this is a fantastic video about the limitations and drawbacks of driverless vehicles indeed, we don't need driverless trucks, we just need trains! thank you for making this!
The biggest problem with driverless cars is that… it’s still a car. Even if you didn’t have to own a car at your house, the self driving cars will still such up space on the streets.
As a British person, I apologise for having terrible media. (Also fun fact: us brits have to pay for a license to fund the bbc if you have a tv. Regardless if you watch the BBC or not 😬)
@@OzitoCementMixerCMX-120 The BBC has a database of every home address in the UK. If one flags up as not paying, they'll hound whoever is at that address for payment or eventual prosecution. The BBC is essentially a part of the government, so non payment akin to tax evasion.
Great video as always. I remember the discourse five years ago saying we would all have driverless cars by now, which we don't have. Driverless trains are enticing though
I agree with the video comment. To have driverless cars operating in a city, that city and its suburbs have to be designed for it and name one city in the world that has been specially designed and built for driverless cars and light/medium weight delivery vehicles. What will be the cost of retro fitting existing cities and their suburbs for driverless car/vehicle and human proof capability?
I'd say platooning is a stupid idea on highways. You essentially wall off a lane. So if there's an unusual highway interchange that exits from the other direction, platooning would block off the ramp. Once you need to merge (which will inevitably happen), all the benefits of platooning will no longer apply. Long-distance trucking is also a bad idea- it takes up excessive amounts of space and can easily be substituted for High-speed cargo. The whole idea of long distance autonomous trucking is based on an extremely car-based mindset that needs to change.
@@thebus-ter - It was a comment from a bus driver. It is like that a 48 seat bus can remove up to 48 non-essential cars of the road and save at least 59 tonnes of toxic gases and pollutants being emitted per journey or a 218 seat 4 carriage passenger train can can remove up to 218 non-essential cars of the road and save at least 267 tonnes of toxic gases and pollutants being emitted per journey plus it uses a sustainable, environmentally friendly 'steel' highway.
You also have to take into account the truck drivers, taxi drivers and bus drivers. What do they do after the introduction of driverless transport? Do they just walk down to centerlink and accept life on the dole? Many of these workers have little employment opportunities outside of the transport industry. You are taking away people income. They are also huge employers. Think how many taxi drivers, bus drivers and truck drivers are in Adelaide? Remember the transport industry is not just about goods and passengers. It about providing a living for a huge number of people. You can not just walk into a bus depo and tell all the drivers "hey your all sacked, go find another job". If you did you would be fearing the warth of the Transportation Workers Union. You find many of these driverless vehicles would have "accidents"
I mean, the BBC got an actress with MULTIPLE sexual harassment/assault claims against her by other women, and let her talk about transgender women being harmful or predatory (which is not true, there's nothing to suggest rates of harassment higher than cisgender women) so maybe they are a bit unreliable...
@@qjtvaddict Plenty of cisgender women do attack transgender women. Most are not "looking for D" as you say, but rather just normal transphobes like J.K. Rowling
cool, driverless trucks, how will packages be unloaded, or even the vehicle refilled, or know when it needs that squeaky belt fixed, does it know how to load packages itself? The fact that they think driverless cars will reduce traffic is laughable, especially when each bus removes 40 cars and each metro train removes at least 10 buses from the roads in Adelaide alone, to say that driverless cars are going to be the future is just asking for a lot of trouble, especially from those that are in the infrastructure industry that understands that just adding lanes does not improve traffic beyond the very few months after it was completed, however restricting the lanes and letting people sort themselves out will increase the flow when they realize that they can take the bus and not worry about idiot drivers because they are already a passenger with them. Having bus only roads and lanes increase traffic drastically on other roads, but will have shorter destination times for those that are using the transport that use those lanes, IE: taxis and public transit. A friend of mine was unhappy with the tram possibly going down prospect road, I myself couldn't be much happier, considering that it will reduce the travel times and possibly come every 15 minutes and have priority at the lights... ding ding.
Hey, your channel is super underrated! Keep up the good work, looking forward to more. I'm gonna use this information, can't tell u how many debates I've gotten stuck in with self driving proponents. Weirdly also as an answer to Cali HSR...
I would absolutely love for more people to start arguing against the "science" side of youtube! So many of those channels have gone down the fucking drain in terms of research quality. And some are straight up just hype machines instead of anything usefull. :/
Could you image a driverless car or bus serving an area like Hackem West or davoren park? It will be left on bricks or someone will graffiti a dick on the bonnet. People will use them as a mobile toilet. Come on if you live in Adelaide for awhile you know it is going to happen. We are many many years away from driverless transport here in Adelaide.
Awesome Video! I agree with most of your points and that it is a stupid article BUT... One point I would like to counter is that platooning and driverless trucks are a dead end. I actually think there is potential in this technology. It of course reminds me of the vastly superior train and we should build more freight lines to turn the world more efficiently and environmentally however trains can't fully replace trucks because you need all this rail and there simply isn't the space or money to build it in lots of cases. This is why I think we will see driverless trucks long before we can make trucking obsolete as it will be safer and cheaper to use driverless trucks one they're ready.
Trucks, with or without a driver, are important for shorter distances and local distribution - something that requires smaller sizes for a large number of less accessible locations for rail but for long distances - especially when you need a caravan of trucks will be better served by a freight train. It can be useful at times so the option should be available but it should not be the default or main use of trucks. As for the cost and space for rail, building a rail track is not that expensive, especially for freight. You might be thinking on the cost of high speed rail, underground or elevated metro or even a standard speed passenger rail - all must be adapted to high speeds, have gentle curbs (more and more gentle as the train speed rises) , smooth and as leveled as possible since there are people on board. Freight needs far less. Speeds of freight trains is significantly lower, the cargo is packed to endure bumpy rides so tracks are much cheaper to construct. the cost of a highway/freeway that a convoy of driver less trucks will use is not cheap and will cost almost the same of a 160kmph passenger train line and more than a freight line. As for space, a highway requires much more space to transfer less fright or people. Depending on the length one freight train can replace more than 400 trucks on a single track A single standard rail track is less than 1.5m, the train itself is about as wide as a large truck and usually not wider than one car lane. Just look on satellite image on Google Maps of any railway next to a highway and you'll see that the highway occupies much more space than the railway.
Driverless trucks will need their on dedicated right of way to be effective. This okay traveling between city/states. etc but totally uses in in built up cities where a truck will have to deal unpredictable humans. How is a truck going to unloaded when deliveries are made? Trucks on sealed right of ways and/or highway are polluting with the tyre dust, etc compared to freight train on a steel highway/s.
@@chrismckellar9350 yeah trains are much better but trucks will still be needed. I actually think driverless trucks will be fine interacting with pedestrians/drivers because the tech will eventually be safe enough to predict the unpredictable.
@@itechcircle9410 - Currently driverless technology can not cope with human unpredictability which the experts think it will be another 5-10 years way if it can be done. Besides human unpredictability, our cities, suburbs and roading infrastructure hasn't been specially planned and built for driverless vehicle operation. The other factor the will hamper wide scale driverless operation is sudden and unpredictable storms and weather patterns that a warming planet will bring to highways, cities and towns. At least with driverless or fully autonomous trains, there will be a human controller to hit the stop button but with millions of driverless trucks, vans and casr moving around a city, state and/or country, how many control centres with human controllers would be required to keep an eye on these vehicles and hit a stop button is there is major emergency? Theory is great and in reality is will be financial nightmare to build the autonomous infrastructure and retro fitting a city, state or country of it, when that money ca be used to adapt to the disruptive effects of a warming planet.
Blind Freddy can see driverless cars are so far away as a credible alternative that it’s barely worth discussion. Except for bed wttr fanboys in love with sci fi & Elon. Much like EV’s.
this is a fantastic video about the limitations and drawbacks of driverless vehicles
indeed, we don't need driverless trucks, we just need trains!
thank you for making this!
Why not driverless cars,buses, and trains too?
bUt It tRAvEls iN tuNnLEs aNd We CaLl tHEm pOdS
Don't forget Mars.....we're all going to Mars!!
@@Patrick-bu5vy Are there pods on mars though?
@@briannem.6787 Of course! Not just pods.... Hyperpods!
@@Patrick-bu5vy Great! At least people can travel quickly to their dystopian nightmares!
The biggest problem with driverless cars is that… it’s still a car. Even if you didn’t have to own a car at your house, the self driving cars will still such up space on the streets.
The biggest problem with your answer is you actually think cars are going away…..in any great number.
As a British person, I apologise for having terrible media.
(Also fun fact: us brits have to pay for a license to fund the bbc if you have a tv. Regardless if you watch the BBC or not 😬)
Like here in Italy with the Rai. I think that almost every country has something like that (o at least I think)
just dont pay it
@@OzitoCementMixerCMX-120 The BBC has a database of every home address in the UK. If one flags up as not paying, they'll hound whoever is at that address for payment or eventual prosecution. The BBC is essentially a part of the government, so non payment akin to tax evasion.
Great video as always. I remember the discourse five years ago saying we would all have driverless cars by now, which we don't have. Driverless trains are enticing though
I agree with the video comment. To have driverless cars operating in a city, that city and its suburbs have to be designed for it and name one city in the world that has been specially designed and built for driverless cars and light/medium weight delivery vehicles. What will be the cost of retro fitting existing cities and their suburbs for driverless car/vehicle and human proof capability?
I'd say platooning is a stupid idea on highways. You essentially wall off a lane. So if there's an unusual highway interchange that exits from the other direction, platooning would block off the ramp. Once you need to merge (which will inevitably happen), all the benefits of platooning will no longer apply.
Long-distance trucking is also a bad idea- it takes up excessive amounts of space and can easily be substituted for High-speed cargo. The whole idea of long distance autonomous trucking is based on an extremely car-based mindset that needs to change.
A 48 seat urban bus is a car that has one driver and takes 48 passengers.
its so simple how you said that😎
@@thebus-ter - It was a comment from a bus driver. It is like that a 48 seat bus can remove up to 48 non-essential cars of the road and save at least 59 tonnes of toxic gases and pollutants being emitted per journey or a 218 seat 4 carriage passenger train can can remove up to 218 non-essential cars of the road and save at least 267 tonnes of toxic gases and pollutants being emitted per journey plus it uses a sustainable, environmentally friendly 'steel' highway.
You also have to take into account the truck drivers, taxi drivers and bus drivers. What do they do after the introduction of driverless transport? Do they just walk down to centerlink and accept life on the dole? Many of these workers have little employment opportunities outside of the transport industry. You are taking away people income. They are also huge employers. Think how many taxi drivers, bus drivers and truck drivers are in Adelaide? Remember the transport industry is not just about goods and passengers. It about providing a living for a huge number of people. You can not just walk into a bus depo and tell all the drivers "hey your all sacked, go find another job". If you did you would be fearing the warth of the Transportation Workers Union. You find many of these driverless vehicles would have "accidents"
"All in all its just another car on the road"
I mean, the BBC got an actress with MULTIPLE sexual harassment/assault claims against her by other women, and let her talk about transgender women being harmful or predatory (which is not true, there's nothing to suggest rates of harassment higher than cisgender women) so maybe they are a bit unreliable...
Don’t women harass transgender women? Looking for the D
@@qjtvaddict Plenty of cisgender women do attack transgender women. Most are not "looking for D" as you say, but rather just normal transphobes like J.K. Rowling
@@briannem.6787 yes because indulging your fantasy and ignoring others concerns is a way forward. DNA changed yet?
cool, driverless trucks, how will packages be unloaded, or even the vehicle refilled, or know when it needs that squeaky belt fixed, does it know how to load packages itself?
The fact that they think driverless cars will reduce traffic is laughable, especially when each bus removes 40 cars and each metro train removes at least 10 buses from the roads in Adelaide alone, to say that driverless cars are going to be the future is just asking for a lot of trouble, especially from those that are in the infrastructure industry that understands that just adding lanes does not improve traffic beyond the very few months after it was completed, however restricting the lanes and letting people sort themselves out will increase the flow when they realize that they can take the bus and not worry about idiot drivers because they are already a passenger with them.
Having bus only roads and lanes increase traffic drastically on other roads, but will have shorter destination times for those that are using the transport that use those lanes, IE: taxis and public transit.
A friend of mine was unhappy with the tram possibly going down prospect road, I myself couldn't be much happier, considering that it will reduce the travel times and possibly come every 15 minutes and have priority at the lights... ding ding.
One 48 seat low floor urban bus can take 12-48 non essential cars off the road.
Hey, your channel is super underrated! Keep up the good work, looking forward to more.
I'm gonna use this information, can't tell u how many debates I've gotten stuck in with self driving proponents. Weirdly also as an answer to Cali HSR...
Only good thing about BBC is that some enjoy their NSFW sites tag.
Adam Something...but its self-driving cars.
Sf now does have robotaxis in a large section of the city
You could also take on Veritasium’s video on driverless cars.
I would absolutely love for more people to start arguing against the "science" side of youtube!
So many of those channels have gone down the fucking drain in terms of research quality. And some are straight up just hype machines instead of anything usefull. :/
Could you image a driverless car or bus serving an area like Hackem West or davoren park? It will be left on bricks or someone will graffiti a dick on the bonnet. People will use them as a mobile toilet. Come on if you live in Adelaide for awhile you know it is going to happen. We are many many years away from driverless transport here in Adelaide.
I propose peopleless cities!
Awesome Video! I agree with most of your points and that it is a stupid article BUT... One point I would like to counter is that platooning and driverless trucks are a dead end. I actually think there is potential in this technology. It of course reminds me of the vastly superior train and we should build more freight lines to turn the world more efficiently and environmentally however trains can't fully replace trucks because you need all this rail and there simply isn't the space or money to build it in lots of cases. This is why I think we will see driverless trucks long before we can make trucking obsolete as it will be safer and cheaper to use driverless trucks one they're ready.
Trucks, with or without a driver, are important for shorter distances and local distribution - something that requires smaller sizes for a large number of less accessible locations for rail but for long distances - especially when you need a caravan of trucks will be better served by a freight train. It can be useful at times so the option should be available but it should not be the default or main use of trucks.
As for the cost and space for rail, building a rail track is not that expensive, especially for freight. You might be thinking on the cost of high speed rail, underground or elevated metro or even a standard speed passenger rail - all must be adapted to high speeds, have gentle curbs (more and more gentle as the train speed rises) , smooth and as leveled as possible since there are people on board. Freight needs far less. Speeds of freight trains is significantly lower, the cargo is packed to endure bumpy rides so tracks are much cheaper to construct.
the cost of a highway/freeway that a convoy of driver less trucks will use is not cheap and will cost almost the same of a 160kmph passenger train line and more than a freight line. As for space, a highway requires much more space to transfer less fright or people. Depending on the length one freight train can replace more than 400 trucks on a single track
A single standard rail track is less than 1.5m, the train itself is about as wide as a large truck and usually not wider than one car lane. Just look on satellite image on Google Maps of any railway next to a highway and you'll see that the highway occupies much more space than the railway.
@@AL5520 I agree. Although a railway is cheaper, in most countries there is more highway than railway so trucks are needed.
Driverless trucks will need their on dedicated right of way to be effective. This okay traveling between city/states. etc but totally uses in in built up cities where a truck will have to deal unpredictable humans. How is a truck going to unloaded when deliveries are made? Trucks on sealed right of ways and/or highway are polluting with the tyre dust, etc compared to freight train on a steel highway/s.
@@chrismckellar9350 yeah trains are much better but trucks will still be needed. I actually think driverless trucks will be fine interacting with pedestrians/drivers because the tech will eventually be safe enough to predict the unpredictable.
@@itechcircle9410 - Currently driverless technology can not cope with human unpredictability which the experts think it will be another 5-10 years way if it can be done. Besides human unpredictability, our cities, suburbs and roading infrastructure hasn't been specially planned and built for driverless vehicle operation. The other factor the will hamper wide scale driverless operation is sudden and unpredictable storms and weather patterns that a warming planet will bring to highways, cities and towns. At least with driverless or fully autonomous trains, there will be a human controller to hit the stop button but with millions of driverless trucks, vans and casr moving around a city, state and/or country, how many control centres with human controllers would be required to keep an eye on these vehicles and hit a stop button is there is major emergency?
Theory is great and in reality is will be financial nightmare to build the autonomous infrastructure and retro fitting a city, state or country of it, when that money ca be used to adapt to the disruptive effects of a warming planet.
The BBC always do Propaganda stuff. That’s what they are like with making fake information and fake news. 😂😂
Blind Freddy can see driverless cars are so far away as a credible alternative that it’s barely worth discussion. Except for bed wttr fanboys in love with sci fi & Elon. Much like EV’s.