Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Cyclists taking advantage of driverless cars is a worry, says transport consultant

Self-stopping autonomous vehicles will open the door for cyclists to seriously slow down busy urban traffic

In the not too distant future, when driverless cars roam our country's roads, will cyclists be the scourge of a potential transport utopia? That is a question being asked by the associate director of transport consultancy Phil Jones Associates.

Adrian Lord, of Phil Jones Associates, fears that once technology that prevents pedestrians and cyclists from being hit by vehicles makes it to our roads, it opens the door for vulnerable road users to take advantage of the impossibility of being injured.

He said: "Once people realise that an autonomous vehicle will stop [automatically], will pedestrians and cyclists deliberately take advantage and step out or cycle in front of them?

“If that’s the case, how long would such a vehicle take to drive down Oxford Street or any other busy urban high street?”

Meanwhile professor of transport engineering at the University of the West of England, John Parkin, told the Financial Times that much of the infrastructure that's being implemented to keep bikes and cars apart in inner-city environments, will be made redundant by autonomous technology reaching maturity.

"When fewer cars are driven by humans, in cities at least," the professor said. "There would be less need to segregate cyclists from traffic. This would allow roads to be designed as more open, shared spaces."

The big hypothetical question over what will become of our city streets when autonomous vehicles arrive seems far away now, but autonomous cars are certainly coming. Theresa May recently struck a deal with Nissan to bring its autonomous vehicles to our country's roads over the next few years and Uber are moving towards an autonomous taxi service even sooner.

>Read more: Theresa May gives Nissan the autonomous freedom of UK roads

And, should the day come when London is an autonomous car-only city, Mr Lord's fears over "busy urban high streets," despite specualtion that the number of cars on our roads will actually go down, could well become a reality if cycling champion Andrew Gilligan is right.

He suggests that the significant increase in convenience autonomous vehicles are set to offer will trigger a notable rise in the number of active vehicles on our roads. That's despite autonomous vehicles doing away with the necessity of car parking - which according to an RAC survey accounts for 95% of a car's time, indicating that fewer cars will be required to meet our needs.

Mr Gilligan said: "If the day arrives when people do not need driving licences or have to pay for insurance, and can simply call a driverless car at a moment’s notice, the number of vehicles on the road is likely to increase."

Despite the potential increase in vehicles on our roads, in many regards,  the potential rise of autonomous cars is good news for cyclists. Autonomous vehicles reduce the chance of human error contributing to the number of injured and killed cyclists on our roads.

It doesn't look, though, like the introduction of autonomous vehilces will be the magic bullet that kills the 'battle for the roads' between drivers and cyclists. If anything, it looks like something of a role reversal will happen instead.

Here at road.cc we can already picture a world where drivers are campaigning for segregated infrastructure to keep cyclists away from cars for the sake of their driving comfort.

Add new comment

39 comments

Avatar
bassjunkieuk | 7 years ago
10 likes

I think it's rather silly to think anyone will "take advantage" of self-driving cars and risk walking out in front of them. Even with eliminating the (possibly distracted/tired) human from controlling the vehicle there is still the small matter of the laws of physics that determine how fast the brakes can bring the car to a stop or how well the car can avoid a collision (which itself opens another can of worms: would a self driving car take evasive action that puts it on course for another crash?).

 

Even with self-driving cars, following a Dutch method and keeping vehicles of different speed and mass seperate is surely still the best way to proceed?

Avatar
Ush replied to bassjunkieuk | 7 years ago
2 likes

bassjunkieuk wrote:

I think it's rather silly to think anyone will "take advantage" of self-driving cars and risk walking out in front of them.

 

More than that, it is also silly to think that there are hordes of "selfish" cyclists and pedestrians whose main desire in life is to make trouble for other road users.  It is that toxic assumption which has been assiduously promoted in the media which leads to this sort of moronic thinking.

Avatar
pwake | 7 years ago
2 likes

On this subject, it seems like there could already be a way of taking advantage of the technology that is increasingly finding its way into cars already.

This device on Kickstarter doesn't look like it's going to reach its funding goal, but it's an interesting idea:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ilumaware/ilumaware-shield-collisio...

 

Avatar
Jamminatrix replied to pwake | 7 years ago
0 likes
pwake wrote:

it's an interesting idea:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ilumaware/ilumaware-shield-collisio...

That thing is only 0.000036% less likely to make you involved in a car crash, and that's at a completely unrealistic 100% success rate!

My SO works insurance and in the USA, at least, the percentage of cars on the road with collision avoidance is a low single digit number. It's not even a standard feature on many new models that offer it. While it's a cool idea to trick radars to increasing cyclists presence, the numbers don't make sense. If we assume 3% of cars have collision avoidance, and you're odds of being hit by a car are 0.0012-percent any one bike ride, that is only 0.000036% increase in safety at a hypothetical 100% success rate.

We are still at least 25 years out to even think full autonomous cars could become a majority. The best weapon we cyclists have right now isn't gadgets and isn't sometimes dangerous infrastructure, it is driver education. And neither media nor government has dragged their head out their ass to figure that out.

Avatar
50kcommute | 7 years ago
7 likes

Surely the idea is less cars in the cities, hence the space being gievn up to more efficient modes of transport; just because the driver is replaced doesn't mean that cars turn into magic teleportation machines...apart from the magic teleporting ones that is  1

Avatar
rliu | 7 years ago
16 likes

Adrian Lord is asking a pointless question that exposes himself to be of the minority that sees it a necessity to drive or be chauffeured through busy city centre streets like Oxford Street, because he finds using public transport or cycling beneath him. He needs to learn the world does not need to bend to his will.

Avatar
pmanc replied to rliu | 7 years ago
0 likes

rliu wrote:

Adrian Lord...finds...cycling beneath him. He needs to learn the world does not need to bend to his will.

Who?  Adrian Lord who is a "member of the DfT cycle proofing working group and is retained as infrastructure advisor to British Cycling.  He is currently collaborating with Phil on updating the cycling content of Design Manual for Roads and Bridges and preparing a Cycling Strategy for the Agency."

That Adrian Lord?  You might want to call the dogs off.

http://www.philjonesassociates.co.uk/team/adrian-lord.html

Avatar
CXR94Di2 | 7 years ago
11 likes

There won't be drivers only passengers, who can rant and rave all they like. At least they won't be in charge of a potentially dangerous vehicle

Avatar
brooksby | 7 years ago
13 likes

Oh here we go: how quickly will the UK see jaywalking laws and bans on anything other than self-driving cars...? Seems to me that the drivers of the non self driving vehicles are just as likely to take advantage of the algorithms for not killing people.

Pages

Latest Comments