# Self driving vehicles



## a_majoor (10 Oct 2010)

Imagine logistics vehicles that can go down the road on their own (or maybe follow the CQ's vehicle). Imagine engineer vehicles that can be sent forward on their own to conduct breaching operations or mine clearing. That would be the next step after driving on public roads is perfected:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/10/google-has-robotic-self-driving-cars.html#more



> *Google has robotic self driving cars that have already logged 140,000 miles of robotic driving*
> 
> Google has automated cars (Toyota Prius) use video cameras, radar sensors and a laser range finder to “see” other traffic, as well as detailed maps (which we collect using manually driven vehicles) to navigate the road ahead. This is all made possible by Google’s data centers, which can process the enormous amounts of information gathered by our cars when mapping their terrain.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kirkhill (10 Oct 2010)

Not limited to Google - Marines (Yankee version) also mucking about with them.



> Move Over Fido: Marines’ New Best Friend Could be A Robotic ‘Mule’
> October 2010
> 
> By Grace V. Jean
> ...


----------



## a_majoor (9 Oct 2013)

Self driving vehicles have been under development for many years, with DARPA being a long time sponsor, but it seems the commercial world is leapfrogging ahead. Google has demonstrated self driving cars (using a lot of equipment added on to existing vehicles, now Mercedes is unveiling a self driving car as well. Since Mercedes is a car company, the level of integration seems much higher.

The use of self driving vehicles for logistics would be one potential near term use (imagine a line of trucks following the CQ, for example). Self driving vehicles making deliveries around the base could also make the base more productive and potentially safer. Even if we accept the need for drivers to deal with emergencies, or to take over when driving off road, the use of self driving functions will do a lot to keep drivers well rested, or vehicle crews can spend more time focusing on what is going on outside the vehicle searching for threats until it becomes time to engage the manual drive button and steering wheel.

Lots of embedded video on the link:

http://www.core77.com/blog/transportation/mercedes_driverless_research_car_looks_freaking_amazing_25652.asp



> *Mercedes' Driverless Research Car Looks Freaking Amazing*
> Posted by hipstomp / Rain Noe  |   2 Oct 2013  |  Comments (41)
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## a_majoor (29 Oct 2013)

Google self driving cars examined. As might be expected, they are smoother and better "drivers" than most of us:

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/520746/data-shows-googles-robot-cars-are-smoother-safer-drivers-than-you-or-i/



> *Data Shows Google’s Robot Cars Are Smoother, Safer Drivers Than You or I*
> Tests of Google’s autonomous vehicles in California and Nevada suggests they already outperform human drivers.
> 
> By Tom Simonite on October 25, 2013
> ...


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (30 Oct 2013)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Google self driving cars examined. As might be expected, they are smoother and better "drivers" than most of us:
> 
> http://www.technologyreview.com/news/520746/data-shows-googles-robot-cars-are-smoother-safer-drivers-than-you-or-i/



Just what we need, something else to make us even more lazy then we already are.  I am envisioning the day when humans are not allowed to drive anymore because we will pose too great a "risk" to everyone else.  I need to start saving so I can move out to the woods and live the good life!


----------



## a_majoor (30 Oct 2013)

Having been rear ended and sideswiped by idiot drivers, I would applaud ways to get them to NOT drive their vehicles.

The proposed advantages of reducing traffic jams, time in transit, motor vehicle accidents and even fuel consumption (because they will drive at the optimum speeds for conditions) will be worth billions to the economy, which will be a powerful incentive for most people. "Hobby" driving may well take place in out of the way areas the way people now go to race tracks, off road trails or rally driving venues to challenge themselves.

In fact, one of the perques of joining the military in the future might be to actually drive a vehicle (since having an unpredictable human behind the wheel to take over from the robot may be the difference between victory and defeat).


----------



## JorgSlice (31 Oct 2013)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Having been rear ended and sideswiped by idiot drivers, I would applaud ways to get them to NOT drive their vehicles.
> 
> The proposed advantages of reducing traffic jams, time in transit, motor vehicle accidents and even fuel consumption (because they will drive at the optimum speeds for conditions) will be worth billions to the economy, which will be a powerful incentive for most people. "Hobby" driving may well take place in out of the way areas the way people now go to race tracks, off road trails or rally driving venues to challenge themselves.
> 
> In fact, one of the perques of joining the military in the future might be to actually drive a vehicle (since having an unpredictable human behind the wheel to take over from the robot may be the difference between victory and defeat).



One of the best benefits to my civilian driving is not only the various DDC and 404 courses but also combat driver courses. It has put me in an advantage both in my civvy job as well as my personal driving.


----------



## a_majoor (1 Nov 2013)

Toyota demonstrates a system which is not 100% self driving, but rather a driver assistent:

http://www2.toyota.co.jp/en/news/13/10/1011_1.html



> *Toyota to Launch Advanced Driving Support System Using Automated Driving Technologies in Mid-2010s*
> Safer Highway Driving; Reduced Environmental Effects and Driver Workload
> 
> Toyota City, Japan, October 11, 2013—Toyota Motor Corporation announces that it has developed a next-generation advanced driving support system, Automated Highway Driving Assist (AHDA), which uses automated driving technologies to support safer highway driving.
> ...


----------



## eme411 (1 Nov 2013)

I read and see all the things going on with CF tactical vehicles and just shake my head, we have gone from a gas power fleet to diesel that gave us great reliability and have now moved to computerized engines with no end of problems ie logistics , and no longer able to repair in the field , all the special test equipment required , the modules (parts) , training for these types of vehicles, and to get all this into the field and then find out you still can't repair without shipping a new dash cluster from the factory because the dash is married to the truck and only that cluster will work, look back to the MLVW , M-35 series truck , in service now for 60 years with the US military, M-35 gasser, M-35A1 & A2 diesel , multifuel, turbo multifuel , M-35A3 Cat turbo diesel with auto trans, this truck has been the army version of the B-52 , just keep upgrading and it soldiers on, a truck that has always been easy and quick to repair in the field , a dumb truck using the KISS principal, these types of vehicles got you on the battlefield and off , alive, something to ponder when you think a computer under the hood or in the dash of your tactical vehicle is a good thing in the battlefield, think of your Leopard doing a reboot in a tank fight , make sure your boots are good,
regards Frank


----------



## George Wallace (1 Nov 2013)

eme411 said:
			
		

> ........... something to ponder when you think a computer under the hood or in the dash of your tactical vehicle is a good thing in the battlefield, think of your Leopard doing a reboot in a tank fight , make sure your boots are good,



Been there.  Done that already with TCCCS.  Murphy's law and having to reboot a radio on CONTACT sucks.


----------



## a_majoor (2 Nov 2013)

There certainly are risks to new technology, and of course *we* often pay for bells and whistles without considering the cost or even how we are going to use it. Anyone remember the cards that came out when we went to SN numbers? Everyone got a plastic wallet card with a magnetic stripe across the back, yet the card had no official use to begin with (it wasn't considered an ID card, for example), and the stripe was just an extra cost with no function, since it was never activated for anything.

Perhaps a trivial example, but still represented a cost in money and effort for virtually 0 payoff.

OTOH, car companies have a very vested interest in making sure their technology works, and that it is cost effective (for them). Compare a Toyota Camery from the 1990's with today's, and the new one is more efficient, safer etc. We can get closer to"B" if we could work our procurement system much better, and we do occasionally get it right (the HLVW was a great truck and is still running strong). There are some pretty large potential benefits to harvest form this technology, even if only here in Canada, such as better fuel economy, minimizing the risks of accidents and freeing up manpower for other tasks. On that basis alone it is worth investigating.


----------



## a_majoor (29 Nov 2013)

The Dutch are developing systems to allow vehicles to cooperatively drive, in order to increase carrying capacity on the roads and reduce fuel usage (there is the obligatory bow to the Church of Global Warming in the articel as well). Once again, a system which could make logistics more efficient and reduce some of the financial burden on the CF:

http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?context=overtno&content=nieuwsbericht&laag1=37&laag2=69&item_id=2013-11-12%2010:35:23.0&Taal=2



> *Automated driving; from the test track to the public road*
> Minister Schultz is first to ride in an automatically driven car on a Dutch highway
> 
> TNO is working on technology to enable cars and trucks to drive automatically on the highway. Cooperatively and at low cost. Tests on the public road will have to demonstrate that automatic driving boosts traffic safety, improves traffic flow, cuts down on fuel and thereby reduces CO2 emissions.
> ...


----------



## CougarKing (4 Jan 2014)

Won't self-driving cars only encourage people not to learn to drive?  :



> *54 million self-driving cars will be on the road by 2035, study finds*
> 
> LA Times
> 
> ...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Jan 2014)

So as SDCs multiply and the accident rate drops, so should insurance rates, right? :rofl:


----------



## Ostrozac (4 Jan 2014)

I would be interested in a self-driving car that will pick me up at the bar and take me home. Or that will drive me to Vegas while I sleep.

A cross between KITT from Knight Rider and the family truckster from Vacation would suit me fine.


----------



## blacktriangle (5 Jan 2014)

Guess I better buy my corvette while I still can.


----------



## a_majoor (11 Jan 2014)

Audi enters the fray (well the parent company is VW, which should give you an idea of the engineering and market clout behind this). The interesting thing is how quickly the sensors and circuitry has been integrated: no large turret with laser scanners on the roof and no trunk full of CPU's:

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/523351/ces-2014-audi-shows-off-a-compact-brain-for-self-driving-cars/



> *CES 2014: Audi Shows Off a Compact Brain for Self-Driving Cars*
> A book-sized computer capable of driving a car could help the technology reach the mass market.
> 
> By Tom Simonite on January 7, 2014
> ...


----------



## a_majoor (2 Feb 2014)

US army is experimenting with robotic vehicles in a much bigger way. The interesting thing about these tests is they are using kits attached to current vehicles rather than integrating the technology into new vehicles (or prototypes). This topic has also been looked at in the "Robotic Army" thread, and could be used as one approach to dealing with the manpower crunch. Self driving vehicles, robotic warehouse technologies and similar systems could relieve the manpower needs of the military "tail" while leaving the same numbers of men in the "tooth" end of the military:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57618149-76/driverless-trucks-get-in-shape-for-us-army-convoy-duty/?tag=nl.t720&s_cid=t720&ttag=t720&ftag=CADe856116



> *Driverless trucks get in shape for US Army convoy duty*
> Recent tests, says Lockheed Martin, show that fully autonomous convoys can safely navigate road intersections, oncoming traffic, stalled and passing vehicles, and pedestrians.
> 
> Jonathan Skillings by Jonathan Skillings  January 31, 2014 10:23 AM PST
> ...


----------



## a_majoor (2 Feb 2014)

Perhaps this could also go into a thread on politics or economics, but the large scale advent of self driving vehicles will have many knock off effects throughout society:

http://www.the-american-interest.com/blog/2014/01/25/robo-chauffeurs-could-kill-public-transit-as-we-know-it/



> *Robo-Chauffeurs Could Kill Public Transit As We Know It*
> 
> Whether or not self-driving cars are the future of public transportation, at the very least they will change the logic of large public transportation projects: a fleet of robo-cars could one day deliver personalized, decentralized public transportation. But what does that mean for our cities’s buses and trains? The Atlantic Cities reports:
> 
> ...


----------



## McG (4 Feb 2014)

The US is considering mandating that all cars include situational awareness technology to predict and avoid collisions.  It is not the self-driving vehicle, but this move (if it happens) will likely begin the advancement of the technology at a faster rate.  


> * U.S. may force cars to communicate with each other
> Computer would alert driver to impending collision*
> The Associated Press on CBC News
> 03 February 2014
> ...


 http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/u-s-may-force-cars-to-communicate-with-each-other-1.2521562


----------



## a_majoor (4 Feb 2014)

Mods: not sure what happened but the thread seems to have been split into two self driving vehicle threads... ???


----------



## a_majoor (25 Mar 2014)

Going the next level: self driving personal air vehicles (AKA flying cars). The technology is there, but does a market yet exist?

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20131031-a-flying-car-for-everyone



> *Why everyone may have a personal air vehicle*
> Technology Science & Environment Aircraft Automobile Robot Transport
> 
> The idea of having a part car, part plane, part drone parked outside your home may not be as far-fetched as it seems. There really aren’t any technological hurdles to this.
> ...


----------



## a_majoor (11 Jun 2014)

More on why self driving vehicles would be a good fit for the military. Sending people on taskings in a self driving would reduce the risks of accidents and injury to our personnel, not to mention civilians or other forces sharing the roads:

http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/10/robot-cars-are-a-moral-imperative



> *Robot Cars Are a Moral Imperative*
> Ronald Bailey|Jun. 10, 2014 9:47 am
> 
> So tweeted tech venture capitalist Marc Andreessen after the crash that injured and killed comedians traveling on a New Jersey highway with Saturday Night Live star Tracy Morgan earlier this week. More than 90 percent of all traffic accidents are the result of human error. The New York Times is reporting the recent findings by Virginia Tech researchers who are estimating how many fewer deaths and accidents would occur with enhanced driving technologies. From the Times:
> ...


----------



## Tollis (27 Aug 2014)

Obviously I'm all for saving lives, but all I can picture with this is me trucking myself through the mud to hook up a stuck Unmanned vehicle because I have no drivers to send into the hole during a recovery.


----------



## a_majoor (28 Aug 2014)

For field use, I think the vehicles will be in a "follow the leader" formation, with at least one maned truck and the remainder following. The other solution would be that crew is in the vehicle for duties like maintaining, manning the guns and loading/unloading, but driving is optional (and automated for the most part).


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Aug 2014)

Self driving buses around the base will reduce personal requirements, but capital upgrades and increased maintenance costs may kill much of the savings.


----------



## mariomike (1 Jul 2016)

06.30.16

Tesla finds a flaw in the car's autopilot when it crashes into a semi killing the driver of the car.
https://www.wired.com/2016/06/teslas-autopilot-first-deadly-crash/?mbid=social_twitter
A Tesla Model S driver using the car’s semi-autonomous Autopilot feature died when the car hit an 18-wheeler, the first known fatality involving technology that remains in beta testing.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Jul 2016)

And how do you stop people hacking the vehicles or feeding false info to the sensors?


----------



## mariomike (6 Jul 2016)

July 6, 2016

Driver activates Tesla autopilot feature.
Car drives into guardrail, crosses roadway and overturns.

Less than a week after the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened an inquiry into the fatal crash of a Tesla vehicle operating in its semi-autonomous “autopilot” mode, a second self-driving Tesla has reportedly been involved in a crash.
https://consumerist.com/2016/07/06/second-crash-reported-involving-tesla-vehicle-operating-in-autopilot/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=socialflow


----------



## CountDC (6 Jul 2016)

Am I misunderstanding?

I see semi-autonomous which seems to me the driver of the vehicle has to still pay attention and be ready to take control of the vehicle at any time.  Oops, heading for a truck so I better hit the breaks or grab the wheel.  The rumour ( I know rumours) I heard was that he was watching a movie.

Be interesting to see what charges are laid in the second case considering they state there was no evidence of the semi-autonomous system at fault.  Maybe it wasn't on and he is just using it as a scapegoat for him losing control.


----------



## Michael OLeary (6 Jul 2016)

https://www.teslamotors.com/en_CA/presskit/autopilot?redirect=no

Model S Software Version 7.0



> *Autosteer (Beta) *
> 
> Autosteer keeps the car in the current lane and engages Traffic-Aware Cruise Control to maintain the car’s speed. Using a variety of measures including steering angle, steering rate and speed to determine the appropriate operation AutoSteer assists the driver on the road, making the driving experience easier.
> 
> *Tesla requires drivers to remain engaged and aware when Autosteer is enabled. Drivers must keep their hands on the steering wheel.*


----------



## ueo (15 Jul 2016)

Key word "assists". I guess stupidity is to be expected from those who do not read instructions or ask for or heed directions.


----------



## mariomike (9 Aug 2016)

Today

Why you shouldn't let Tesla’s Autopilot drive you to the hospital ER during an emergency.
http://mashable.com/2016/08/08/tesla-autopilot-hospital/#go7LQM71bkqz
Over the weekend, the story broke that a Missouri lawyer, Joshua Neally, claimed that the Autopilot system in his Tesla Model X saved his life when he suffered a pulmonary embolism while behind the wheel. Neally contends his Model X drove him to the hospital, saving his life.

The writer compares it to impaired driving.


----------



## mariomike (28 Nov 2016)

How do you stop a unresponsive driver in a self driving car? GM has a fix for that.

GM Super-Cruise Feature Raises Concerns From Regulators 
http://www.wsj.com/articles/gm-super-cruise-feature-raises-concerns-from-regulators-1480366908?mod=e2tw
Regulators say GM should ensure semiautomated halting feature safe


----------



## a_majoor (29 Nov 2016)

Back to the military for a moment, DARPA is now looking at drones to escort the convoys. The ultimate result would be autonomous drones flying over an autonomous convoy to protect the convoy from autonomous threats.....

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/11/darpa-seeks-drone-escort-for-military.html



> *DARPA seeks drone escort for military truck convoys to protect against enemy drones*
> 
> DARPA is asking for industry's help in developing a agile and mobile drone-defense system that can defeat a raid of self-guided, small unmanned aerial systems (UAS) that are attacking an important moving target like a high-value convoy.
> 
> ...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (29 Nov 2016)

Hello Hal, call us when the war is over......

I can't do that Dave......


----------



## a_majoor (30 Nov 2016)

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


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Dec 2017)

https://dms.licdn.com/playback/C4D00AQGBbGPzkUKodw/e3418b80a62f471d85da3e67902fb921/feedshare-mp4_500/1479932728445-v0ch3x?e=1512229186&v=alpha&t=VfgYog5MyyffE6Sc5NU6No5-9Z4GcEJ0Op7o5oBhgLk


----------



## FSTO (1 Dec 2017)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> https://dms.licdn.com/playback/C4D00AQGBbGPzkUKodw/e3418b80a62f471d85da3e67902fb921/feedshare-mp4_500/1479932728445-v0ch3x?e=1512229186&v=alpha&t=VfgYog5MyyffE6Sc5NU6No5-9Z4GcEJ0Op7o5oBhgLk



Pay a kid 20 bucks to shovel your driveway or 13,000 for a remote control thingamajig that will miss all sorts of areas


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Apr 2021)

L3Harris Joins Rheinmetall’s Team Lynx For Army OMFV (Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle)​Getting there - Crew of 2 in the manned mode and 0 in the unmanned mode.

And lots of Canadian connections (Rheinmetall, L3Harris and Textron) for IRB considerations.










						L3Harris Joins Rheinmetall’s Team Lynx For Army OMFV - Breaking Defense
					

L3Harris joins Textron and Raytheon on Rheinmetall’s team to refine the heavily armored, high-tech Lynx for the Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting vehicle competition.




					breakingdefense.com


----------



## Kirkhill (18 Apr 2021)

The Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle project continues to evolve.  Stated objective is a crew of 2.  But if it is optionally manned - meaning some of the vehicles could have Zero crew - why not aim for an autonomous vehicle with one vehicle commander on board?









						OMFV: Army gets BAE, GD Designs For Bradley Replacement - Breaking Defense
					

BAE’s press release features a shadowy silhouette of a previously unseen vehicle. Could this be BAE’s proposal for the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle?




					breakingdefense.com
				





And, as is often the case, the Israelis are ahead of the curve

Project Carmel - 2019.









						Defense Ministry unveils 3 prototypes for Israel’s tanks of the future
					

Carmel program yields first fruits as defense contractors offer proof of concept for a two-person tank, loaded with AI and improved visibility




					www.timesofisrael.com
				









IronVision Helmet






Can't help but think that the IronVision Helmet in conjunction with the RMs jetsuit and a Loyal Wingman version of an armed UAS might make for an interesting combination.


----------



## dimsum (18 Apr 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Can't help but think that the IronVision Helmet in conjunction with the RMs jetsuit and a Loyal Wingman version of an armed UAS might make for an interesting combination.


To clarify:  Loyal Wingman is a project from Boeing Australia.  The idea is to accompany manned aircraft as their...uh...wingman. 

What you're suggesting here is Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T), which a bunch of agencies around the world are looking into.  MUM-T isn't specific to air either - the US Army and USMC are looking into it for logistics like having robotic "mules" carrying squad gear and patrolling with the troops.


----------



## Kirkhill (18 Apr 2021)

Thanks for setting me straight Dimsum.

So Loyal Wingman would be the Air Force variant of MUM-T?


----------



## dimsum (18 Apr 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Thanks for setting me straight Dimsum.
> 
> So Loyal Wingman would be the Air Force variant of MUM-T?


Sorry, Loyal Wingman is actually the name of a project by Boeing Australia.  I've corrected it above.  

LW is a project that uses MUM-T.


----------



## Kirkhill (18 Apr 2021)

MUM-T

Word of the Day Dimsum.  Many Thanks.   Videos and articles galore.


----------



## Kirkhill (4 Dec 2021)

Army, Industry Have Faith in New Approach for Bradley Replacement
					

Army, Industry Have Faith in New Approach for Bradley Replacement




					www.nationaldefensemagazine.org
				




"Army, Industry Have Faith in New Approach for Bradley Replacement
12/3/2021

By Mikayla Easley	

A 2D rendering of Oshkosh’s OMFV concept design unveiled at AUSA.

After a handful of unsuccessful attempts to replace the Army’s aging Bradley fighting vehicle, the service hopes it is finally on the right track.

Known as the optionally manned fighting vehicle, or OMFV, the program is the Army’s latest attempt to replace the Bradley following years of cost and requirements issues. Five manufacturers are competing to build a new prototype that officials hope will meet the growing need for next-generation land capabilities.

Maj. Gen. Ross Coffman, director of the next-generation combat vehicle cross-functional team at Army Futures Command, said the OMFV is his team’s top priority as legacy systems rapidly age. As the Reagan-era M-2 Bradley — which is made by BAE Systems — inches toward being mothballed, the Army is aiming for a replacement platform that can enter full-rate production by 2030.

Following program cancelations and restarts, the service is taking a new approach to OMFV. Rather than forcing contractors to meet a list of requirements, the Army is simply asking defense companies to bring their capabilities to the table.

“This is going to be the basis for all future vehicle requirements and procurement,” Coffman said in October during the Association of the United States Army’s annual conference in Washington, D.C. “We believe that we’re going to learn a lot of lessons.”"


I was wondering about the popularity of an Optionally Manned Personnel Carrier.

But perhaps the idea is to be fully manned until you get in range of the objective, have everybody debus, including the crew, and then control the vehicle from under cover.  Equally, in the defence, fire and move from position to position with the crew separated from the vehicle.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Sep 2022)




----------



## Kirkhill (17 Sep 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


>



More of an arty system than an armoured cavalry system perhaps?  Rapid relocation from position to position and then going silent and waiting?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Sep 2022)

It's interesting as a AD weapon and a manned version might be useful for filling the roles the Universal Carrier did.


----------

