GM Joins Forces With Ford, Toyota For Self-Driving Car Safety Framework
16
Sponsored Links
General Motors, Ford, Toyota, and the Society of Automotive Engineers have banded together to create the Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium, or AVSC. The new group aims to build a self-driving car safety framework and begin laying out guidelines for how companies test and implement autonomous car technology.
The three automakers and the SAE announced the new group on Wednesday, and it will focus on building a framework to test Level 4 and Level 5 self-driving cars safely. On the SAE’s autonomous scale, Level 4 and Level 5 cars do not require any input from humans in any scenario. Level 3 cars may still require humans to take over controls in some cases. Every company peddling self-driving technology today continues to work toward Level 5.
“To achieve these benefits, industry collaboration, cohesion and flexibility to merge new ideas with proven safety processes are critical. This is why we are forming the AVSC and announcing our roadmap strategy,” Edward Straub, DM, executive director of the Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium, said.
All three automakers are currently working on their own self-driving car technology, with GM ahead of Ford and Toyota with respect to progress. GM operates its Cruise Automation subsidiary, which still plans to commercialize autonomous vehicles sometime this year. However, the consortium will leverage each member’s strengths to lay out protocols for safe testing and inform any future self-driving standards to be implemented in the future.
Regulations and laws surrounding self-driving cars still lack in major countries around the world. For example, in the U.S. specifically, all cars must still feature a steering wheel and pedals. GM has petitioned the NHTSA to reform the regulation, though it hasn’t acted yet. GM showed off its Cruise AV without a steering wheel or pedals that it wants to test publicly a few years ago.
The group’s first order of business will be to create a roadmap for future goals and priorities. The document will surround data sharing, vehicle interaction with other road users, and safe testing guidelines.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM technology and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Sponsored Links
Here’s a guideline…….don’t build them!!!
What reasons do you have against self driving cars?
You need to remember that in all reality, they aren’t for you and I (25-35/35-45 demographic) they are for mass transportation, and in my opinion for our parents or grand-parents that might not be as confident driving on the highways or in town anymore, or at night time.
I agree, GM and all automakers for that matter should perfect the products they already have instead of dabbling in a technology very few people will want.
I will never buy a self driving vehicle I will not put my life in danger in a vehicle I cant control they should all have pedals and a steering wheel in case of a emergency
Nobody is going to force you to. There will still be human controlled cars for a long long time to come. You’ll be buying an electric car, truck or SUV several times over before self driving cars are the norm.
My reason is I LIKE TO DRIVE!! I like the freedom of driving when I want to drive! I like being able to accelerate when I want and the ability to break the rear end lose when I want. I like the feeling of making a perfect apex through a corner or the sudden rush when I miss that apex and have to correct the car……. with out a computer dong it for me. I like to tow and haul and back a trailer using my mirrors because I learned how to drive!! I don’t need a knob on the dash from ford, I know which way the trailer is going because I practice my skill at DRIVING!!
DRIVING is a skill that can diminish without practice, I like to practice the art of actually being able to control a vehicle rather than just ride behind the steering wheel.
I’m sure there is a generational thing going on here but not so many years ago a “road trip” was something people longed for and part of that adventure was getting to drive! Think about this, when all vehicles are “connected” and we have to summon our transportation to pick us up and then enter our destination so it will know where to to take us but only if it is “safe ” to do so after the “unit” coordinates with other vehicles to see if we can move without getting hit, this takes away freedom and I do not won’t to ever give that up. Nor do I want to give up powerbraking a “87 Grand National for 300 feet and then doing burnouts till the Eagles pop!
I do not want autonomy, I would rather people learn how to drive……..and not text or whatever it is that contributed to this “need” for autonomy.
“I like being able to accelerate when I want and the ability to break the rear end lose when I want. I like the feeling of making a perfect apex through a corner or the sudden rush when I miss that apex and have to correct the car”
“Nor do I want to give up powerbraking a “87 Grand National for 300 feet and then doing burnouts till the Eagles pop!”
Keep driving like that on public roads and the autonomous car will come sooner. Behaviour like that will be evidence for officials to push for mandatory AV use.
Autonomous driving cars are great for anyone who wants to eat, text, put on makeup, get dressed or the old favorite standby which is talk on the phone; research have concluded that people have difficulty driving and talking on the phone at the same time especially if they’re holding a cellphone as autonomous cars could save hundreds of lives each year.
Why not just enforce laws that already exist, and have much harsher penalties for those who text and drive and do any other distracted activities? It is almost like saying, let’s release all the prisoners into society, and put the law abiding people in prison to protect them.
“It is almost like saying, let’s release all the prisoners into society, and put the law abiding people in prison to protect them.”
But’s it’s not like that at all, and you equivocation is false.
Penalties and enforcement aren’t enough of a deterrent for people to stop doing it; it didn’t work with prohibition of booze and pot, and it can’t work with phones. People will always have a desire for their vices; their amusements and distractions.
Upholding education for present car use will not be enough to keep people from using their phones, and demanding that laws exists that force drivers to operate a car ram-rod straight is unenforceable and untenable.
I don’t propose black and white answers to AV’s, but I don’t proposed cracking skulls with law enforcement will somehow stop the push of autonomous cars and thereby keep the public from being distracted while driving presently. Push too hard on the entertainment that the public consumes, and they’ll keep doing it.
Self-driving automobiles are a bad idea.
Within 10 years, expect AEVs to be liked by just about everyone. There’s lots to like. For instance, expect AEVs to end most undesirable vehicle emissions and traffic congestion. Also expect AEVs to reduce road accident fatalities and serious injuries by more than 90%.
Don’t drink the cool aid. there is a lot not to like as well:
-Being at the mercy of a computer
-Being in a vehicle that is subject to hacking at any moment
-Having to wait for a drone to arrive in the head, rain, and cold
-Riding in something that could very well be filthy inside as most people do not care about things that are not their own.
– Losing all notion of personal privacy as your exact whereabouts can be tracked.
BTW, most people could care less about emissions from their vehicles.
“Being at the mercy of a computer”
You’ve been at the mercy of computers for 40 years now. Get over it.
“Being in a vehicle that is subject to hacking at any moment”
Hacking isn’t always done with computers. In fact, cars could be hacked with lockpicking tools for decades. Where was your out-cry for that?
Lets not forget all those wonderful fuel siphoners and rim stealers from way back then. That also is a means of hacking cars that hasn’t gone away with time!
“Having to wait for a drone to arrive in the head, rain, and cold”
Why would you deliberately choose to wait outside after ride-hailing? Besides, it isn’t difficult to inform the ride-hailer the ETA on their (gasp!) phone while they wait inside a building or house.
By the way, have you ever heard of an umbrella? How about a raincoat or boots? Yes, those have been around as long as we’ve had computers too.
“Riding in something that could very well be filthy inside as most people do not care about things that are not their own.”
Tis true, but if the fleet is managed carefully, it can be cleaned carefully too.
At this point, I think you’re deliberately confusing private AV’s with ride-sharing AV’s, to the detriment of both of your arguments.
“Losing all notion of personal privacy as your exact whereabouts can be tracked.”
Again, the ship has already sailed on that one dude. 40 years too late, and too late to start complaining about it now.
“most people could care less about emissions from their vehicles.”
If the could care less, they why can’t they?
Furthermore, people care about emissions that they can see. They care about emissions they see from coal-burning, from trash on the side of a road, and plastics in the water.
The difference now is that people are less and less scientifically ignorant, and they know about things that they cannot see coming out of ICE exhaust pipes. They care about it because they know about it, and because the know about it, they don’t want to contribute to it.
And since vehicle emissions contribute in part to climate change, the incentive for automakers to stay in business longer by making private and fleet AV’s (rather then be regulated out of operation by legislation) is only going to get stronger.
Flawed thinking on your part. I have a plethora of “car guy” friends and speak to a lot of customers that want no part of self driving cars. 10 years from now will not sway the majority and as these greedy car makers try shoving this crap down our throats it will continue to be not liked and only purchased by a small niche of younger buyers that are more into the tech than the car itself and possibly a few elderly ones that are impaired in some way. And that brings up the question if they are impaired enough to not be able to drive what are they going to do when they reach there destination? More than likely someone else would need to be with them so why couldn’t that person drive?
The other huge overlooked problems are the human beings designing these systems are flawed, the computers and sensors are flawed and will be compromised with simple things like weather conditions, corrosion, computer lockups and malfunctions and age. Already many customers we have spoke to have had issues with their blind monitoring systems, rear cameras and radar cruise control. Add car manufacturers profit margins keeping prices affordable for the masses and corporate greed and you can bet these systems will not have top notch quality system boards and controls and the sensors will be very costly when they fail and you cannot use the vehicle as a result.
all I can say I enjoy driving myself