1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Mercedes concept "mobile living space"

  1. Jan 6, 2015 #1

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 6, 2015 #2
    I think the concept works. Future real world models may end up not looking very much like cars.

    Here is the photo
    mercedes-f015.jpg
     
  4. Jan 7, 2015 #3
    The real question is what happens in a head-on collision. I know, I know, it's a concept and ideally the systems on board should avoid/mitigate it, but I can't help think that this "living room" concept is a bit unsafe if you happen to hit a deer at 70 mph.
     
  5. Jan 7, 2015 #4
    A deer hit is not the same as a true head-on. Head-ons will be quite rare with self driving vehicles. As for deer - good question, however the sensors in these vehicle will likely see the deer long before a typical person will - the best defense is seeing them early, although most people do not slow down aggressively enough even when they see the deer - they just watch as they go by and hope it does not jump in front of them- this behavior would be different in a Self-driver. Secondly - these will likly have some vehicle to vehicle communications - so the vehicle in front will communicate to ones behind it that it is slowing(avoiding rear ends) - and vehicles can communicate to each other about the presence of deer.
    Reading up on the Google vehicles challenges - Stop Lights back lit with the Sun, snow, rain and temporary / new traffic controls are the major hurdles today,
     
  6. Jan 7, 2015 #5

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Yeah, but I'm guessing you've never had a deer jump out from a tree line right in front of you. I think you are badly underestimating how quickly it happens. As for the vehicle in front warning your vehicle about it ... fugedaboudit ![/QUOTE]
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2015
  7. Jan 7, 2015 #6
    I live where they have deer hunts (lots of deer) - I have never hit one and I do not drive slow, though largely attributed to luck ( i.e my wife was hit BY a deer - ran into the side of the car while she was going 25MPH). IMO with thermal sensors - expected because they would be best for seeing people - and much better low light vision / motion detection etc - and truly focused attentive driver, the deer strikes will be reduced - thus the work "likely" - not completely eliminated. Your reply seems to imply that just because you did not see it is was not visible, I do not mean this a s a personal criticism, my point being that humans are really not good observers.
     
  8. Jan 7, 2015 #7

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    I agree that humans are not always good observers and that a car will likely be more adept at avoidance than a human but I've seen them jump into the road far enough ahead of me that I was not in danger of hitting them and I was amazed at how quickly it happens. Not there ... there. Almost like a cat's ability to materialize out of thin air (I know physics has no explanation for the cat thing but I've seen it happen :smile:)
     
  9. Jan 7, 2015 #8
    A grey deer in the woods- adapted for low visibility in low light to avoid predators, standing still - esp when it hears a noise.... we have all driven by far more deer we never saw than the ones we saw. We need somethng like this LINK
     
  10. Jan 7, 2015 #9

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Yeah, I think that sort of technology will be common on "mobile living spaces" when they happen.
     
  11. Jan 7, 2015 #10

    jack action

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The problem with self-driven vehicle is not the technology (I think Google proved that). the problem is a question of responsability: When there will be an accident or a mechanical failure (and there is always one), who is responsible? Who is to blame? Even worst, What if a driveless car go over the speed limit or park itself into a no-parking zone?

    In a car that was sold with the promise of driving itself, the responsability could go back to the manufacturer. In a car with a driver, the driver has some control, so a share in the responsability.

    The auto manufacturers are not ready to assume that level of responsability yet and that is why in every automated system, they will probably always let some control to the driver.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/14/upshot/when-driverless-cars-break-the-law.html?_r=0
     
  12. Jan 7, 2015 #11
    having seen a Moose jump a 7 ft fence and hop right in front of the vehicle we were in. I'll say automated systems will be useless against some threats no matter how well they see the animal. the variety of behavior is simply too great to make a common reaction to potential work often enough to be truly safe.

    whats worse is anti collision is limited in its effectiveness as long as the passengers are little more than eggs in a shoebox. you can not stop so suddenly you kill the passengers and that means you have to increase the reaction time based on speed and safe breaking distance to the threat. having a car moving at 80 MPH and a deer jumps into the roadway 1 second ahead means an assured accident for one or the other. the car simply can't stop in time to avoid hitting the deer without risking the passengers inside.(we simply don't shake that well. think whiplash.) so what will be the programs primary choice? the passengers inside or the outside living being?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Mercedes concept "mobile living space"
  1. Concept of Entropy (Replies: 6)

Loading...