#4 Comments on Draft Strategic Plan on Accessible Transportation - Industry Representatives

I am making my way through the comments to the Draft Strategic Plan on Accessible Transportation and I recently looked at comments submitted by non-profit organizations, some representing people with disabilities, others connected to specific travel modes, and still others not tied specifically either to transportation or accessibility for people with disabilities.  

In total, nine groups with disability access as a primary focus submitted comments. Two organizations without such a focus offered their thoughts, and three organizations whose interests align with a particular transportation industry responded to the draft plan. I am reading those last ones first and covering them in this post. 

Lip service, perhaps, but that is meaningful

A generation ago, I doubt that every industry-related comment submitted in response to a government plan to expand accessibility would have genuflected at the altar of accessibility. Even if these same players will bark at the idea of independently changing their products to be accessible, or claim that regulation is needed to even that playing field, but that the time is ripe for innovation, not for regulation, they still feel compelled to state on the record that accessibility is good. I do not believe that companies or the associations that represent them or the research endeavors they fund would have made the same declarations 30 years ago, let alone 60 years ago. That change might not deliver a product line to help people with disabilities, but it is not meaningless. 

Painting of coffee mug and the word "slow."

I expected to find in the industry comments this genuflection to the value of accessibility, while pointing off that now is the time for prioritizing innovation, while equating that priority with a regulation holiday, as if kindergarteners would instantly learn to read and master algebra if only their teachers laid down no rules or schedules for the classroom.

What I found was different than what I expected. 

I discovered what looks like engagement. I think the tough nut to crack is not indifference so much as a desire that everyone hold hands and jump in the pool at the same time. It's not a fear of being left behind; it's a fear of being first, with no one following, and no one buying.

I am not always right

Comment from Alliance for Automotive Innovation

Here we go with the words of the industry association representing automobile manufacturers and their technology partners. I recently described the Alliance for Automotive Innovation (the Alliance) in a post discussing its comment submitted in response to the RFI for an Inclusive Design Reference Hub. My favorite part of that comment was a line talking about reflecting the "cross-stakeholder" nature of the issue of autonomous vehicle accessibility in a proposed repository of accessibility standards and resources. One is in DC for sure when words like cross-stakeholder are bandied about.

The Alliance has mastered the skill of making statements that are as American as apple pie, but have no meat behind them. Notice the lack of actual commitment.

Auto Innovators shares the Department’s commitment to a more accessible transportation future and therefore appreciates the Strategic Plan’s focus on this goal. We particularly appreciate the Strategic Plan’s identified strategies to promote accessibility for AVs. This includes strategies around: (1) advancing solutions that can further enable people with physical, sensory, and cognitive disabilities to use AVs; (2) leveraging Department research funds to investigate the impact of AVs on transportation for people with disabilities; (3) engaging stakeholders on inclusive design of AVs; and (4) working to pave the way for safe deployment of new technologies that increase accessibility in transportation by evaluating relevant regulations and eliminating unnecessary regulatory barriers.

The comment then proceeds to reiterate the Alliance's thoughts shared in response to the proposed Inclusive Design Reference Hub. I will repeat the bottom line of my tea-leaf interpretation of that comment, which is that the Alliance would adhere to accessibility standards if required, but its members will not voluntarily be offering anything new in accessibility.

No one in this group is jumping into that pool alone. But wait one hour after eating to swim.

[Caption to video: Clip from the Princess Bride with Billy Crystal and Carol Kane.]

Comment from University of Michigan, Mcity

I am counting MCity as an industry player because it is a partnership of academia; the auto industry and some AV companies; and all levels of government, from the city of Ann Arbor (home to the University of Michigan), to the state of Michigan to the federal government. Michigan's leaders are never at a loss for words to say that they intend for the AV future of the auto industry to remain in their state. Michigan Sen. Gary Peters has been, in my mind, an honorary Eisenhower Republican on the issue of industry-friendly AV legislation, for example. What's good for GM and so forth.

As for MCity's comment, it too utters a standard declaration of the goodness of accessibility. As I said, no one will come out against that, but the approach that MCity seems to support is one of investment in research, with no word on its position on establishing a goal of accessibility and a hard deadline to reach it. This is an entity that understands its partners. My snarky comments aside, the comment lists the work on AV accessibility that MCity has been involved with. 

• "Michigan Mobility Collaborative - ADS Demonstration, led by the city of Detroit under a USDOT Automated Driving System Demonstration grant. The Detroit project will test the mobility, safety and endurance of a Level 4 AV – operating as Level 3 with a safety driver - to serve the city’s senior citizen population."
• "[P]artner with May Mobility on an AV deployment in Ann Arbor expected to launch in October 2021. May Mobility and the U-M Transportation Research Institute just received $300,000 from USDOT’s Inclusive Design Challenge for their proposal, Independent Safety for Wheelchair Users in AVs. The deployment will include a wheelchair-accessible Toyota Sienna. J.D. Power will conduct a survey to collect user sentiment, of which a component will address accessibility."
• Funding research projects: "Low Speed Accessibility Matrix, and Accessible Autonomous Shuttles: Human Factors Challenges and Design Solutions. A third is being considered for funding, Design Guidelines for Achieving Accessible Autonomous Vehicles." [Emphasis in original.]

What MCity does not do, perhaps what is feels it is inappropriate to do, is provide feedback on the draft plan. There is no discussion of it.

Comment from Airlines for America

Airlines have a terrible reputation in terms of accessibility. The bathrooms on planes are too small for wheelchairs; they have barely enough room for an occupant with a caretaker. Likewise, the aisles are no place for wheelchairs or walkers. A normal-sized human is too large for a basic seat. Legislation actually made it through Congress a couple of years ago that forced the airlines to report data on wheelchairs broken. It's like the strollers collected at the plane and given back at arrival - except that these are often broken by the time the plane lands. 😳 To be honest, I do not follow this issue particularly, so I do not know whether the situation has improved since the legislation was enacted.

Hand lettering: Mobility Smorgasbord

I therefore did not expect much of the comment from Airlines for America. But this association, which represents the major airlines in the US, plus FedEx and associate member Air Canada, seems to have a decided attitude toward regulation that while it is unpleasant, it is - I repeat - okay as long as everyone holds hands and jumps in the pool at the same time. The airlines association is talking stakeholder engagement, and it wants to be at the table, with the elephant in the room being the power of the consumer public to demand greater accessibility.

I have no interest in air travel, so I am going to give a quick rundown. The specifics that the airlines association comment addresses are: 

• Accessible plane lavatories, 
• FAA processing of disability-related complaints against airlines, 
• A strategy for boosting accessibility compliance, and 
• Expansion of outreach to include more players within the airline industry universe. 

Personal complaint for the airlines

As long as we are addressing the airlines, they not only discriminate against people with disabilities, they completely disrespect any customer not tall or strong enough to lift an average piece of luggage into the overhead luggage compartment. That's me and every petite woman, by the way. Plus there are those in this group who are barely able to retrieve their luggage from the overhead luggage compartment and thereby endanger whoever is sitting or standing nearby, putting all of those passengers at risk of luggage falling on one's head.

Hawaii Dipping Toes, Not Surfing

For the first time in 2020, a US state has passed an AV-related law, but the newly enacted Hawaii law does not exactly grant permission for wide scale AV operations on public roads. Indeed, although more than half of US states have passed legislation that in some way touches upon autonomous or partially automated vehicles, only California has anywhere near a comprehensive regulatory system in place. California can get away with that because a major portion of the AV engineering workforce wants to live in and around San Francisco/Silicon Valley. That is a unique situation that many companies have chosen to accept.

Toes in the Water 

Hawaii joins the ranks of those states that wish to appear as if they are doing something, the equivalent of dipping ones toes in the water, without really accomplishing anything. That is fine; the legislators had a conversation. Some state representatives probably examined the issues closely. Nothing to be ashamed of.

Designed by Freepik.

I Digress to an Unrelated and False Impression of Hawaii

Now I've never been to Hawaii and my first introduction to that state was from watching reruns on afternoon television of Gidget Goes Hawaiian. No doubt it was a completely accurate depiction of the surfer life. Carl Reiner plays her dad. According to Wikipedia, the movie was filmed on location at the Royal Hawaiian Hotel, but a stand-in for the actress who played Gidget did the actual surfing. 

I've known people who have lived in Hawaii or spent considerable time there, but Gidget and her boyfriend Moondoggie (played by James Darren), alas, created a lasting false impression. This Gidget actress was not as good in the role as either Sandra Dee, the first Gidget, or Sally Field, who played Gidget in the TV show, before she went on to Flying Nun fame. Enough for 60s television and my elementary school years doing homework while sitting in front of the TV.

Back to Hawaii's Legislation

Hawaii's law creates an "autonomous vehicle testing program" within the state's department of transportation, without mention of funding or other details. The one pertinent point that the state legislators made when writing the law was to make sure that the citizens of Hawaii and its visitors would not feel or be threatened by a Batman-like AV. (I could not help myself after delving into ancient TV references.) Although AVs are expressly permitted to be tested on public roads, "a conventional human driver shall remain physically present in the vehicle at all times" just in case human intervention is needed.

Now before your mind goes where mine did, straight to humorous definitions of who or who might not be considered conventional, the law defines "conventional human driver" as a person who manually operates a vehicle. Fun fact: The law does not, I repeat NOT, require that the "conventional human driver" be licensed to drive in Hawaii or anywhere else. So, to appear as a conventional human, wear a polo shirt with a collar, look like you are headed to a golf course, but don't worry about passing the driving test.

Like many state laws before it, the Hawaii statute requires that a report be written. The deadline is about three weeks before the legislature convenes in 2023. This year, they convened in mid-January.

Taxi-Like and Microtransit AV Pilots

US sees on-demand AV expansion with taxi- and transit-like pilots

Big news! California has granted Waymo permission to operate AVs without a safety driver, but, for now, only in the Palo Alto area and only for free. Waymo must request permission to charge a fare for AV service in California. This permit will not only enable Waymo to go truly backup-driverless in California, but it will also boost Waymo's credibility if the company wants to expand elsewhere. In fact, Waymo is also about to begin experimenting with charging fares for AV ridehailing in Arizona. Waymo continues testing in California, Arizona, Washington, Michigan, Texas, and Georgia.

Meanwhile, free AV shuttle service is going well in the entertainment district of Arlington, TX, in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. This service is used to shuttle people on game days for the Dallas Cowboys and Texas Rangers, and other events. The North Texas Council of Governments (NTCOG) will be spending "$1.5 million for its cities to have planning assistance ahead of autonomous vehicle deployment. Total funding up to $10 million for the actual programs would follow." The Dallas-Fort Worth Regional Transportation Council, a part of the NTCOG, is also involved, with its own AV 2.0 plan. This AV 2.0 is not yet posted on either the NTCOG website or on the RTC webpages.

International on-demand, small AV taxi-bots 

Tel Aviv AV ridehailing service announced for 2019. New Mobility will be VW cars using Mobileye technology. If AVs can operate on roads with crazy Israeli drivers, which means all Israeli drivers, then they are ready for anywhere. Though the service is self-described to include Mobility as a Service (MaaS), there is nothing to indicate an actual MaaS platform such as FlexDenmark or Whim, which operates in Finland. [MaaS is generally thought to be of as a coordinated technology platform for delivering transportation choices across all modes. This can be done on a per ride, monthly, or even an annual basis.]

In Finland, in March 2019, an AV shuttle will be piloted with passengers in Helsinki. The shuttle bus is touted to be an all-weather vehicle that can handle snow.

First-mile/last-mile solutions to retrofit for sprawl may use AV transit or shared-use private transportation pods that seat up to four passengers. The video shows a pilot in Milton Keynes, a UK city in England, of AV pods available on demand via an app. The company manufacturing the AV pods is Aurrigo. FYI: The pilot just ended after a successful seven months.

Up to 15 pods – capable of travelling up to 15 miles per hour and lasting up to 60 miles from one charge – have been operating in the city centre from Central Railway Station. There are plans for the pods to continue to operate in the city, with a service being offered to residents in the near future.

Advertised in the video above is the independence-enhancing aspect of the mobility-on-demand AV pods for some people with disabilities. Showcased is an individual who is blind. What goes unmentioned is that the vehicle appears not to be accessible to people with wheelchairs and other mobility-related disabilities.

Notes on Ford AV report, but first:

Disclaimer: I owned a Ford station wagon for several years. I loved that car; indeed the only car I have ever loved and I have avoided driving and owning a car for much of my life. That station wagon had two great features:

1. Could be seen from anywhere in any parking lot - The station wagon was an unusual shade of blue and it had weird-shaped side back windows. The odd look of this vehicle was a distinct advantage and every single time I am in a parking lot with a sea of similarly shaped black/dark grey sedans, I think of our former blue beauty;
2. The station wagon had a large back window with its own windshield wiper. I miss this whenever I have to drive our supposed more luxury car (that my spouse felt was needed when the kids grew up and which I have thus far lobbied unsuccessfully to sell because why do we need a car anyway).
3. One more for extra: Not a fancy vehicle, so you never felt you had to avoid bringing the dog, eating something, or otherwise relaxing. I even slept in it once during a particularly rainy camping trip. FYI: Never take me on a camping trip because the chance of rain will skyrocket to 90 percent.

Terminology use that I like - 

• Saying ridehailing instead of ridesourcing or TNCs (transportation network companies), 
• Saying self-driving, driverless, autonomous vehicle (AV) as referring to only fully AVs. 
• Using "the term driver-assist technology to describe features that assist drivers with convenience or safety benefits, but they are not autonomous because they require the human driver to always remain engaged and available to take control of the vehicle. These features are defined by SAE International as Levels 0-2 of Automation and leverage technology to augment a human driver but not replace them." The report also states that Ford will not use terms such as "blind spot monitoring, lane keeping assist and adaptive cruise control ... [as] “self-driving” or “autonomous” – and we’ll never refer to them as such – because they require the driver to supervise and maintain control of the vehicle."

Ford going for different business model possibilities - shared use that is fleet-based for human passengers and then otherwise for deliveries.

Ford is touting its street cred on service for people with disabilities, or, at least, for taking such individuals to healthcare appointments. I therefore hope that Ford will lend its support when I draft and start advocating for the All American Accessibility Act that will require every passenger vehicle to be accessible by a date certain (though I have not yet picked the date).

Smiley face on decision not to directly sell to consumers AVs - 😁

You had me at hello

Wow on the way stuff is explained on a for-dummies level without feeling condescending. This person or group should win an award. I am feeling satisfied as a transportation nerd who has a very pro-transit, pro-shared-use, pro-walking-and-biking perspective. Is there a drug coming to me from this report, has Ford learned to talk the talk, and perhaps even learned to walk the walk?

As for the movie Jerry Maguire, from which the clip is taken, I never bought the sudden I love you realization at the end of the movie. Just had to add that. Back to Ford report:

Talking up the partnership with ArgoAI.

Photo from ArgoAI website.

I didn't know that Argo AI is in Cranberry, NJ. Cranberry is quite close to a bunch of gated retirement communities. I am not proud to say that I know people - very nice people - who made the mistake of leaving Brooklyn to live in one of those retirement communities.

ArgoAI is also in Pittsburgh, as the photo shows.

I even got to see one of those AVs recently on a trip to Pittsburgh, which, by the way, is a neat place and rivals Boston with its pretty bridges.

What I don't like

No car company should be talking safety as if it is proud of its record. I am sure that Ford is well represented among the millions of roadway fatalities and injuries over the past several decades. In my opinion, as along as a car company has not capped its products' capability to speed, among other things, it should not engage in the pretense that it has produced a safe machine. I am also sure that Ford advertising has shown its vehicles on the open road operating at high speeds.

I found the human interface section insufficient. Nothing was mentioned about people with disabilities, about varying levels of cognition, people who speak different languages, children or older adults riding alone, or just people who happen to differ. Nothing about people without the ability to see or hear. Nothing about people who might not see or hear because they are watching a movie, listening to a podcast, or are engrossed with binge watching of Elisabeth Moss TV shows. One could be totally fixated on something like Mad Men or the Handmaid's Tale. Just as examples.

One should not brag, or even mention, being part of a project intended to deliver bad pizza to anyone at any time. I would leave out the collaboration with Dominoes. Really Ford, why not pick a great pizza place, like pretty much any neighborhood place in Brooklyn or even some on Long Island or in New Jersey? There's at least one wonderful option in New Haven as well. You buy up such nice startups, you hire smart people, but you are sad when it comes to pizza.

Notes to Ford

Reminder about the pizza and looking for your support for the All American Accessibility Act.

Not everyone speaks English or is able to hear at all. Make sure to embed interfaces for communication with people with different disabilities, different levels of cognition (as in teenagers who hardly look up when they cross a street), and who might be visiting from a place where people do not routinely learn to speak English fluently. There are people as well who are blind or visually impaired and then there are people like me, who do not pay attention or get distracted by the engaging thoughts running through their minds at any particular moment.

Fine, no problem - or might be a problem, but I do not know enough to judge that

Intended for a mass journalism audience that will get a sound byte or two from the report and briefly summarize it, the report is sometimes a bit of an AV-for-dummies publication.

Though the report might be for dummies, since I have no background in or substantive knowledge of software, vehicle design, or safety testing protocols, I will leave it to others to analyze Ford's language about cybersecurity, reaching a minimal risk condition (a/k/a pulling over to the side of the road or the equivalent), safety testing methods and practice, and crashworthiness.

Best sample from report

Most human drivers have a comfort zone. Some prefer to avoid highways and stick to local roads when possible; others would rather not drive at night or in bad conditions, such as during snow or ice storms. These driving routines and decisions can be considered a comfort zone. 

The difference between most drivers and Ford’s self-driving vehicles is that our comfort zone is set in code. Our Virtual Driver System only works within its Operational Design Domain (ODD), which prescribes which areas, streets, speeds, weather and time of day our vehicles can safely operate. Emerging from the requirements generated by our System Safety processes, the ODD defines the vehicle’s area of operation. As the capabilities of our vehicles improve, we expect the ODD will expand in size and scope over time.

Our production-intent self-driving vehicles are being designed to operate at typical speeds for urban streets (e.g. boulevards and collector roads) within strictly mapped geo-fenced areas. The vehicles will be equipped with technology designed to detect and respond to static external environments, such as road structures and features (e.g. curbs, lane markings and barriers), roadside objects (e.g. trees and debris), dynamic objects (e.g. cars, trucks, motorcycles and bicycles) as well as pedestrians, first responders and animals. Our vehicles will operate day and night under a variety of light conditions as well as during precipitation capped at light rain.

That is one wonderful explanation. And, one last time, a portal to the actual report.

Way too long blog post #1 - US

You spend a week away and tons of autonomous vehicle (AV) stories come out, by which I exclude the "here's how the world will change, IMHO" pieces and the "world will end with AV transportation" stuff. My favorites of those genres are the "we'll all be having sex in AVs" and the "we'll all be nauseous with carsickness in AVs," which, if you consider those together for a second, is not an attractive combination.

I will only mention actual news.

United States

Still waiting - We are sitting by our laptops and phones in anticipation of the next iteration of the NHTSA AV guidance, due in July. I personally expect the guidance to be released after mid-July or, perhaps, I'm just hoping not to sit inside on July 4th reading it. I think it will continue along the trajectory of the "let's get out of the way of private sector innovation" 2.0 guidance released last time around. This is not to judge Sec. Chao's USDOT in particular because the Obama Administration took pretty much the same position.

Minor revision - Partial AV technology is revisited by SAE. The standard AV taxonomy is reconsidered oh so slightly by clarifying what SAE is referring to in its six levels of vehicle automation - from 0 to 5. Here's the heart of the brief document:

The levels of driving automation are defined by reference to the specific role played by each of the three primary actors in performance of the DDT [dynamic driving task] and/or DDT fallback. “Role” in this context refers to the expected role of a given primary actor, based on the design of the driving automation system in question and not necessarily to the actual performance of a given primary actor. For example, a driver who fails to monitor the roadway during engagement of a level 1 adaptive cruise control (ACC) system still has the role of driver, even while s/he is neglecting it. 

Active safety systems, such as electronic stability control and automated emergency braking, and certain types of driver assistance systems, such as lane keeping assistance, are excluded from the scope of this driving automation taxonomy because they do not perform part or all of the DDT on a sustained basis and, rather, merely provide momentary intervention during potentially hazardous situations. Due to the momentary nature of the actions of active safety systems, their intervention does not change or eliminate the role of the driver in performing part or all of the DDT, and thus are not considered to be driving automation.

Startup boost - May Mobility is getting a boost from an auto supplier company named Magna. Looks like pilots with May Mobility technology will be coming down the pike.

Senators hear both sides of debate - The June 13 hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works (like roads) Committee featured witnesses on both sides of the AV START Act debate, meaning those favoring more versus less regulation and control over AVs. A stark comparison can be made, for example, between the testimony of Shailen P. Bhatt, President and CEO of ITS America (the former Colorado Secretary of Transportation who allowed the spectacle of the staged AV truck delivery of Coors beer), who recommended that tech and auto companies get free reign, and the testimony of Shaun Kildare, Director of Research at Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, who pointed out how untested AVs are and how we don't maintain roads now, so how can we expect anything different with roads full of connected vehicle technology. Apologies for the awful run-on sentence.

Is concern in the Senate part of the reason for the birth of the Partnership for Transportation Innovation and Opportunity (PTIO)? Though PTIO is touted as a labor-focused enterprise to deal with upcoming loss of jobs, the initial descriptions - here's the website - show a concerted effort to deal with public relations problems that the AV industry has been and will encounter. PTIO includes some big players - Lyft, Uber, Waymo, FedEx, Ford, Toyota, Daimler, and the American Trucking Associations. Interesting that none of the cute AV shuttle companies are in the group. Probably have not been asked to join the team. Right now, it looks like PTIO will only have a presence in DC.

Pittsburgh mayor is pissed - Love this because Mayor Peduto is fighting the battle for every city in the country to control its streets and not be completed preempted by sometimes faraway and antagonistic state capitals. So what is Peduto angry about? The state transportation department of Pennsylvania, PennDOT, will be meeting separately with each of the major AV players in the state - meaning Pittsburgh, where they are all testing and developing technology - instead of hosting a public  meeting. Basically, the people of Pittsburgh, whose streets are the testing ground, and Mayor Peduto have been locked out of the process.

At first, after the Uber crash in Arizona, PennDOT appeared to be changing course and steering toward a California-like regulatory/voluntary approach. Peduto seemed to be on board or, at least, ready to talk. But then, like many matches made through dating apps, radio silence. This whole debacle demonstrates that inclusion and taking the time to invest stakeholders (such a DC word), such as major cities, works far better than effectively saying "screw you, not interested in your input." In an instantly viral world, PennDOT should be careful; Mayor Peduto is a charming and passionate adversary if that is what the agency turns him into.

Commercial interruption for Waymo video. Arizona riders love Waymo AVs.

Wicked* AVs in Beantown - Watch out Jamaica Plain, Beacon Hill, Roxbury, and Alston: Every Boston neighborhood could soon see AVs zipping around. Boston is now permitting AVs to be tested throughout the city. So far, that means nuTonomy, which has been testing for a long time at the seaport. nuTonomy is beaming, stating the company is:

[P]roud to be the first and only company authorized to operate autonomous vehicles on public roads citywide in Boston. Being recognized by the City for our exceptional safety record is an important milestone for the entire nuTonomy and Aptiv team.  

My message to nuTonomy is to watch out. Those Boston drivers can be aggressive; as a pedestrian, I used to wait for three cars to go through the intersection as the light changed before I felt safe to walk.

*By the way, translate the word "wicked," when used in Boston (or anywhere in the Red Sox Nation states of New England) as "fabulous."

Wicked all over Massachusetts - So far, the states that have passed AV laws have either preempted their municipalities out of any say-so for control of where AVs may test or the state laws call for onerous requirements, hoops that would have to jumped through with each municipality. The latter demonstrate part of the reason that a state like Arizona has attracted testing. It's easier to operate when there is one state rule.

Massachusetts has possibly arrived at a beautiful angle of repose for balancing state-city relationships in relation to AV testing. "the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and 14 towns and cities in the Greater Boston area signed a Memorandum of Understanding that will open up their roads to autonomous vehicle testing." Massachusetts, unlike some other states with councils established to study AV testing, continued to meet even after testing commenced in the state. Usually those councils precede and end with a report.

According to an article from a Worcester news source:

The new MOU streamlines and standardizes the process for companies seeking to test Autonomous Vehicles on Massachusetts roadways. Following the signing of this MOU, MassDOT and the participating communities will finalize a universal application for companies to use when seeking to test Autonomous Vehicles and the participating municipalities will identify locations and roadways suitable for Autonomous Vehicle testing. 

The municipalities signing the MOU today include Arlington, Boston, Braintree, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Newton, Revere, Somerville, Weymouth, Winthrop, and Worcester. In addition, the Department of Conservation and Recreation is joining the MOU in order to make Commonwealth-owned parkways available for the testing of Autonomous Vehicles.

Basically, this area covers the Boston T and commuter-rail universe. Nice.

Nebraska slows down - Despite a lenient, come-on-in-to-test new law and despite plans for testing on public roads in Lincoln, Nebraska will not be seeing AVs too soon on public roads. No reports are explaining the details of why an ambitious pilot for testing in Lincoln has slowed way down, but now the word is that the University of Nebraska will host a pilot on the private roadway of the campus.

Officials in Lincoln had initially planned to launch a driverless shuttle service to carry passengers between downtown Lincoln, the Haymarket District and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s main campus, but a city spokeswoman said the project was delayed and won’t arrive in Lincoln for at least another few weeks. City officials now expect to run smaller-scale tests on the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Innovation Campus to work out any possible kinks.

Not the Lincoln in Brooklyn* - BUT Lincoln, NE won a grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies to fund an AV shuttle pilot. The mayor has declared, "Lincoln is seeking to become the first city in the United States to offer an on demand autonomous shuttle service for public transportation." A Navya shuttle will be used.

*In Brooklyn, NY, there is Lincoln High School, Lincoln Gardens cooperative apartment building community, and Lincoln Garden Cleaners. All of you alumni of P.S. 209 and Avenue Z Jewish Center (plus the million nearby churches) know what I'm talking about. And tons of famous Lincoln alumni, including Mel Brooks, Arthur Miller, Neil Sedaka, and Stephan Marbury.

Back to Nebraska, the law is lenient for AVs. Neb. Revised Staututes from 60-3301 to 60-3311 are the pertinent state code sections; 60-3308 is the preemption provision.

Even Toledo - The Toledo in Ohio (not Spain) has a plan for AVs; the "[u]se of smaller, autonomous vehicles is a key element of MoveToledo, a strategic plan TARTA [Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority]." Last week,  TARTA's general manager "announced his agency has received a $1.8 million federal grant to develop an experimental automated public transit route. The three-year pilot, Mr. Gee said, most likely will use small vehicles similar to a 15-passenger, electric shuttle." The pilot is scheduled to be on the street by summer of next year. Details have yet to be determined and these AV transit pilots take a while to arrange due to the programming of the vehicles and the need for accessibility, which is an odd add-on for foreign manufacturers.

Cross-border cooperation - On the state/province level, there is collaboration on AV planning. This is in the Pacific Northwest and cross-border counterparts in Canada. The states of Oregon and  Washington, and the province of British Columbia have set up an AV working group called the Automated, Connected, Electric, and Shared (ACES) Northwest Network, an organization focused on moving people and goods throughout the Puget Sound. ACES is not an official government endeavor for either the American or the Canadian participants, but, according to it press release, will include visionaries, researchers and other experts. (I have the same instinctive response to the word "visionaries" that I have to the word "passion," which is that these words are being employed awkwardly outside of their central zones of application.)

Small Steps from Houston to Florida and Big Steps Abroad

Prelude: Thus far, and for the near future, this blog exists in some respect as my personal filing cabinet of topics I follow about autonomous vehicle (AV) business development, models of future service and arrangements, and legal and regulatory issues. At the moment I do not have the time and resources to cover and catalogue these issues as thoroughly and in ways I would like to. Not sure when that will change, but I do feel torn because I want to follow through on my ideas for better resources than currently exist.

That's my reason for why the following is a list and not an analysis or complete coverage of what follows. PLUS - This is not up-to-the-moment. 😦

Read below while considering the "cities-first" approach of an AV planning partnership from the Bloomberg Philanthropies AV Cities project and the National League of Cities. In an American governance framework where cities are often preempted from regulating their street use due to federal or state laws and regulations, it will be interesting to see the planning coming out of the project. So far, these two organizations say there has been a 30 percent jump in cities incorporating AV transportation into their planning.

There's more than a yellow rose in Texas

Texas is growing as far as AV pilot programs. There is Arlington, where the Dallas Cowboys and the Texas Rangers play, which has an AV shuttle operating on game days and around other events. But now:

Houston - An AV shuttle will be operating on campus at Texas Southern University (TSU) shuttle. "The small shuttles, called “university circulators,” will be limited to a mile-long campus pathway and will run at average speeds ranging from 8 to 12 miles per hour."

Frisco, a suburb of Dallas - According to a Dallas News article, Drive.ai will be testing and doing a six-month pilot of an AV ridehailing service that is planned to commence in July. "The service is made possible through a unique public-private partnership among California-based Drive.ai, the city of Frisco, the Denton County Transportation Authority and the private developments for Hall Park, The Star and Frisco Station. They are all part of the newly formed Frisco Transportation Management Association."

The Frisco AV shuttle will serve the general public at an office park near where the Arlington, TX, AV shuttle operates.

Commercial interruption

Florida

Two states with strong conservative tendencies have attracted plenty of AV testing, Arizona and now Florida. Florida, which is a little far from California and does not have that dry heat, has also rolled out the red carpet of no regulation for AV testing, pilots, and operations.

Gainseville, below the Florida Panhandle, but not at all on the water, is getting a cute AV shuttle route for a transit pilot. EasyMile will be supplying four shuttle AVs. Service is expected to begin for regular riders by the fall.

Tampa already has a shuttle and Babcock Ranch, a real estate development creation of a town, has a pilot that is expected to turn public. The town, Babcock Ranch, announced in 2016 as an eco-friendly soon-to-be-developed town the size of Manhattan, is being true to the word of the developers and an AV shuttle is on its streets being tested since January. Some houses are already built.

Viva Las Vegas

Coming this summer to the streets of Vegas to join the cute AV shuttle there will be Lyft AV ridehailing - BUT to run on fixed routes. This partnership of Lyft and Aptiv will build on the January pilot that provided rides during the CES conference in January 2018. Aptiv's Chief Technology Officer says, "Aptiv will work closely with the city to design future mobility solutions, which benefit public transportation and help with urban congestion challenges. The findings in the Las Vegas test run will be deployed in other cities across the world."

While in the Midwest:
FINALLY the University of Michigan MCity AV shuttle makes its debut, after over a year in the works. Ferrying students on North Campus is a cute shuttle vehicle from  Navya. Students, staff, and eligible guests are invited to ride for free. Hours are limited to daytime and the shuttle ceases service at 3 pm.

Watch the cool video from Ford about enabling people with visual disabilities to "see" or at least to experience the visual landscape.

Over there ... and turn north

When you're in Norway, you are definitely not in the US. While the federal government, over both the Obama and Trump Administrations, has tried to stay more out of the way on AVs and electric vehicles, Norway is taking a wholly different route. AV shuttles are planned and the country is actively encouraging more electric vehicle use.

The long-running AV shuttle operating in Sion, Switzerland is being taught to cross busy streets and communicate with traffic signals. There will also be testing for making its route more complex with roundabouts as well.

AV Trucking at a Highway Near You

Dear truck drivers,

The argument truck manufacturers and tech companies are making in favor of autonomous vehicle technology driving trucks - and to replace your jobs - are that it is impossible to hire and retain enough drivers and that truck driving is the most dangerous job in America, so AV technology will save lives - unemployed lives.

Read below and get working on Plan B because that big rig job might not be there in a few years.

Already happening

Uber has been sending AV trucks on Arizona roads for the past few months. Why it has taken this long to hit the airwaves, don't ask me. Arizona has been completely off hands, no pun intended, on AVs from the beginning.  I am listing two articles that give details. about the trucking testing, again on regular roads.

1. https://www.engadget.com/2018/03/06/uber-self-driving-trucks-deliveries-arizona/ and 
2. https://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2018-03-06/ubers-self-driving-trucks-haul-cargo-on-arizona-highways

Ford - Miami by 2021

Ford is going for colorful, loud Miami to test its AVs and pilot its "business model with human-driven vehicles doing things like delivering Domino’s pizza and Postmates."

Japan could beat bad pizza to the punch. This week, Japan has a pilot of AV delivery trucks on public roads for its post office company. Actual service is planned for 2020.

Starsky without Hutch

Just a little bad 70s humor there with Starsky and Hutch. I'm not talking 70s TV, but autonomous trucks. Starsky Robotics, a startup AV trucking technology company, is not really producing AV tech, though it is enabling driverless trucking. According to a good article in the San Fransisco Chronicle, Starsky has produced a system for remote-control - by humans - operation of trucks.

This is really partially autonomous, Tesla-autopilot with a remote driver hired to take care of those driving situations that the technology is not up to at the moment. "Starsky’s plan: Hire truck drivers to sit in a remote control center, using video-game-like controls to navigate trucks from distribution centers to highways and vice versa. The remote operators would also oversee the long-haul part of the trip, helping with lane merges and navigating between different roads, for instance."

Yes, now I am compelled to put in the intro video from the TV show.

Private Roadways = No Motor Vehicle Laws

On your driveway, inside a college campus, or within a private retirement community's gates, regular motor vehicle and speed laws do not apply.These private roads are regulated and policed by their owners or whoever has legal control of those grounds. Two international examples show how autonomous vehicle (AV) companies are taking advantage of these self-regulating roadways because the technology, thus far, is ahead of legislators and regulators.

Kiwi AVs soon to spread

A report out of the New Zealand states that a homegrown company has gone big into AV shuttles and is about to launch regular service at the Christchurch airport. HMI Technologies was a partner in an AV pilot at the airport, but then it went out and manufactured its own vehicles, which it plans to deploy in the near term on private roads, but, as this September 2017 video shows, its ambitious involve public roadways as well.

College campus in China

With an EasyMile logo on the front of this AV shuttle, Southeast University in Nanjing is beginning campus AV service. At least for now, rides are fare free for students and staff; no word on tourist access. Nanjing is west of Shanghai and the city has a population of over eight million people.

Submit Your Comments - Early and Often (Long post)

The USDOT, through its administrative agencies of NHTSA, FTA and FHWA has announced requests for comments about how it will arrive at a world of autonomous vehicles (AVs), incorporating shared rides, and cybersecurity. I concentrated recently on FTA's STAR plan, but the USDOT has more in mind than transit and shared rides and labor issues.

FTA's two documents were published in the Federal Register on Jan. 16 and the comment deadline is March 2, 2018. FHWA and NHTSA's were published on Jan. 19 and the comment deadline is March 5, 2018.

US transportation agency acronym recap

By the way, FTA = Federal Transit Administration and FHWA = Federal Highway Administration. NHTSA, as the vast majority of you know, is the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, which already has AV guidelines and which issues the US federal motor vehicle safety standards or FMVSS.

Important comment detail!
The USDOT agencies are requesting that comments "indicate the level(s) of automation impacted by the statute, regulation, or policy." Don't forget! You want your comments to be considered and taken seriously.

Documents published in the Federal Register

FHWA's published request for comments with a March 5, 2018 deadline:

Automated Driving Systems

FTA's published request for comments with March 2 deadline:

Removing Barriers to Transit Bus Automation

Research Program: Automated Transit Buses  

NHTSA published request for comments with a March 5, 2018 deadline:

Removing Regulatory Barriers for Vehicles With Automated Driving Systems

FTA research program request

Remember, FTA is not seeking comments pertaining to systems without an automated driving aspect (driver warnings and alerts), unless the system is evolving to include automation in the foreseeable future. So feel free to comment about AV ridehailing services - sans drivers or engineers - that have been recently announced by Uber, Lyft, Waymo and other companies that will begin in the next year or so.

The goal, from FTA's perspective is to "better inform FTA of existing transit bus automation technology, and to assist FTA in identifying potential areas of future research. ... Each response should indicate which level of automation the technology or process addresses. Inclusion of existing supplemental information is welcomed and encouraged. This supplemental information could include reports, presentations, specifications, or other documentation."

In case you were thinking of transit in terms of big, long buses, think again. FTA is redefining transit for an almost universal definition that includes different kinds of vehicles and anything from fixed route to mobility-on-demand (MOD) kinds of service. Bus = "defined broadly to consider a range of sizes, vehicle platforms and configurations, and passenger capacities, and could include both traditional and novel vehicle designs (full-size city buses, articulated buses, small shuttles, etc.). “Bus” includes bus rapid transit."

FTA removing barriers request

Again, Bus = "defined broadly to consider a range of sizes, vehicle platforms and configurations, and passenger capacities, and could include both traditional and novel vehicle designs (full-size city buses, articulated buses, small shuttles, etc.). “Bus” includes bus rapid transit."

This is a wide-ranging request for comments in that it seeks "public comment regarding current or potential regulatory or other policy barriers to the development, demonstration, deployment, and evaluation of automated transit buses and related technologies for" level 3-5 - fully AVs. Lots of folks are invited to express themselves, including "stakeholders, including the disability community, to better understand regulatory and policy barriers and challenges to development, demonstration, deployment, and evaluation of automation systems in the transit industry."

Chime in about statutory "regulatory, policy, or legislative challenges or barriers ... which may impede development, demonstration, deployment, or evaluation of automated transit buses."

Long post - here's an entertainment break

Watch the video about the Lyft/Aptiv "robotaxi" demonstration project that ferried hundreds during the CES conference earlier this month. It's going to continue in Las Vegas and be expanded to an - as yet - unnamed city. Not sure I want to replace those sweet, friendly Lyft drivers, but I am guilty of enjoying the low prices. Thank you venture capitalists for the nice subsidies. Could you expand that to public transportation?

Back to the long post -
If you ever want to cross a street again, comment!

FHWA published request for comments with a March 5, 2018 deadline:

Automated Driving Systems - FHWA's thoughts and questions will affect every person in the US, whether they drive or not. Anyone who crosses the street, gets on a bus, or takes Uber or Lyft exclusively will want to comment. Planners and anyone involved with equity and accessibility should comment. "FHWA seeks comments more broadly on planning, development, maintenance, and operations of the roadway infrastructure necessary for supporting ADS, including any information detailing the costs associated with implementation."

The question for FHWA regarding pedestrians, bikers, and transit users is how will the human roadway user safely travel when automated systems will be "driving" instead of other humans, with whom eye contact has been the system for knowing when to stop or walk across a driveway or cross a street when there is an oncoming vehicle. Will we need to carry or have embedded chips? There should be some signal on an AV, be it a car or a bus or something in between, to indicate to the walking or biking human that now is a time when it is safe or unsafe to cross a street.

Traffic signals unecessary for AVs, but for humans ...

AVs will not need traffic signals, but humans might prefer them to a Rome-like system where vehicles instantly stop and one feels as if one is putting one's life on the line by crossing the street. On the other hand, for smaller intersections, we could have a California-like situation everywhere so that even in the middle of Brooklyn, the pedestrian's foot in the roadway would be enough to signal an AV to stop. That one change could do a lot for mode equity.

In terms of equity for older adults, people with disabilities, and people with one-to-seven year olds, meaning those individuals need more time to cross a street than most traffic signals currently allow, AVs could present a vast improvement. They need freedom from right on red (the one way in which New York City is superior) and they need more pedestrian crossings, not just one every half mile or so.

Every half mile or so pedestrian leads to what I witnessed in Columbus, OH: An 80-year-old woman getting off a bus at a broken sidewalk and no pedestrian crossing; she crossed anyway at the six-lane road with cars moving along at about 45 miles per hour. That is not safe; it is not equity; it is a recipe for death and injury. But it happens frequently at bus stops and shopping centers and schools across the country.

Lane markings

Since FHWA is asking for comments, which I will interpret as an interest in my personal and professional opinion, one message must be clearly articulated and stated out loud: We cannot rely on lane markings for safe AV transportation. I do not know of any city or county that is uniformly or even mostly good about keeping those lane lines freshly painted. A few are not bad about keeping the roads well lit, but far, far from a majority. (As a New York City kid, I was shocked to see unlit roads when we went out to the "country" for vacations.)

AVs must be able to see which lane(s) is (are) for which direction without sensors that have to be maintained or markings that must be repainted frequently.

Words FHWA needs to hear

FHWA's request for comments does not include any of these words: Accessibility, pedestrian, walk (or variation thereof), bike (or variation thereof), equity, sidewalk, intersection, crossing, transit, wheelchair, blind, deaf, ... I could go on and on. People use our roadways to do things other than to drive and currently all of those people are second-class users of our transportation network. Let's make sure they can be safe and equal when the AV revolution comes instead of sliding down to third class and greater isolation and inequity.

FHWA needs to think not only about the roadway, but about all of the people who use it. Think of the five year old who foolishly runs into the street after a ball; think of the person who is blind; think of the old person pushing a shopping cart; think of the grad student riding a bike.

NHTSA focuses on safety standards

NHTSA published request for comments with a March 5, 2018 deadline:

Removing Regulatory Barriers for Vehicles With Automated Driving Systems - NHSTA is focusing on removing FMVSS that have to do with drivers, whether involving steering wheels, dashboards, or testing vehicles. On the other hand, NHTSA declares that it wishes to retain other safety standards so that - in my words - we don't throw the baby out with the bath water. "The existing FMVSS can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations at 49 CFR part 571. NHTSA has over 60 FMVSS today."

Opportunities for comments to suggest ways in which vehicles can become accessible for people with disabilities - Why not?

NHTSA states that the FMVSS will no longer have to assume the presence of a driver or even a passenger, therefore no longer needing displays or equipment that require a driver's attention. But if the person whose attention is needed, either when ordering, waiting for, or being present in the vehicle, has a disability - cognitive, visual, auditory - then this moment is the perfect time for NHTSA to think in terms of equity for all AV passengers and require accessible interfaces.

NHTSA asks, as one example, "Would occupants still need warning telltales and other displays to be viewable if they did not have any means of driving their vehicles?" If one's suggested answer is yes, then why not take this perfect moment of billion-dollar investments and a clean slate to require accessibility with those new interfaces?

In a catch-all invitation for comment, NHTSA poses the question:

There may be other existing performance requirements and test procedures that would fail to accommodate unconventional designs. If there are, the Agency will need to identify them and determine how the Agency should amend them in ways maintain the current level of effectiveness.

Why not now impose a physical accessibility requirement that allows for wheelchairs, double strollers, shopping carts, and luggage to be wheeled directly on to EVERY AV? Again, if we are investing and experimenting, why not require and figure out universal design?

Perhaps stretching the meaning of safety

I'll bet there is a good percentage of caretakers, people with disabilities, people with small children, and people who travel a lot who have fantasized about not having to awkwardly lift packages, bags, luggage, and children who rapidly gain weight. Think of all of the back conditions we could prevent all while serving people with disabilities. (When my older daughter was little, but getting too heavy to carry a lot, I would make sure to have a book with me whenever I drove because she would wake up and not go back to her nap if I lifted her out of the car. You see what I mean?)

I might be stretching NHTSA's mandate vis a vis the FMVSS: "[T]he FMVSS need to be “objective, practicable, and meet the need for safety" when initially issued and must remain so after being amended."Safety" being the operative word, but we should consider safety for everyone. Isn't preventing long-term injury of lifting kids, packages, and luggage part of safety? Isn't preventing the social isolation of persons with disabilities with few or no transportation options part of safety?

Maybe not, but whether it's via NHTSA, USDOT, or Congress, the current transportation system that blatantly discriminates against anyone who is unable to drive puts many of our colleagues, friends, and family members at a huge disadvantage.

Back to NHTSA's concerns

NHTSA is also rightfully interested in certification and testing, meaning a reliable and credible performance testing system for whatever AV equipment or software is produced. NHTSA is already pursuing this.

There are other mundane, but important, questions. Will passengers still have a way to turn on windshield wipers or lights? Will such options be needed or wanted? What about the option of stopping a vehicle? What about mirrors?

What about emergency controls - and making sure emergency controls are accessible? If we have regulators and legislators touting the freedom that AVs will provide for older adults and people with disabilities, then surely they must be provided with accessible emergency controls.

Modes between cars and transit - all of USDOT should pay attention

In the shared-use, slugging, ridehailing, microtransit world of strangers sharing rides and often (but not always) money being in some way exchanged,  NHTSA and FHWA have an obligation to acknowledge that the private car and van are being employed as a kind of public transportation. The safety of those occupants, and the accessibility of those vehicles, should be on FHWA's and NHTSA's radar as they ponder and handout research dollars to ensure a smooth and safe transition to AVs. Kudos to FTA for already making this transition and for studying and otherwise staying in the forefront regarding these changes.

AVs Appear Close for GM, Via, Navya, Buses, and Roving Corner Stores

Forget 2021 for large legacy auto companies to debut autonomous vehicles (AVs): GM is planning on 2019 to launch a car-like AV that will NOT include a steering wheel or brakes. Still looks eerily the same as current sedan, however, with normal seats, interior design, and many cupholders. No imagination there.

Very interesting is GM's strategy vis a vis the US Department of Transportation (DOT) to avoid steering- and brake-related regulatory requirements. According to nice article from myStatesman, which quotes from other sources, GM is seeking to avoid the safety standards, but (if I'm reading this correctly) meet safety objectives.

Digressing for a moment

Spoiler alert - Next post to address DOT AV-related requests. Lots of activity and room for comments.

Don't ask my opinion about DOT car safety standards - FMVSS - because, with upwards of 35,000 deaths in US alone, not to mention injuries, we do not have actual standards that are producing safety as that word is understood by all normal people.

Back to GM

Notable tea leaves from the GM announcement: (1) Influence GM has with Congress and DOT means that by well before the company's launch date, we will see AV-friendly changes in terms of regulation and legislation; (2) GM is serious about beating Ford and other auto companies as well as being truly competitive with Waymo, Uber, and the like. Nice to see this from a company that not so long ago predicted we would not see AVs on our roads for at least another generation.

Navya cuddles up to Via

In a sweet marriage that reflects the couplings and menage a trois (or more) partnerings, Navya has committed its Autonom Cab - I refuse to use the all caps in actual name - to Via's fleet management system. Via, for those outside of the shared-use transportation world, is a kind of hybrid of microtransit and taxi service. It is app-based, but shared ride, and can require a short walk to meet the vehicle. Via is currently in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Chicago, and DC; but a look at its jobs page shows the many cities where it is expanding or in some way otherwise operating.

Here's the Navya Autonom Cab video, which, curiously, shows no interior shots and a Paris magically sans congestion.

Another AV bus project

Just a month after the EasyMile announcement of an AV bus development project, Volvo and a university in Singapore have publicized their "cooperation agreement on a research and development program for autonomous, all-electric buses. According to the company, the program is part of the Land Transport Authority of Singapore’s drive to create new solutions for tomorrow’s sustainable public transport."

What is notable is that this project marks a departure, really more of a branching out, from Volvo's previous AV-as-conventional-car initiatives.

Roving convenience store - why stop there?

A California company, Robomart, has fitted out an AV as a mobile small convenience store. The video (on the boring side) shows a supposedly upscale, McMansion exurb with a contemporary reimagining of the corner store - but without people, candy, long pretzel sticks, friendly person behind the counter, and nine year olds.

As I wrote yesterday regarding the e-Pallete concept, why stop the imagination? Why not roving offices, coffee places, meeting rooms, tiny houses?

Be a STAR

Strategic planning

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has released a five year strategic plan - not to be confused at all with former Soviet five year plans - called STAR, which stands for Strategic Transit Automation Research. I guess the nature of plans is to assume linear development that progresses in a rational and even manner and this is certainly the case with the FTA's STAR plan. To give FTA credit, the agency is earnestly trying to help transit systems and communities to adjust to a world with both new technology and travel modes that blur what were once very clear lines.

The STAR plan will be carried out from FY 2018 through FY 22, with low-speed autonomous vehicle (AV) demonstration projects to commence in the second year of the plan. The plan includes traditional transit, old on-demand modes, and newer on-demand and other shared-use services, including, but not limited to (one needs a legal degree to use that phrase), paratransit, ridehailing, and bus rapid transit. STAR loosely defines a bus “to consider a range of sizes and passenger capacities, and could include both traditional and novel vehicle designs (e.g. full-size city buses, articulated buses, and small shuttles).” Paying close attention to the parentheses in that definition, it is clear that FTA is acknowledging the blurriness of distinctions evolving, even being erased, within transit and between transit and legacy on-demand modes of paratransit, community transportation services, and taxis/ridehailing.

FTA is also including in STAR labor questions relating to transit’s workforce and automated operations related to maintenance, yard, and parking.

In the meadow, we can build a snowman ... 

As we speak, it seems, advances are happening. One big concern for AVs is snow and its close cousin, ice. But snow is not scary for Finland's prototype autonomous car.  It bears the cute name of Marti and its city slicker companion is named Marilyn. Marti is already driving than most people on icy roads in a winter wonderland, albeit at a slow pace. I would not want it otherwise. Why would anyone expect any vehicle to speed along in those conditions?

I can't resist including the song. It's better audio than the Marti video.

Happy last day of Hanukkah and an early fabulous winter soltsice, which is tomorrow. I'm pretty sure there will be something to write about by Christmas, but just in case, have a fun and very merry Christmas as well. Now I can't stop humming the winter wonderland song.

Rand's AV Study: Not Feeling Its Calculation of Unknown Unkowns

Agreed - Perfect is not all it's cracked up to be

I love how polling and models and other predictive tools are put together and often manage to get results so wrong. There are just too many variables, including the idiosyncrasies and preferences of many different humans, and the personalities of thought leaders - whether elected, in business, or in the media - that are popular or ignored at any given point in time.

That is my skeptical frame of mind when reading the Rand study, entitled The Enemy of Good: Estimating the Cost of Waiting for Nearly Perfect Automated Vehicles, which is nicely summarized in this video on the report's summary page.


The study and the video remind me of the classic Donald Rumsfeld quote, uttered sometime around the start of the Iraq War.

Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

Huge disclaimer

I have not now, nor have I ever been, an expert in statistics or modeling. The language used to summarize conclusions based on scenario modeling is such that I end up re-reading it several times without the benefit of increased comprehension. Therefore, the following could be completely wrong. 

AVs present a whole bunch of unknowns

Giving the author's credit, they do articular a whole bunch of known unknowns, including:

• The safety/crash equation between human driver risks and new, as yet unknown, highly autonomous vehicle (HAV) risks, such as cyberattacks.
• Percent of HAV market penetration when we begin to see safety improvements in terms of lives saved and injuries avoided.

My big BUT

The study makes some possibly dubious assumptions:

• Someone out there who is credible AND will be heeded will be able to calculate and recognize at what point in time it is when we have reached the break-even safety point for HAVs, that is when they become exactly as safe and then surpass the safety of conventional, human-operated vehicles. 
• We are several decades from the full diffusion of HAVs. What? Talk about an unexplored assumption.
• The pace of HAV learning and operational capability will NOT be fast or accelerate in the future. Same What? as above.

And the winner is ...

In a nutshell, the Rand study authors' conclusion is stated very succinctly:

From a utilitarian standpoint, it seems sensible that HAVs should be allowed on U.S. roads once they are judged safer than the average human driver so that the number of lives lost to road fatalities can begin to be reduced as soon as possible. Yet, under such a policy, HAVs would still cause many crashes, injuries, and fatalities—albeit fewer than their human counterparts. This may not be acceptable to society, and some argue that the technology should be significantly safer or even nearly perfect before HAVs are allowed on the road. Yet waiting for HAVs that are many times safer than human drivers misses opportunities to save lives. It is the very definition of allowing perfect to be the enemy of good. [Emphasis added.]

The conclusion makes perfect sense, as do the numbers calculated to support the opinion, but the assumptions are so massive that the numbers could be wildly off. Of course, only time will tell.

My guesses 

I guess - predict - that HAVs will be (a) safer and (b) be adopted quickly.

(a) Increased safety: HAVs will mean fewer and then zero jerks who will drive when sleepy, in a rush, distracted by children, radio, podcasts, or pretty trees, or in any way under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or indigestion or pain. Jerks who over-estimate their driving skills will not be speeding or weaving in and out of traffic or erring in their predictions of being able to make a lane change or a turn before another vehicle comes barreling along. Even if HAVs are only as safe as human drivers in terms of their optimal driving skill, they will all learn from each other and they will mostly be driving at that optimal point, instead of doing so only at noon when one is alone in the car.

(b) Fast adoption: For the most part, in terms of early HAV adoption, we are talking about humans in Western and modern Asian countries. These are people who went underground before any large-scale testing to embrace subways when they were first built; who readily relinquished control and got on planes even though crashes that result in many lost lives happen occasionally; who quickly bought expensive smartphones even though this meant giving up privacy and being, at times, unreachable; and who, despite the safety risks, while driving, use those smartphones, unwrap and eat food, scramble with other devices, and deal with other people - sometimes demanding tiny people. Plus, there is no one who would prefer to pay attention to rush hour traffic than nap, play games, read, text friends, read entertainment news, or even work. Maybe there's an exception for a few people who get to drive each day on pretty two-lane roads with little traffic.

Those are guesses resulting from zero modeling, scenario planning, or any calculations. Many assumptions have been made and they are mine.

Popping Up Like Weeds from the Sidewalk

[Image from Cision PR Newswire.]

Gov. Hickenlooper of Colorado declared Monday, Dec. 4th to be Connected and Autonomous Vehicle (AV) Day. No word on store sales for that holiday. Part of Hickenlooper's C-and-AV Day photo op was to showcase Colorado's upcoming AV pilot project.

The declaration of the special day was a way for the pro-AV governor - whose administration paved the way for the driverless truck beer delivery PR stunt - to continue to highlight AV partners and Colorado's enthusiasm.

According to the press release, in very press-release-y language:

"Panasonic, a global leader in smart cities and smart automotive technology solutions, welcomed Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper, Denver offices, where he proclaimed December 4 as "Connected and Autonomous Vehicle Day" to reinforce initiatives like Panasonic's connected vehicle partnership with CDOT's RoadX Program, as well as acknowledge EasyMile, a leader in autonomous technology, for their North American headquarters grand opening co-located within the Panasonic building."

Best of luck to Lauren Isaac of EasyMile as she awaits the birth of her baby. By the time that baby is a teenager, he or she will never need a driver's license. My own kids told me about six years ago that their generation would be the last for that.

Other EasyMile news is that the company is graduating, or rather expanding, from cute AV shuttles to real buses, AVs, of course. EasyMile is partnering with the French government and "IVECO, Sector, Transpolis, ISAE-SUPAERO, Ifsttar, Inria, and Michelin" to produce the AV buses. The buses will be large enough to transport 100+ passengers. (A warning to all of you traveling with more than one small child: Whether or not a bus has a driver, get on at a stop where you can sit together and where you do not have to stand holding a child of 30 pounds or one wearing a snow suit. AVs will not solve every transportation conundrum.)

Watch this nice video of the EasyMile AV shuttle at Bishop Ranch office park in California, being piloted in a partnership with the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.

In the state where everyone believes every visitor wants to move there

Look at the cute Colorado license plate for the EasyMile AV shuttle. It will be spring 2018 before regular passengers can get on board to ride the first-mile/last-mile route near Denver's 61st and Peña Station. Political and business partners came out to shine anyway for the early dog and pony show on Monday.

Perfect would be taking that shuttle from the commuter bus stop near Louisville, CO (near Boulder) to the Moxie Bread Company hipster bakery and coffee place. It's a Denver transit bus, so why not?

[Off topic: Moxie bialys are nowhere near the real thing, but their whole grain, naturally-leavened bread is excellent. In the bialy/bagel realm, I remain true to my pre-hipster Brooklyn roots.]

Pilots popping up everywhere

Nissan will be starting a pilot in Japan for app-based AV ridehailing. Will start with only two Nissan Leaf electric vehicles. The pilot will begin in March 2018.

Lyft riders in Boston's Seaport neighborhood may be experiencing AV ridehailing trips due to a pilot program and a partnership between Lyft and nuTonomy.  Delphi owns nuTonomy, which has experience in Singapore with AV pilots.

Previous posts about nuTonomy activity in Singapore: AV ridehailing in 2018; Singapore is a driverless sandbox; plus more posts about AV activity in Singapore.

Will vans be cool again?

The company first known for its cool vans is trying to climb back to regain that reputation. Volkswagon has developed an AV van called MOIA that will be launched as the vehicle for a ridehailing service. "The van-pooling MOIA service will launch in Hamburg in 2018 with 200 vans, letting passengers enter a departure point and destination in an app. "We've set ourselves the goal of taking more than a million cars off the roads in Europe and the USA by 2025," said MOIA CEO Ole Harms."

[Image from Endgadet.]

FYI: No flower power on these sleek, corporate-looking VW vans.

Fiskers has also developed an AV shuttle called Orbit and its shape varies from the cute boxy design of other companies. No word on when this van-like shuttle vehicle will appear on roads or where it will launch.

School bus without driver

[Image from Teague.]

So, I hope parents are aware that school bus drivers do not actually supervise children who ride the bus. I mostly walked my kids to school up to high school, but I overheard plenty of kid conversations about school bus rides.

The AV school bus design, named Hannah,  crafted by the Teague design firm is cute. The affluent-and-white world portrayed in the photographs suggests a crime-free, suburban paradise. In the real world, perhaps parent volunteers would be needed up to high school, especially in the prime cliquey years of fourth grade through middle school.