-
Barriers for the introduction of a collision avoidance system in the market.
According to your opinion, which are the barriers for the introduction of a collision avoidance system in the market:
If others please specify
-
The pull from legislative intervention. More details
In cases where the social aspects of technology are very important, legislations have exerted a strong force to adopt innovative solutions. In transportation the most impressive case of legislative actions is the one related to the environment pollution.
Due to the big societal issue related to road transport injuries and casualties, do you think that a strong pushing effect from legislations is to be expected for the active safety issues related to?
-
The pull from market demand. More details
The market appears to appreciate some of proposed features dealing with active safety at least for the higher class of cars.
Such market appreciation will depend also on the potential cost reduction of insurance in proportion of the reduction of the accident rate. To give an example the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety has estimated that "if all passenger vehicles were equipped with forward collision warning, lane departure warning, side view assist, and adaptive headlights, about 1 out of 3 fatal crashes and 1 out of 5 injury crashes could potentially be prevented or mitigated".
Do you expect that such market pull will determine a more rapid diffusion of active safety features?
-
The push from technology. More details
In trying to depict the role of technology push in building the scenario, it is important, first of all, to underline the different role that will play the car producer with respect to the components and system suppliers.
On one side one might expect that the end producer will play the major role for an innovation, such as collision avoidance, very much integrated in the total product performance. On the other end, since the active safety technologies depend very strongly on ICT technologies, one might expect that even in this case the major role of innovation push will be played by the component and system suppliers. The dynamic innovation diffusion might be very different in the two cases.
Do you think that:
-
The potential effect of producer liability. When discussing in general the potential application of an innovation, one has to consider the possibility that the adoption of such innovation in the product might increase the risk for the producer to have to respond to actions for damages incurred for the mal operation of the product itself.
To which extent you think that such argument might impede or reduce the applicability of the most involving feature of active safety such as that of collision avoidance?
-
The extension of active safety for different driving conditions. More details
When talking about collision avoidance one should better indicate to which types of driving conditions and environment it might successfully respond to avoid collision.
For instance, the case of driving in a large and straight highway will certainly simplify the task of the system intervention with respect to the case of a narrow and windy road. And what about the risk that collision avoidance will induce other accident after avoiding the collision in the case of city driving? The ERSEC objective is to enlarge the case of different driving conditions where the collision avoidance will take place without the risk of secondary accidents, like out of road in case of windy road and of subsequent collision when driving in city road network.
To which extent you consider that a collision avoidance system to be accepted should be operative in all the driving environment? In alternative, do you expect potential application also for collision avoidance systems that will safely operative only in highway environment?
-
The extension of applications of safe car automatic driving. More details
Car producers have already proposed features of automatic driving limited however to very special case like automatic parking.
In principle, the technology of automatic car driving can be expanded to cover other cases when the driver is temporarily substituted by the automatic driving, such as, e.g: finding its way to a free available space in a complex parking place; self driving to follow a preceding car in an highway. The safe consideration connected to automatic car driving become the more important the more the case is extended.
Do you consider that there is a market demand for potential application of temporary safe automatic car driving in the next future?
-
Estimated timelag for entrance in the market of collision avoidance systems.
Considering the above mentioned aspects (legislations, technological push, user acceptance...) according to your opinion which is the estimated timelag for the entrance in the market of collision avoidance systems?
If others please specify
-
The extension of applications for Automated Guided Vehicles. More details
AGV are already applied in very specific cases related to goods transport, in reduced and specially instrumented space, to move the vehicles between given positions.
The new technologies developed for anti-collision between vehicles in normal traffic might well be applicable to innovate the technology for AGV in special spaces substituting the today hardware technology with the ICT technologies based on sensors and actuators on board the vehicle. Google did support an experiment with unmanned car driving. Other interesting experimentations can be referred to, such as the one, supported by the ERC, for an unmanned vehicle following a leading vehicle normally driven along all the road from Europe to China.
What about the possibility to adopt such technology for automated guided vehicles dedicated to moving people in normal traffic conditions?
-
Estimated timelag for entrance in the market of AGVs extended applications.
According to your opinion which is the estimated timelag for the entrance in the market of AGVs extended applications?
If others please specify