Well, I was wondering that. It's OK if the people 'teaching' it are good drivers but if they're not it will learn all the wrong lessons. I suppose it can maybe learn by experience so, if someone has an accident it could learn that what the driver had done leading UP to that point was how NOT to do it.
Spent an enjoyable hour watching some YT's on tesla and other EV's and that led me to this... It's about liquid metal batteries and the future of gridscale energy storage. I'm sure some of you fellas already know all about this but it seems to have passed me by somehow
Self driving cars (the google ones) are already saver than human drivers. The problem is, well... human drivers. They do a lot of unpredictable things. Once all driving is done by AIs that's not going to be a problem anymore. Tesla is not the best example because they are trailing the top dogs in autonomous driving by quite a bit. Their "autopilot" is basically assisted driving. I'm not saying self driving cars are just around the corner but this technology is coming sooner rather than later. It's going to take a shitton of jobs with it.
This is the problem. AI is pure logic. It doesn't have gut feelings. How many times has a car gone by and you say to yourself "I'm staying clear of that idiot"? AI can't do that. Pure AI is going to be fantastic, but a human/AI mix will be a nightmare. Americans are going to give up driving about as easy as they give up guns.
I'm very excited to see it start and, for me, the sooner the better. The other thing is I could envisage it being introduced on certain roads first and not others.
Hmm... not sure I agree with that, tbh. I think said before that my old man was a driving instructor and he always used to say that driving could be taught precisely because it IS based on logical 'rules'. It's when people start to 'improvise' things usually turn to shit.
As a motorcyclist I totally agree. Some bikers are concerned that the self-driving cars won't see motorcyclists well enough. As far as I'm concerned that will be no worse than today.
They've been rather popular up here in NE Ohio, too. Tallmadge Circle has been around for decades (more than a century?), but there's been an explosion in new roundabout construction in the last 10 years.
As a survivor of my motorcycling days ['56 BSA Road Rocket] I cringe when on the I5 Freeway with 6 lanes of slow moving cars and cyclists doing 70/80 between them. There is plenty of blame to go around!
I used to be like you but my perception of space used to be those of a car driver which made it seem they were riding through a very tight space. While what the bikes are doing wouldn't be legal under California's legal lane splitting, the practice is almost never fatal.
Watched a few YT's on this including this one... That's a reasonable analysis I'd say although, for me, his point about what he calls traffic 'platoons' is also an argument for why you shouldn't have lights instead of roundabouts... because it encourages people to drive without taking note of their environment but I accept that's arguable.
Yeah, that's about right. All of the ones I'm familiar with around here are appropriate for the setting and traffic, though the oldest one (Tallmadge Circle) is in the center of said suburban Western Reserve-style planned town, and has eight(!) entrances/exits. That one gets very, very clogged at certain times. A couple are poorly designed w.r.t. semis, but otherwise are good. We'll find out soon enough if the one they're installing in downtown Akron will fall prey to pedestrian problems.
Just on the point about pedestrian usage, in some circumstances it's necessary to put a bridge or walkway for their benefit. but, in truth, if the junction requires that level of pedestrian safety that might be necessary anyway.
Timing Green lights used to be something I excelled at back East. Here in Cal most lights are controlled by embedded sensors so that no longer works. While I'm at it the road resurfacing crews here need to go to an East Coast training facility and relearn their craft. A newly laid asphalt road here rides like it's gravel.....with a bunch of little potholes.
Five or six years ago we had a couple of intersections between my house and everywhere useful replaced by rotaries; one of them was about the most dangerous intersection in the north end of the state, averaging 30-40 collisions a year and 5-6 fatalities. These rotaries have been the scene of the most godawful driving decisions I have ever seen-- and I drove taxi in Manhattan for a year. There's nothing quite like having the guy right in front of you in a rotary come to a dead stop half in and half out of the exit you want to take while he decides if it is really the one he wants to take-- and there are two cars coming into it, one in each lane... But the collisions are down to maybe five or six a year, and there's only been one fatality since they went in. Hard to argue with the result, even if it enhances one's tendencies to hate people...
They are putting them in in my city to reduce injuries in accidents. Low speed wrecks are better than high speed t-bone hits.
I can imagine when they're first introduced there will be problems and if they weren't previously on the driving test it will be even worse. Regarding people stopping while they're exiting the roundabout, (as opposed to joining it), the answer is simple... just go around the damned thing again until you're sure
The guy in the vid I linked to said they reduced fatalities by up to 90%. Personally I find it unlikely it would be that high but I imagine there'd be some reduction in high speed collisions and thus fatalities.
I tell you what: Central Florida (Orlando) could really use something like an occasional roundabout. They find amazing new and creative ways to create fatal crashes there, pretty much all to do with running red lights.
We used to have a very busy intersection that was replaced by two roundabouts. While the number of accidents increased in the first year, there were zero fatalities due to all the accidents being end bumps at 5 mph instead of t-bones at 35 MPH +. I totally see a 90% reduction in high-speed collisions because the high-speed aspect was completely removed from the equation.
That will certainly be true for a lot of people. But I think self driving cars will be a game changer for old people who shouldn't be driving but still want to live independently. And I know of some 20 somethings who are so used to taking an uber that they hardly remember how to drive. Not everyone is in love with driving.