In Soviet Russia, crazy vision of the future conceives CFABLACKBELT!
Talking about 2.4M traffic injuries, no one gets in his/her car looking to crash it, hence the term “accident”. There are many other ways to prevent/reduce accidents (i.e. tougher driver’s license exams and restrictions) that are MUCH cheaper and most likely just as effective. Oh and what about motorcycles? Automate them as well?
Uh, anyone else worried about autobots? I am.
I think the future of transportation is the electric car. It has the lowest infrastructural changes and lifestyle changes required. Maybe sugarcane ethanol based cars? NO idea, don’t really know how economical ethanol is without subsidies.
CFABLACKBELT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ZeroBonus Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > what is your definition of an autonomic car? > You > > do realize that an HSR would probably be 100x > > cheaper what you are envisioning… > > Fully autonomous. > > Based on what analysis that it would be 100x > cheaper? They could be guided by wireless, > satellite, etc… other than that and central > computer hardware, facilities, software upgrades, > and monitoring, I fail to see where the extra > capital costs would come from. > > HSR is horribly expensive. Tracks and trains are > expensive, most likely would need to deal w/ high > cost labor b/c of unions, maintenance is > expensive. I also don’t think they really address > a high demand outside of the eastern corridor > other than the romantic idea of traveling on a > train. Outside that you’re really just addressing > a market that already has a decent mode of > transportation. Look I love the train more than > you give me credit for, but even the ones now are > still expensive and don’t always go at the times I > want or to all the places I want. > > Autonomous cars could essentially be trackless > trains; they could be driven very close and reduce > traffic by several orders of magnitude. Also you > aren’t restricted to one route and time schedule. > > This isn’t something I expect will start tomorrow, > but I don’t see why the technology could not be > achieved in the next 20-30 years. So you don’t think researching, developing and applying completely new technology and implementing it across the nation will have any more than a marginal capital cost associated with it. While taking essentially off the shelf technology and adapting it to existing rail right of ways is far too prohibitive of a capital expenditure? are you sure you are not missing something in your analysis? Plus theirs the cost associated with the regulation of the new technology and its implementation on public highways as well as the fact as it will take a complete shift in attitudes to get people to give up control of their cars.