bypass with a switch on the dash!

      Why would you want to turn them off? Daytime Running Lights have been shown in studies to improve safety for years*. Even your own observations as a driver should tell you they substantially increase a car's visibility in most driving conditions. Even on bright sunny days, when a road moves through areas of shade, DRLs really help other drivers a, spot you, and b, better judge your speed. If you haven't observed this, then I hope driverless cars arrive sooner rather later.

      The number of people (usually in grey or silver cars) who don't turn on their lights in dusky, misty or rain-spray conditions is incredible. It's almost as if they want to be invisible on the motorway.

      *The first study of DSLs I read of in New Scientist, about fifteen years ago, was conducted in Australia. I'm assuming you have a rough idea of the difference in visibility conditions between New South Wales and, for example, South Wales...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Got fed up of being flashed.

        >Why would you want to turn them off?

        Heres a couple of reasons:

        - One car with its lights on might stand out , 100 cars don't , they just merge into a mass of lights that confuses the eye and arguably makes it less clear what is ahead.

        - It makes motocycles less visible. Bikers use their headlights to stand out because bikes have a much narrower profile than other vehicles and can be easily missed. Now every other vehicle has lights on - which one is the bike?

        >Even on bright sunny days, when a road moves through areas of shade, DRLs really help other

        >drivers a, spot you, and b, better judge your speed. If you haven't observed this, then I hope driverless

        >cars arrive sooner rather later.

        If your eyesight is soo poor you can't see an oncoming car with its lights off in broad daylight then hand in your license and get off the damn road, you're a danger to everyone around you.

    3. Bryan Hall

      Re: Got fed up of being flashed.

      I prefer the older city lights of my euro lights on my Corrado. They are bright enough to help others see you, without blinding oncoming drivers with ridiculously bright LED DRLs. I use them when its not fully sunny, but I don't want to burn up the "off road only" halogen headlights.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Got fed up of being flashed.

        "ridiculously bright LED DRLs"

        Yep. Those and HIDs should banned. Very distracting when it's dull, dawn or dusk, some seem to go off like camera flashes in the rear view mirror when going over bumps or the boot is loaded up. Do cars no longer have sidelights any more? It seems as if most cars these days have auto-on headlights which come on well before they are needed. Last few hire cars I have have the option to switch that function off but only until the next time you turn the ignition off. According to the manual in one hire car, one of the ways the car "decides" to switch on the headlights is if it "sees" oncoming traffic with their headlights on. Madness!

        This probably explains why I see more than usual numbers of cars driving with no lights on when they should be on, especially in wet conditions on well lit roads. The driver is probably in the second car or a borrowed one and doesn't seem to realise they are still responsible for turning the lights on when the car doesn't have auto-on lights.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Got fed up of being flashed.

        but I don't want to burn up the "off road only" halogen headlights.

        I used to use them too. My old Pug GTi had 100W bulbs in headlights and auxiliary lamps (the 205 GTi's foglights weren't fogs, they were main beam auxiliaries). It was great fun, you could flash 400W at an unlit cyclist at night and they'd vapourise like a civilian at Hiroshima. On the other hand you never really could see better most of the time because of the bounce-back off of reflective road signs.

        Now, being much, much older and a tiny bit wiser, I realise that all that counts is the quality of the reflector or projector, not the output (be that watts or lumens). Mind you, I'd still pay extra for a cyclist vapouriser. Tw*ts.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Trollface

    Nothing new here...

    Volvo's have been driven by automatons for years, just ask any biker...

  8. Sgt_Oddball
    Coat

    Hang on....

    I still would like to know what happens in the event of a race condition?......

    Mines the one with the pocket guide of road race tracks of the UK.....

  9. Scott Broukell

    Could this mean . . . .

    That these Volvos become the first to actually give turn signals.

    1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Re: Could this mean . . . .

      Don't matter. They'll just follow the lead of Alfa and VW and make the actual lights so small that you can't even see them at night.

  10. CCCP

    DRL show when a car is running

    A big benefit is in a car park or along a row of parked cars - you can see which cars are running. Cyclists especially appreciate to know which car could drive off, but it helps everyone. Sweden has less fatalities per car, per mile and per population than the UK (at least according to wikipedia), so maybe it works. Both countries are among the safest in the wolrd btw.

    A motorbike should occupy the same road space as a car (2/3 from the left of the lane ISTR from the test), so I don't buy this argument against DRL. If they are filtering unsafely, Darwin will rule.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: DRL show when a car is running

      "Sweden has less fatalities per car, per mile and per population than the UK (at least according to wikipedia), so maybe it works"

      Possibly its down to DRL ... or maybe its because the UK has some of the most crowded roads and motorways in europe. Hmm, wonder which one ...

      "A motorbike should occupy the same road space as a car (2/3 from the left of the lane ISTR from the test), so I don't buy this argument against DRL. If they are filtering unsafely, Darwin will rule."

      Its not about filtering, its about cars not seeing an oncoming bike when turning or don't notice it in their mirrors. If every vehicle has a light then subconsiously they'll pay less attention to any lights they do see.

      1. JohnMurray

        Re: DRL show when a car is running

        Most car drivers can't spot a bike with its lights on and the rider in dayglo kit.

        Most truck drivers can't spot anything.

        All cab drivers are wankers, most have one headlight not working!

      2. Sgt_Oddball

        Re: DRL show when a car is running

        Our motorways are actually quite safe, (only 4% of all road fatalities happen, it's quite the misconception to think that they're lethal), it's country roads that have the highest fatalities caused predominately by dodgy overtaking.

        (I may have been forced to take a speed awareness course recently and some of the bits shared where quite eye opening).

        I do question though how many total miles per vehicle are covered in Sweden though, it'd also be interesting to see how the figures stack up if you accounted for miles driven per vehicle, road types available and climatic conditions (since fog causes increases in traffic accidents overall and when everything buried in snow people tend to drive less).

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: DRL show when a car is running

          Sweden is rather large, mostly empty and has well maintained roads. you don't need to go far out the city and off the motorway to drive for an hour without seeing another car. Skid control is part of the driving test and you are over the limit if you sniff in the general direction of a glass of aquavit.Comparing to UK driving conditions is largely spurious.

    2. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: DRL show when a car is running

      "Sweden has less fatalities..."

      'fewer'

  11. David Pollard

    Obligatory xkcd

    http://xkcd.com/1720/

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A race to the selfdestruction of big car manufacturs ...

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-16/ford-announces-plans-self-destruct-starting-2021

    1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

      Re: A race to the selfdestruction of big car manufacturs ...

      This is probably why everyone's so bullish, pouring so much money into the idea and ramping up so quickly. Nobody wants to be late to market with the product that kills the market.

      1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

        Re: A race to the selfdestruction of big car manufacturs ...

        I should probably say "...with the service that kills the market" as people probably wouldn't buy a personal car to share with strangers; they'd subscribe to a car-sharing service like the one Ford et al. are working on.

        I suspect uptake is going to take long enough that the industry has sufficient time to pivot and no excuses.

    2. User McUser
      Alert

      Re: A race to the selfdestruction of big car manufacturs ...

      I'll agree that cars in America have a 3% utilization implying that 97% of the time the car is idle.

      The problem here is the fallacy that this is some sort of artificial limit - cars are used 3% of the time because that's how much we use cars each day. Once the rush-hour traffic gets to work or home then the vast majority of drivers are basically done driving.

      Or in other words, most cars are idle most of the time because we don't need a lot of cars most of the time. The limited number of people who can take advantage of an idle car during non-commuting hours is very low compared to the number of idle cars available. At best your car will drop you off at work in the morning and then return home for your spouse/child/whatever to use before it picks you up again after your shift ends. It's highly unlikely that you'll hire it out to randos; with such a potentially high supply and low demand the price will be too low to be worth the bother.

      1. JeffyPoooh
        Pint

        A-to-B + B-to-C + C-to-D is MORE than A-to-B + C-to-D

        If we replace private automobiles with shared vehicles (taxi cabs, or self-driving equivalents), everyone just assumes that this would inherently reduce road congestion and save fuel.

        But the opposite is true.

        A-to-B + B-to-C + C-to-D is MORE than A-to-B + C-to-D.

        Yes. Shared vehicles can reduce need for parking, because instead of sitting quietly parked in a parking spot, they'll be out driving around on the way to pick up the next passenger.

        Shared vehicles can perhaps slightly reduce the number of vehicles built, but would increase the number clogging up the roads. All trips plus empty re-positioning trips.

        Some will then assume some arm-wavy undefined magic that will address these inherent effects, but nobody has the first clue about how or when they'd be implemented. Or how much they'd cost.

        The inherent effect of cars wandering around empty is more traffic and more fuel.

        Don't just assume the opposite.

  13. myithingwontcharge
    Stop

    Stop!

    Ummm... Why has nobody mentioned that Ford basically own Volvo? :-)

    Edit: Then again it seems they've just sold it again... Those motor industry types move fast....

    1. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: Stop Volvo!

      Volvo has some 'good' experience with automatic ('self-driving') safety features.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNi17YLnZpg

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_47utWAoupo

      Fairly serious (apparent) failures there. Their hubris must be at a low ebb, which might make them more cautious going forward.

  14. voyager12
    WTF?

    Self-driving and car obesity

    Why would you use a (autonomous) vehicle that weighs 20-30 times more than the person behind the steering wheel, that is wider than he or she is tall, if the vehicle typically carries only one passenger? Particularly if you expect the vehicle to drive autonomously through dense city traffic.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like