Issues around driverless vehicles arise at two levels.  There are more-or-less 
interesting, low-level questions about possible technology, but a much more 
interesting issue is what we would hope to gain and at what cost - the System 
Requirements Specification.  I can see a role for driverless road vehicles in 
certain situations, such as providing public transport around a CBD for example.

On 2016-06-07 14:40 Jim Birch wrote:

> If cars are to be completely computer-controlled by law <snip>
> 
> This is a possible endpoint at the moment.  It's not a real issue.  That 
> would only happen if cars meet all the requirements you listed and a lot more.

However it's the premise of the topic!


>> How is the computer to navigate the journey?
>
> Cached maps, GPS, cameras, sensors, etc.

GPS is out because of the risk it can be disabled, destroyed, or simply turned 
off.  If all vehicles, or even just private cars, rely on a GPS system, an 
unfriendly agency could bring road transport all over the country to a stop.  
I'm reminded of an incident at the Port of London a while back where (from 
memory) radio or radar transmissions from some ship pretty much disabled 
operations.  Apparently some of the resulting problems occurred because systems 
using the GPS timing signals, such as mobile networks handing over a call, were 
affected.

See also http://www.harbourmaster.org/news-maritime-archive.php

QUOTE
Added: 21 Jan 2016
Report Disruptions Immediately

On 19 January 2016 the United States Coast Guard issued an alert (Safety Alert 
01-16) reminding users that this past summer (2015), multiple outbound vessels 
from a non-US port suddenly lost GPS signal reception.

The net effect was various alarms and a loss of GPS input to the ship’s surface 
search radar, gyro units and Electronic Chart Display & Information System 
(ECDIS), resulting in no GPS data for position fixing, radar over ground speed 
inputs, gyro speed input and loss of collision avoidance capabilities on the 
radar display.

Fortunately, the vessels were able to safely continue their voyage using radar 
in heads up display, magnetic compass and terrestrial navigation. Approximately 
six nautical miles later, the vessels’ GPS units resumed operation. Although 
the vessels had back-up systems to allow a safe transit, the consequences could 
have been severe.

These types of events highlight the potential detrimental impact to navigation 
caused by GPS interference or jamming and the importance in understanding how a 
vessel’s or a facility’s equipment could be impacted by a loss of GPS signal.

More on the subject with advice to mariners as to what they should do in 
reporting disruption is to be found in the nearby pdf.
Attached File: USCG GNSS alert 1.pdf
UNQUOTE


> As I have said before, robotic systems get better every year.  They learn.  A 
> robotic driver system does not have to be smarter than a human, all it needs 
> to do is *drive a car*  - better, safer and more reliably that the average 
> driver.

Accepted safety-of-life criteria for automated-driving systems will require far 
better reliability than that of "the average driver" otherwise there would be 
no point in having them, or at least I'd certainly hope so!

David L.
_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Reply via email to