Our readers showed a surprising degree of animosity towards the development of autonomous platooning technology for trucks in the UK
We were a little surprised by the depth of opposition to platooning technology revealed by last week’s poll. Notable features of the results included the proportion of people who declined to pick one of our options; we can only guess at this, but judging from the comments we received (overwhelmingly negative) it appears that they might have been looking for a way to register their opinion on the concept of autonomous lorry platooning itself. This would certainly have made for an interesting poll, but it wasn’t the question we asked; we were asking about the trial only.
Of the 379 people who responded to the poll, the largest group, 34 per cent, thought that the biggest problem trial designers will face is the potential for truck platoons to cause congestion; several comments raised the prospect of difficulty in overtaking a line of heavy lorries, especially in wet conditions. The next group, on 30 per cent, were the ‘None of the aboves’; this option in fact led for most of the week. Finding clear road stretches was the biggest concern of the next group, comprising 23 per cent of respondents; we noted that a satirical radio show last week featured a musical number about the singer never seeing a quiet stretch of the M6, echoing the Disney song about never seeing an elephant fly. The distance between motorway junctions, and how this would affect trial safety in the event of having to get a platoon off the road, was the choice of 8 per cent; while the smallest group, 6 per cent, thought that the potential for blocking long stretches of the hard shoulder was likely to be the biggest problem.
Many of the comments we received were from readers asking what the point of platooning was, when the option of putting freight onto trains and getting it off the road altogether existed. But as Jon Excell mentioned in his comment last week, testing is a vital part of developing such systems so there’s a strong chance we’ll have to get used to it, even though the biggest markets for autonomous platooning trucks are likely to be in regions with many miles of long, straight road, like the US, Canada, Australia and Russia.
Please continue to send us your thought on this topic.
Just because it’s possible doesn’t mean it’s desirable. what happens if one of the mid-convoy “followers” develops a mechanical fault (e.g. a puncture or motive power failure)?
Yes, it is a ludicrous idea.
Other driver acceptance to autonomous vehicles will be the greatest block
As the article suggests, there are some considerable logistic difficulties to overcome when mixing platoon freight and individual passenger cars.
Probably the best means of platooning is to have a separate trunking network from regular road traffic. You could thus have a system whereby one driver could haul more than 2000 tonnes between distribution centres. You could call it something like Railfreight perhaps…
Why can’t they just use freight trains? Am I missing something?
No-oo , but ” they ” are : dunno where the source of this group-thought is – but it’s already well underway on most automotive designs. Looking back to ‘ye olde dayes’ of “Vauxhall Craftsman’s Guild” designs, who would have thought that 50 yrs on the shapes and ideas would have materialised …. taking it further wot next?
Nicely put…
I have answered ‘none’ because the greatest threat will surely be the number of ambulance chasing lawyers in cars following the convoy to be first to be able to issue writs if/when there is a problem.
I’ve got a more upbeat view of this than this poll invites. The advantages of not trusting goods to a human driver who can only travel for a certain number of hours per day are huge. With full autonomy, these could drive all night at low speeds. You’re not paying a driver, and your fuel costs are cut. You don’t need the weight and bulk of the cab, or its height, so drag reduces if e.g. your flatbed is travelling empty. The lead truck needs to maintain a safe distance from the one behind it so a crash doesn’t automatically put the whole platoon through your Nissan, but the rest of the convoy can be nose to tail for aerodynamic benefit.
You can achieve most of the gains you rightly highlight without ‘platooning’. If these are all autonomous trucks with a human on board, why do they have to form ‘trains’?
How utterly ridiculous, high tech solutions for the sake of them. How are these monsters going to get in & out of service stations when a break is required, what happens when one convoy tries to overtake another at a 0.5mph differentail. Where will the other drivers appear from at the end of a journey? this is not new, we used to have railways that did this & much safer for all!
The biggest problem with this solution is not the way in which it interacts with other road users, it will be the effect on the road surface. if lorries are all going to follow the same path, start and stop at the same points the wear on the road surface will be in the same area. This will be a problem someone will have to overcome.
I have answered none because I don’t believe any of the objections raised are significant.
Platooning is an interim technology in any case, individual trucks will be fully autonomous quite soon.
We can’t get the drivers out of the tube trains that can drive themselves now, so how would it work with lorries? How often do several lorries need to go to the same place? if they did you would use a train instead.
If there had been a button for ‘all of the above’ I would have voted. Platooning will still cause just as much pollution. Get the long distance freight off the roads and on to the railways!
ONE PROBLEM I FORESEE IS TO TURN AROUND A CORNER AT A TRAFFIC JUNCTION WITH OTHER CARS STUFFING WITHIN THE TRAIN OF TRUCKS (SINCE THEY CANNOT TURN ALL AT THE SAME TIME THE LEAD (MANNED ) TRUCK TURNS. THIS WOULD STRETCH THE CONVOY FAR APPART AND WOULD NEED QUITE A BIT OF “INTELLIGENCE” TO KEEP THE CONVOY ALL NEETLY PACKED BEHIND ONE ANOTHER TO FOR EXAMPLE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE AERODYNAMIC SAVINGS (MENTIONED BY OTHER) BY HAVING THE FIRST “PUSH THE AIR” FOR THE REMAINING COUPLE BEHIND. SUGGETSION WOULD BE TO HAVE ALL TRUCKS WITH VISUAL ADVICE FOR CARS TO OVERTAKE WHILE ON A LONG STRETCH OF ROAD SO THAT THE CONVONY CAN RE-GROUP TOGETHER. I AGREE THAT IT IS AN INTERIM SOLUTION UNTIL THE “INTELLIGENCE” COMES TO HAND FOR REAL AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES AND HAS TO BE SEEN MORE AS A TESTBED THAN A REALLY AFFORDABLE TECHNOLOGY, SINCE RAILWAY SEEMS STRICKINGLY MORE SECURE AND CONVENIENT.
We had these years ago. They were called trains
The electronics may be reliable these days but what about mechanical failures such as engines seizing up, punctures or brake failures. And what about hijackers? Maybe ok in the Australian outback but not on this small heavily congested roads. As a previous post said we had railways that did this better !!
How /where do you refuel the platoon?
What happens when one of the followers has a blow out?
What separation will there be between trucks – its bad enough now trying to get off at motorway junctions with the inevitable line of trucks nose to tail not considering other road users.
When the guy leading the platoon crashes – everybody crashes. What will that do to the insurance premiums of the lead driver?
When the terrorist in the lead tractor unit ploughs into the pedestrian area, do the rest follow?
Far safer on those old fashioned systems on rails, what were they called??
When did you last see pedestrians on a motorway?
We used to have things that did a similar job to this idea before the tories destroyed them, they were called freight trains I think.
We have trouble on the roads at the moment with hesitant overtaking of individual or small groups of trucks by other users.
Consider the time taken to overtake the suggested 10 vehicle platoon, it will be at least 20 seconds and in actual practise much longer. If it is raining, all that spray WILL prevent ANY overtaking!
How do you unwind a platoon at the end of the motorway?
Yet another example of “just because we can” rather than a genuine need.
Delighted to read all these comments: most seem to be from Engineers who are NOT ‘road-freight’ experts -who are asking questions and making analysis that those deeply embedded in a particular industryperhaps have forgotten to do. [Come on, we are all, even textile engineers guilty of this]
many years ago, a dear friend, a civil (and he was well mannered) Engineer of my family -when there was controvacy about whether the UK and France should build a Channel Tunnel or Channel Bridge (there were benefits to both) suggested a Channel Dam! Some lateral thinking? I am still hopeful that one day we will see sense and create and use the contour canal. [ie lock-less and deliberately ‘slow’ method of moving bulk everything. ] What is the merit of having warehouses scattered all over the motorway system, which trucks travelling at 60+ mph (or whatever) and then the ‘goods’ sitting in the warehouse for days….. Simply put them into the canal barges at the rate of manufacture and requirement necessary.
The canal becomes the store. Sushi restaurants do something similar for food….so why not for bulk everything else? De Bono would approve.
For everyone’s sake listen to the engineers, hardly anyone sees the sense or practicality of this.
This was mentioned on the local News recently,it would seem that the systems intended will have a driver in each truck and these drivers will be there to deal with any issues the “autonomous” system cannot. Whilst in convoy,the lead truck has control over the others.They state the fuel savings will be sufficient to reduce the selling price of the goods(when did I last hear this kind of claim? When Sellafield was created,we Cumbrians were anticipating drastically reduced electricity costs which never materialized)The reason for choosing the M6 is every other road is too badly congested.
Why do we need such convoys as we already have railways which can carry greater quantities of freight than a convoy of trucks.
The biggest challenge will be cars weaving in and out of the line of lorries.
My pet hate are cars that enter the motorway and make a “beeline” for the fast lane, cutting across 3 lanes at 70+ mph. They don’t care how small the gap is between vehicles (that they cut through.)
Presumably when they cut between the lorries in a Platoon, the next lorry will break sharply and so all the following lorries will brake. If another car decides to “duck and dive” between lorries further back in the platoon, it will get squashed.
There is no “fast lane” in the UK. It is an overtaking lane. If you are not engaged in an overtaking manoeuver (as opposed to obstructing the overtaking lane by trundling along it at 5 – 10 mph more than the inside lane) then you should not be in it!
Government mandates required with multiple benefits
1) All freight journeys of > 75 miles to be made by rail unless in PLG class vehicles
2) All trucks over 7.5 (class C) tonnes restricted to travel 8pm – 8am (unless carrying solely perishable food stuff with short life (e.g. milk wagons))
3) All rail stations irrespective of size to have container handler to offload rail containers to local trucks
Benefits of above / notes to above
1) At any point in Britain you are no more than 76 (ish) miles from coast so max 75 mile freight should be generally sufficient with suitable rail stations. Increased employment on rail network opportunity for inland container ports at major railheads.
2) Reduce road congestion at peak and office times facilitating business travel. Also helps drivers maintain hours
3) Allows even local trains to have freight / container wagons that can be transferred to rail network. Increased local haulage, and local employment.
Overall spare capacity on rail network can be utilised to ensure correct routing of goods and also maintains usefulness of outlying rail stations with low passenger footfall.
I rest my case, 23 comments so far, well over 50% negative, many with valid concerns and proposals but all made with little knowledge of what the actual platooning system will be, how it will work, what safeguards there might be and how they might be implemented. the biggest block to progressing this will be other road users.
We need to know a lot more details of what is proposed for trial and for a realistic commercial scheme before we can rubbish it completely
I’m genuinely amazed at the negative reaction. Generically, a summary seems to be, “Autonomous truck convoys? But I’ve thought of a problem, so it’s ridiculous!”
I think plenty of valid concerns have been identified, but nothing that can’t be overcome. Overtaking at 0.5mph margins? If we can manage to make ten trucks follow each other, surely we can manage to slow one convoy down by 4mph to enable overtaking in a reasonable time. Lead truck crashes? Perhaps ensure that the rest of the convoy, while themselves nose-to-tail, maintain a reasonable distance from the lead truck. One truck has a puncture? Put it on the hard shoulder while the rest carry on. A mechanic will have to come and change the wheel. Terrorists? Please. Remote shutdown if we must, but I think you’re scaremongering. A 40-ton articulated lorry is weapon enough already and (in the UK at least) not generally being hijacked for attack purposes.
I have no problem with either the concept or probably the practice of convoyed trucks. If you look at the referred link ( http://www.theengineer.co.uk/budget-boost-for-infrastructure-projects/ ) it seems contradictory to put money into trucks and road transport, while at the same time deciding the roads need greater capacity. Although controversially the ‘autonomous convoying’ while increasing very local lane traffic density will conversely decrease overall lane traffic density if large numbers of trucks are close-couple-convoying (electronically or otherwise).
I stand by my earlier comments however of forcing non-perishables to the rails. Do we really (and I mean really) need our new jeans, clothes or curtains, washing machine next day with ordering to 10pm? And once rail was established this could probably still be achieved.
It rather seems from the comments that there is little understanding of the realities of road transport. Road haulage provides the flexibility for the ‘just in time’ system that we have had for many years now, without JIT many places would just come to a halt, they have almost no warehousing capacity to save on premises and staff, the ‘warehouse’ is the truck, most supermarkets operate in this manner. If you go behind the scenes of quite large supermarkets you will find perhaps room for two trailer loads of goods, the stuff is being put onto the shopfloor all the time, but an extra effort at night to completely clear the back of the shop for the fresh foods arrival first thing in the morning. So dreams of putting stuff on the railways would be fine so long as you are happy to wait until the middle of next week or whenever it suits the railway and its union members to deliver. Forget your overnight internet purchase being delivered next day.
Those big warehouses that one reader thinks are full of goods that could be put on slow moving barges is deceived. Virtually all of those sheds fill and empty almost completely every 24 hours! Even some quite small places have surprising levels of activity. For example a fairly small DFS store at Maidstone has four 40′ boxes every day. The box is backed onto the loading dock and is immediately stripped out and all of it placed in a fleet of waiting box vans, this takes about an hour. This happens four times a day and is clear to repeat for the next morning. That’s just one fairly small DFS outlet. All warehouses operate in a similar way, in one side and pretty soon it’s moving out of the other side of the building. Supermarkets 25 years ago were charging their hauliers £200 per half hour delay penalty, no doubt it is a rather higher charge by now.
As for the convoys, I don’t know who they think is going to ride in the cab of 44 tonne truck 3′ off the back door (it will have to be that close to get any useful slipstreaming) of the one in front, with up to eight other 44 tonners following behind. It certainly won’t be me.
It will be pointless having ten vehicles turning up at a delivery destination all at once, there won’t be the handling capacity. Three persons over an 8 hour day could handle 10 palletised loads, and will have their deliveries scheduled accordingly. If 10 turn up at once there are going to be long delays and subsequent costs to the haulier.
The only obvious use for these proposed convoys would be from port to port, traffic out of Ireland to Dover, or perhaps to an inland container port.
Individual robotic trucks would make a lot more sense, and over time there might arise good reason to link two or three of them together at certain times, as commercial realities evolved. For the vehicles to connect with each other, the convoy would have to move fairly slowly so that vehicles wanting to join can catch up with it. Thus a convoy will likely do 45 mph, and will find itself being perpetually overtaken by independent trucks, effectively reducing the capacity of the motorways. Then HM Gov will ban trucks from overtaking convoys, then you get lots of shunts, delayed deliveries and higher haulage charges.
Vested interests will do/say anything to get their hands on the government crock of gold, vast sums will get splurged, they will ‘discover’ the obvious as out lined above.
Here is novel idea. Instead of platooning trucks on asphalt highways, why not instead cause them to run on some kind of fixed system. It could be rails for instance. In fact, we could call it a railway! I know, it’s such a novel idea it will probably never take off.
What is the point of this? Cutting road congestion could be done by trains. Or if we want to do something different – dirigibles anyone? Presumably they can do “point to point” without too much trouble. They could do passengers too — then we wont need autonomous cars either.
Perhaps those of us who enjoy driving cars and riding motorbikes could just get on with it then.
I have a simple question that I put to my inventive colleagues when they bounce up to me with a new clever idea – “what is the problem for which this is the solution?”
Surely isn’t anything that may disempower psychotic lorry drivers a good idea?
But, as David Graham says, get them onto trains. Make lorries pay a proper amount of tax, and that will happen. And the roads will be much better.