revtothelimit - motorbike forum

Cousin Jack wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 3:21 pm

Mussels wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 3:08 pm Both, the batteries need to charge faster and the infrastructure to charge them is needed.

It is OK, both of these developments are on track and imminent, along with really cheap power from fusion.

Keep in mind that electric cars predate petrol internal combustion engines

Mr. Dazzle wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:56 am Airbus aircraft are 100% computer controlled and have been since the late 80s. The pilot decides left/right and up/down, but the computer actually flies it with full authority. That's where the original "fly by wire" phrase comes from. There is no backup, if the computers fail there is literally no way the plane can fly.

I’m not speaking from any authority here, but I do have a passing layman’s interest in aircraft and I’m not sure that’s totally accurate. I think there is some level of manual control for trim and rudder. Mainly to allow some control while you switch it off and switch it on again

An airbus also has different ‘laws’ or modes which can allow a more direct input into control surfaces.

I think most modern transport systems are full of computers, sensors and complicated gadgetry and I'm pleased it is, but many still need human inputs to control these systems , My motorbike is run by a computer.

Dodgy knees wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:08 pm I think most modern transport systems are full of computers, sensors and complicated gadgetry and I'm pleased it is, but many still need human inputs to control these systems , My motorbike is run by a computer.

Pack your bags

I think that sums it up perfectly.

Dodgy knees wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:08 pm but many still need human inputs to control these systems

Perhaps unsurprisingly Airbus, and now Boeing, have several widely studied examples of human/computer interface failure leading to loss of aircraft.

Air France 296 was an A320 that crashed after flying very low/slow during an airshow. The Pilot (mistakenly) thought the aircraft wouldn't let him crash, so he flew it in a way that was beyond sensible and ended up failing to clear a load of trees.

Air France 447 crashed into the Atlantic off Brazil after stalling at high altitude. The sensors which inform the computer whats going on broke, so the computer did what it was supposed to do and asked the pilots to fly manually. The pilots didn't grasp what was going on and ultimately flew into the sea.

The two 737 MAX crashes were caused by the MCAS system doing what is was supposed to do, they were both entirely avoidable. Boeing didn't feel it necessary to train pilots on the specifics of the new system, leading to the crashes.

In all of those examples the behaviour of the electronics contributed to the crash as did the Humans flying the planes. If either system had worked properly they would never have happened. Does that mean we shouldn't have electronics, or we shouldn't have people?

Despite recent events with Boeing I expect quality control in aircraft is much better than cars. Car manufacturers seem to push out plenty of design mistakes.

Indeed they are, but they also operate 10, 20, 30 years behind in many fields...so they reap the benefit of Aerospace's expensive development programmes.

Mussels wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:06 pm Despite recent events with Boeing I expect quality control in aircraft is much better than cars.

I used to be a buyer at Lucas Aerospace. We could only buy from CAA approved companies and every single nut and washer had to be traceable back to the bar of steel it came from.

Mr. Dazzle wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:08 am

Dodgy knees wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 9:51 am The electrickory is a great safety backup, but to have your life depend on it is different. I honestly can't see them sharing our public roads in real world, any time soon.

Maybe don't fly on an airliner then.

737Max?

Seriously though, do you want your local 18 year old work experience trainee messing with complex electronics in your car?

On the rare occasions I've entrusted my bike to anyone else, I've had to cope with stupid and potentially life-threatening errors. I've ridden away with the rear axle loose (I figured that out after about 400 metres but had the toolkit under the seat) and had a front brake pad pop out as I was out doing a DAS course with trainees - I braked and it hit me on the shoulder so I dropped the trainees at the nearest cafe for an early lunch, rode back and picked the pad up and refitted it properly. My brother's just had to swap his headlight bulbs over as some f*ckwit in the dealers replaced a blown bulb and the matching one on the other side with the wrong wattage - he wondered why he couldn't see anything at night.

The standards of maintenance are poles apart. That's what bothers me.

From a perspective of an older person, who can see a point at which he has to stop driving will happen. This coming from having witnessed elderly neighbours either stop as they've had one too many accidents or after they've been told to stop by their Doctor (who's been told by family and friends how scary his driving was getting) I welcome self driving cars. Hopefully by the time I have to give up my licence (maybe 20 years from now) the tech and "who dies in the accident" software laws will have matured. They'll keep independence for people into old age and will be much safer in general than the human behind the wheel.

How many fatal accidents are caused by the young buck or buckess at the wheel thinking they are the latest Lewis Hamilton?

Yes, I expect there will be fatal accidents and fatal programming issues as they come on stream but it will be ironed out. Grim but much safer in the long run.

Twenty years ago a mate worked in the flight sim industry and the industry joke ran like this:

"Pretty soon we'll have a trained Chimpanzee at the controls in the cockpit and an Alsatian"

"Why a Chimpanzee?"

"He's there to take the controls should there be a problem"

"And the dog?"

"He's trained to bite the Chimpanzee's hands should he touch the controls"

Mr. Dazzle wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:25 pm The two 737 MAX crashes were caused by the MCAS system doing what is was supposed to do, they were both entirely avoidable. Boeing didn't feel it necessary to train pilots on the specifics of the new system, leading to the crashes.

In all of those examples the behaviour of the electronics contributed to the crash as did the Humans flying the planes. If either system had worked properly they would never have happened. Does that mean we shouldn't have electronics, or we shouldn't have people?

Reasonable idea of the scope of Boeings failure here much of it is to do with the Type Rating so pilots don't have to retrain to fly the many different types of 737 which minimises the training they are required to take.
https://www.aviationlawmonitor.com/2019 ... explained/.

Horse wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 12:18 pm
Edit: weren't Oxnotica near your training centre?

I tried to get the site where they set up a there was a massive tarmac marshalling area along with a roundabout, stop line, give way junctions on a quiet part of the site; exactly what they needed when they set up. The last yard I had was at completely the other end of the site, near the Culham main gate, we could see over the fence where the cars were doing there initial set up. one of the drivers told me he had to 200 miles on site before he could go on the main road (over 50 laps at max 20mph).

There's a driverless car testing site at Cranfield Uni, about 3 miles from my house. AFAiK its predominantly on the airfield, but unsurprisingly they're not keen on spectators. Nissan's European technical centre is on the same site so I imagine they use it alot.

From looking at Google Maps it does appear they have a few bits of tarmac with unnecessary roundabouts etc.

Mr. Dazzle wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:56 am There's a driverless car testing site at Cranfield Uni, about 3 miles from my house. AFAiK its predominantly on the airfield, but unsurprisingly they're not keen on spectators. Nissan's European technical centre is on the same site so I imagine they use it alot.

From looking at Google Maps it does appear they have a few bits of tarmac with unnecessary roundabouts etc.

Something like this?

That's the kiddy...that is J14 of the M1 in the vid, which is 2 mins from my front door. I'll keep an eye out for a driverless leaf.

The last 10 years have seen numerous predictions of fully autonomous cars. To an extent, firms like Uber and Lyft have bet their business model on it. Uber have recently announced that they have abandoned their long term plan for level 5 autonomy.

We’ll continue to see improvements in ‘driver aids’, but reliable fully autonomous cars are science fiction and will be for a long time yet.

A bit like cold fusion - 20 years in the future and has been for 50 years or so!

Mussels wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 2:55 pm

Mr. Dazzle wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:40 am With HGVs its not really the UK you have to think about, at least not in the short term. Although there are still relevant points about the UK.

Consider that in the US its quite common for truckers to "pair up" in the same cab, one drives while one sleeps (often they're a married couple). That's the only way you can succeed in the business. No obviously an AV can just plough on 24/7 only stopping for fuel. That should tell you the financial attraction of an AV.

In the UK we already have laws about how long you can stay in the driver's seat for. Those laws only exists cause its financially attractive to drive for as long as possible, so again that gives you some indication as to the benefit that can potentially be reaped by an AV.

Assuming these are all going to be battery powered 'only stopping for fuel' is likely to be a big thing. How long will a lorry take to recharge, will we have enormous new lorry charging areas built near motorways, will Amazon have a near monopoly because they are the only ones with enough infrastructure to swap cabs half way to Scotland for urgent deliveries?
I can see automated lorries not arriving first as haulers won't want to invest in battery powered long haul until they are forced to and they won't want to buy new automated diesels if they will be legislated off the road soon.
Unless the battery breakthroughs that have been just around the corner for the last twenty years suddenly happen.

There IS a network of long distance electric vehicles in place, but the roads lobby won out over rail. If the local leg can be sorted, that seems a much more logical route...

And that's one justification for HS2 - it frees capacity for additional freight on the existing network.