Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brooklynite

(94,571 posts)
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 12:25 PM Nov 2017

Driverless shuttle involved in crash on first day of service in downtown Las Vegas

Source: News 3 Las Vegas

LAS VEGAS (KSNV News3LV) — Las Vegas is the first city in America to have a self-driving shuttle operating in real-time traffic.

However, in its first hour of service in downtown Las Vegas, the shuttle was involved in a collision with a delivery truck. There has been no report of injuries at this time.

The driver of the truck was cited by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department.

The project has many people intrigued, wanting to see how the shuttle would work.


Read more: http://news3lv.com/news/local/driverless-shuttle-crashes-on-first-day-of-service-in-downtown-las-vegas



Back to the drawing board...
33 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Driverless shuttle involved in crash on first day of service in downtown Las Vegas (Original Post) brooklynite Nov 2017 OP
Looks like the human driving the truck may have been at fault... EarlG Nov 2017 #1
At fault, yes; but the vehicle needs to be responsive to external human behavior brooklynite Nov 2017 #5
In this case... forkol Nov 2017 #13
Passenger on board said the shuttle didn't have to ability to move backwards it just stopped and sat MrsCoffee Nov 2017 #19
We accept many thousands of highway deaths a year with human drivers Kaleva Nov 2017 #20
Human error not computer error Maggiemayhem Nov 2017 #8
In what way? Safer on the road... LisaM Nov 2017 #26
Surprise, surprise. Sneederbunk Nov 2017 #2
I imagine the same was said LanternWaste Nov 2017 #4
Seems a driver would've moved forward or back to avoid the truck. Oh well, more testing needed. brush Nov 2017 #3
The vehicle sensors stopped it when it felt a danger. The truck hit it anyway. Maggiemayhem Nov 2017 #9
That seems to be the problem. The sensor stopped it. A driver would've moved it. brush Nov 2017 #10
Good suggestions lagomorph777 Nov 2017 #23
Not too sure about that.... forkol Nov 2017 #15
The incident you describe is much different than a stationary van being backed into by a slow... brush Nov 2017 #17
A horn would be what most people would have used. Kablooie Nov 2017 #31
Yes, seems that would have been one of the first things engineered into driverless cars. brush Nov 2017 #32
I have avoided accidents by looking at the driver's face... HopeAgain Nov 2017 #6
Watching tires helps as well Rural_Progressive Nov 2017 #7
Every sure thing I ever heard of turned out to be a not so sure thing bucolic_frolic Nov 2017 #11
Skeptic! KPN Nov 2017 #16
Whew! That makes me feel better!! bucolic_frolic Nov 2017 #18
Thanks republicans Achilleaze Nov 2017 #12
It isn't the guns ... oops, the computers KPN Nov 2017 #14
This is what all the candidates were warning about during the 2016 election. Tommy_Carcetti Nov 2017 #21
Headline is clickbait. It was a fender bender and not a crash. Kaleva Nov 2017 #22
To the surprise of no one. eppur_se_muova Nov 2017 #24
No surprise that human error caused this accident and the driver was cited? Kaleva Nov 2017 #25
Back in my day we didn't need moving pictures.... moda253 Nov 2017 #28
I guess you didn't need jobs, either. eppur_se_muova Nov 2017 #29
"Driverless shuttle involved in crash", more like ... JustABozoOnThisBus Nov 2017 #27
A driver in the shuttle would've taken some action to warn the truck driver, or to move the shuttle. brush Nov 2017 #33
The shuttle was sitting still and a truck backed into it. Kablooie Nov 2017 #30

EarlG

(21,947 posts)
1. Looks like the human driving the truck may have been at fault...
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 12:27 PM
Nov 2017
A representative with the City of Las Vegas issued the following statement:

"The autonomous shuttle was testing today when it was grazed by a delivery truck downtown. The shuttle did what it was supposed to do, in that it’s sensors registered the truck and the shuttle stopped to avoid the accident. Unfortunately, the delivery truck did not stop and grazed the front fender of the shuttle. Had the truck had the same sensing equipment that the shuttle has the accident would have been avoided. Testing of the shuttle will continue during the 12-month pilot in the downtown Innovation District."

forkol

(113 posts)
13. In this case...
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 01:57 PM
Nov 2017

it seems it did have human-like behavior. It sensed an accident, and tried to avoid it. What more do you think could have been done to avoid this accident?

MrsCoffee

(5,801 posts)
19. Passenger on board said the shuttle didn't have to ability to move backwards it just stopped and sat
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 02:48 PM
Nov 2017

there. I thought I did see it going backwards in the video, but I couldn't tell which end was the front, lol.

Kaleva

(36,301 posts)
20. We accept many thousands of highway deaths a year with human drivers
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 02:52 PM
Nov 2017

If drivers could respond better to external human behaviour, deaths and serious injuries could be greatly reduced.

Article says that 90% of traffic fatalities are caused by human error.

Maggiemayhem

(809 posts)
8. Human error not computer error
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 12:54 PM
Nov 2017

My daughter and her millennial friends take driverless Uber’s as often as they can. They actually feel safer than with a human only driver.

LisaM

(27,811 posts)
26. In what way? Safer on the road...
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 04:09 PM
Nov 2017

or safer because they are physically afraid of the driver?

I have taken exactly one Uber (not my choice; I was on a vacation and that's what the friend ordered) and the driver was a flat out racist. It was awful

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
4. I imagine the same was said
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 12:35 PM
Nov 2017

"Surprise, surprise."

I imagine the same was said in 1891, when Henry Wells of Massachusetts, driving his brand new gasoline-powered buggy, struck Ebeling Thomas.

brush

(53,778 posts)
3. Seems a driver would've moved forward or back to avoid the truck. Oh well, more testing needed.
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 12:32 PM
Nov 2017

The passengers saw the truck coming towards them but there was no driver to tell to move.

brush

(53,778 posts)
10. That seems to be the problem. The sensor stopped it. A driver would've moved it.
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 01:11 PM
Nov 2017

Or at least honked the horn to alert the truck driver.

Back to the drawing board for more sensors that warn other drivers.

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)
23. Good suggestions
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 03:19 PM
Nov 2017

Seems like a bit more engineering could fix that problem.

I'm still pretty skeptical, but I look around me and I see many many driverless cars. There are people sitting behind the steering wheel, playing with their phones instead of driving.

forkol

(113 posts)
15. Not too sure about that....
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 02:14 PM
Nov 2017

I was in an accident once where a guy ran the red light at the intersection, hit a SUV crossing the intersection, which caused the guy's car to veer off to the curb, the curb caused the car to turn, then it was heading straight for the front of my truck! Even though I saw the accident happen initially, I did not expect the car to veer towards me and as it started coming towards me I tried to put my truck in reverse, but with the shift on the floor, I was not able to do it fast enough to try backing up (and I also needed to check to see what was behind me so *I* would not cause an accident as well. He ends up hitting the front of my truck anyway.

There was just not enough time to react, and a horn blow in this case would have not helped in any case.

I don't believe that even if there were a driver, the passengers warning a driver, that the driver would have had enough time to focus attention, devise a countermeasure, and execute it in time to avoid the accident anyway.

brush

(53,778 posts)
17. The incident you describe is much different than a stationary van being backed into by a slow...
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 02:32 PM
Nov 2017

moving truck. Not even close.

An accident after just two hours on the job proves that they need to enter many more accident avoidance scenarios into the driverless van's computer system, including situations when the van is sitting still—perhaps one as simple as blowing the horn.

Not yet ready for prime time.

HopeAgain

(4,407 posts)
6. I have avoided accidents by looking at the driver's face...
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 12:38 PM
Nov 2017

Honked my horn when it's clear they don't see you. I think that is something the Robots can't do. Driving may be more intuitive than we think.

Rural_Progressive

(1,105 posts)
7. Watching tires helps as well
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 12:48 PM
Nov 2017

If you see those front wheels just starting to turn, before the vehicle itself changes orientation, you can frequently get that extra instant needed to avoid running into someone turning in front of you.

bucolic_frolic

(43,161 posts)
11. Every sure thing I ever heard of turned out to be a not so sure thing
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 01:22 PM
Nov 2017

Edsel
The Nifty Fifty
Tech Stocks 2000
Entire computer on one chip
Laetrile
Defeat of USSR
General Motors could never go bankrupt
HRC 2016
Bernie Madoff
Enron
WorldCom
Mitts
Sears recovery
Shopping malls the safest bet in REITs
Trump draining the swamp
_________

So call me skeptical of
Driverless cars
Amazon taking over the world and retail in particular

eppur_se_muova

(36,263 posts)
24. To the surprise of no one.
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 03:55 PM
Nov 2017

This whole business of driverless vehicles is being pushed to market because a small number of companies hope to reap big profits -- not because of the possibility of it doing anybody else any good at all.

 

moda253

(615 posts)
28. Back in my day we didn't need moving pictures....
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 04:25 PM
Nov 2017

In my day we didn't need moving pictures, in my day there was only one show in town and it was called STARE AT THE SUN! That's right! You'd sit in the middle of an open field and stare up at the sun til your eyeballs burst into flames! --that's the way it was and we liked it, we loved it!

eppur_se_muova

(36,263 posts)
29. I guess you didn't need jobs, either.
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 04:32 PM
Nov 2017
The Luddites were a group of English textile workers and weavers in the 19th century who destroyed weaving machinery as a form of protest. The group was protesting the use of machinery in a "fraudulent and deceitful manner" to get around standard labour practices.[1] Luddites feared that the time spent learning the skills of their craft would go to waste as machines would replace their role in the industry.[2] It is a misconception that the Luddites protested against the machinery itself in an attempt to halt progress of technology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite


Self-driving vehicles, like many trends in automation, are a means to liberate corporations from having to hire people, and not much else. If we had a form of minimum guaranteed income, or at least minimum guaranteed standard of living, this would not be such a problem. But "progress" in the tech-finance context has come to be a matter of replacing paid employees by wholly owned machines, no matter what. Ironic that owning the labor force as property is being touted as a benign development.

Kablooie

(18,634 posts)
30. The shuttle was sitting still and a truck backed into it.
Fri Nov 10, 2017, 04:51 AM
Nov 2017

The problem probably was that the shuttle didn't have a horn.
Something to add I suppose.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Driverless shuttle involv...