Bob Lutz on the Future (or not) of the Automobile

[Dodge Driver]

Heard Mr. Lutz on the radio, regarding this article. http://www.autonews.com/article/20171105/INDUSTRY_REDESIGNED/171109944/bob-lutz:-kiss-the-good-times-goodbye

 

[tbill]

Sadly, I can almost see that happen, other than the fact we can’t get good roads now, so who’s gonna build the ‘ rail ‘ system or whatever is used for the navigation of these things?

[modelercarl]

Never happen in 20 years, if ever.  We can't even get good roads in many locales.....the major cities in the world are struggling to provide transportation for the population now with the revenue that they capture through taxes, etc. so where is the money going to come from for all the new infrastructure.  The change from horses to automobiles (and trucks) was easier to accomplish because they both basically used the same road system for their needs......this would require ALL NEW systems to become widely accepted.

Just another Bob Lutz pipe dream.......this kind of stuff is why he has bounced around the auto industry for years, never had any really sound approaches to problems facing the auto industry.

[Belugawrx]

WTVR

We will continue to drive our trucks and cars until the oil runs out, along with the roads, air, animals, and the planet deflates,...so

[unclescott58]

Lutz. How well was GM run when he was there? I don't see why he's been put on such a pedestal as the end of all automotive wisdom? Why Road & Track magazine replaced their classic P.S. page with him, I'll never understand. I don't see his predictions coming true. Because of American's attitudes towards controlling and owning their own forms of transportation. And even though it true, that the automobile replaced the horse as basic transportation. The is still around, and used recreationally. I sure if the automobile is replaced by these pods, there will still be a place for them recreationally. Lutz is not the God of cars. I'm taking his predictions this a grain of salt.  

[aurfalien]

Hi,

I like Mr. Lutz.  But I don't have to agree with him to like him.  I've a few of his books that I plan to read.

Besides opinions are like brown eyed Suzies and every one has at least 2 of em.

 

[martinfan5]

Not gonna happen in five years.

[Snake45]

Heard Mr. Lutz on the radio, regarding this article. http://www.autonews.com/article/20171105/INDUSTRY_REDESIGNED/171109944/bob-lutz:-kiss-the-good-times-goodbye

 

I heard him too.  I'm glad I won't be alive in such a bleak and joyless world. 

[Dodge Driver]

I heard him too.  I'm glad I won't be alive in such a bleak and joyless world. 

But we'll have our private, unregulated vehicle playgrounds to quench our car lust, says Mr. Lutz

[Ace-Garageguy]

...Because of American's attitudes towards controlling and owning their own forms of transportation....

I dunno Scott...I'd like to agree with you, but it's a brave new world out there. A whole LOT of the 50%-less-testosterone-generation (look it up) of dweeps and tewrbs have absolutely no interest in driving or owning vehicles.

Story here:    http://time.com/money/4185441/millennials-drivers-licenses-gen-x/

[aurfalien]

Hi,

Entertaining article, a quote;

The authors would not speculate as to the reason for the decreases, but a survey they conducted in 2013 of 618 respondents between the ages of 18 and 39 found that the primary reason reported for not having a driver’s license was that people were simply too busy (37%), followed closely by the cost of of owning and maintaining a vehicle (32%), and the ease of getting a ride from someone else (31%).

I don't understand the too busy part contributing to not having a DL.  However the 31% I underlined is telling meaning perhaps they still live at home.

Monsignor Bill, blame the parents for coddling and over indulging them.  My generation, generation X is mostly t blame which is ironic as we complain about it a lot.

 

[aurfalien]

Shhhhh. Somebody will accuse you of making a political statement.

I'm planning to live forever, so somewhere in the future, the powers that be will have to pry my steering wheel out of my cold dead fingers if they expect ME to give up cars.

Hi,

This to me, is one of the best driving songs of all time.

[peter31a]

The 37% being "too busy" is bogus in my opinion. It's more like they're too lazy or they're part of the 31% crowd getting other people to drive them around so they don't have to be bothered. It was my generation of baby boomers that started this by driving their kids everywhere so that they just thought that's how life is and other people drive you around. And that's filtering down to the generations after that. They'd rather fly all over the world to "experience" things and not worry about having their own transportation. I'd rather have the freedom to go anywhere on this continent at a moments notice because I can drive there in my own car.

[Ace-Garageguy]

All it's going to take to put paid to the "autonomous vehicle" (self-driving-car) thing is for some antisocial wizard hacker to fiddle with the system on a large enough scale. 100 "smart" cars that all try to occupy the same space at the same time, and the resultant steaming pile of carnage...multiplied many times over...may just make the proponents of this idiocy sit up and reconsider the wisdom of the whole concept. And don't even begin to think it can't happen. Any system one group of humans can devise, another group can defeat.

Again, if human-driven cars are legislated out for "safety" reasons, it's just another example of the lowest-common-denominator among humans ruining things for everyone else. The vast majority of drivers out there, while not exactly competent, don't cause serious collisions. It's the distracted or irresponsible or chemically impaired few who bear the real blame. Take THEM off the roads, let THEM have to be dependent on OOBER or traditional forms of public transportation...but allow the reasonably OK drivers to retain the freedom that comes from having a private, human-controlled vehicle.

What's happened to the typical American actually having a pair? And HOW did we become a nation of quivering sheep, willing to trade more and more freedoms for the illusion of "safety"?

[JollySipper]

What's happened to the typical American actually having a pair? And HOW did we become a nation of quivering sheep, willing to trade more and more freedoms for the illusion of "safety"?

I think it's called "Entropy".... and it's only going to get worse...

(Sorry for the bold type, not sure why it happened)

[Snake45]

I can absolutely guarantee you that our elected masters aren't going to travel around in driverless podules. They'll just demand it of us "sheeple." 

"When in the course of human events...."

[Jim N]

There was a poll done recently, and if the poll is a true random sampling, people do not want anything to do with autonomous cars.  The reasons are what we on this forum have been discussing for some time.  They can be hacked, and as great as their proponents claim, their will be problems.  And since we know our political leaders will not legislate who is responsible for the problems (i.e. the car makers or their third party contractors), the courts will have to decide.  We all know that the courts move at a glacial pace.  Furthermore, the corporations all have their ways to try and cover up their misdeeds.  It will be years before any problems will be widely known and many people will be killed or maimed.

The other issue that many seem to overlook is that many people in this country live in rural areas where self driving cars will not operate well.  No one that I know has indicated how they will travel on a gravel road.  And mass transit will never reach these people.

[Ace-Garageguy]

  ...No one that I know has indicated how they will travel on a gravel road.  

It may interest you to know that much of the enabling technology for driverless cars that has seen significant development in recent years was originally developed under a DARPA-funded program that focused on an off-road course intended to roughly simulate terrain that might be encountered in military operations.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Grand_Challenge

Wherever there's a line-of-sight to 3 GPS satellites, most current-developmental systems should be capable of working...in a rough sort of way...but there's a wide array of additional sensors that tell the car's brain where it is relative to other vehicles, the road, buildings, obstructions, and pedestrians, plus its own speed, the relative speeds of other vehicles in the immediate area, their closing rates, weather conditions, traffic conditions, etc.

The reason a very rural setting was chosen for the early development was simply to minimize the number factors the car's brain would have to manage simultaneously.

I personally don't believe we'll see fully autonomous vehicles until there's at least one more doubling of the capabilities of machine vision and AI in general. AI is already a whole lot smarter than most people realize, but it's still a long way from being able to rival a reasonably competent human vehicle operator in a congested urban environment.

And whatever you put on the road, somebody is going to do something stupid. Not reading and understanding the directions with these things can get you killed. And no matter how idiot-proof something appears to be, there's always a bigger idiot just waiting to test the limits.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/business/self-driving-cars.html

 

Edited November 15, 2017 by Ace-Garageguy

[espo]

I happen to like Mr. Lutz and respect his wisdom  I think people should pay more attention to his insight as to the operation of big automobile companies. More than a few people have questioned why he didn't do more to improve the different companies when he was there. If you listen to what he is saying you start to realize the politics that goes on in the automotive business and I believe most large companies. Listening to how he describes how and why things and product came about you realize all to often the "leaders" of a company are only worried about their bonus and not the over all health of the company. Mr. Lutz is a very wise person on business in general and the car business in particular. The fact that someone has worked for several different companies in the same industry does  not always mean there is something wrong with the individual but more that they did what the were allowed to do and often leave out of sheer frustration because they in fact often know a better way but they get passed over because they will not "play the game" that the people at the top are doing to only enrich themselves and not the company, this is very short sighted on the companies part but that does seem to be how the American auto manufactures have done business for decades and they still are trying to figure out why so many other off shore manufactures are doing so well in the market place. As for an electric car I'm no fan and just how are the states going to tax us to pay for the road repairs. Sometimes  people forget that the burning of fuels to create electricity also create more pollution than the automobile it's self. The only way it could really improve is if we use Solar or Wind.    

[Spex84]

Read that, felt depressed.
I don't see how the turtleneck-wearing silicon valley transportation wet dream of government-mandated autonomous networked cars could possibly SERVE the bulk of humanity, as opposed to making everyone poorer and more isolated.

I wrote a long breakdown of how such a system would never serve me or my community, but deleted it all. Basically, the world is welcome to that particular future, but I hope it only arrives after I'm dead and in the ground.

 

 

[Jim N]

It may interest you to know that much of the enabling technology for driverless cars that has seen significant development in recent years was originally developed under a DARPA-funded program that focused on an off-road course intended to roughly simulate terrain that might be encountered in military operations.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Grand_Challenge

Wherever there's a line-of-sight to 3 GPS satellites, most current-developmental systems should be capable of working...in a rough sort of way...but there's a wide array of additional sensors that tell the car's brain where it is relative to other vehicles, the road, buildings, obstructions, and pedestrians, plus its own speed, the relative speeds of other vehicles in the immediate area, their closing rates, weather conditions, traffic conditions, etc.

The reason a very rural setting was chosen for the early development was simply to minimize the number factors the car's brain would have to manage simultaneously.

I personally don't believe we'll see fully autonomous vehicles until there's at least one more doubling of the capabilities of machine vision and AI in general. AI is already a whole lot smarter than most people realize, but it's still a long way from being able to rival a reasonably competent human vehicle operator in a congested urban environment.

And whatever you put on the road, somebody is going to do something stupid. Not reading and understanding the directions with these things can get you killed. And no matter how idiot-proof something appears to be, there's always a bigger idiot just waiting to test the limits.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/business/self-driving-cars.html

 

Thanks for the clarification.