Forget Autonomous; How about Remote Control?

Almost smack dab in the middle of wireless infrastructure maker Ericsson’s booth at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona two weeks ago was a stand demonstrating the remote control of a vehicle live streamed from an airport in Berlin.?The demonstration was a unique manifestation of connected car technology and immediately raised all sorts of questions.?Is this practical??Is this real??Can this scale?

It was as if human drivers on roads today didn’t have enough to contend with as all forms of driverless vehicles from delivery bots, to shuttle busses, to robotaxis, and commercial vehicles are increasingly populating highways and biways.?Now we have to consider the prospect of remotely controlled vehicles with no human drivers.

(To join a spirited discussion of autonomous vehicle operations and regulation on March 15th at the Future Networked Car Symposium from the International Telecommunications Union - and weigh in with your own questions - register here:?https://lnkd.in/dM-Rt7QK )

From Las Vegas in the U.S. to Milton Keynes in the U.K. to Berlin in Germany remote control vehicles are rolling into view raising all kinds of questions as to who or what is actually in control.

Remote vehicle control is pure madness to some autonomous vehicle purists.?For early innovators in the autonomous space, self-driving tech was seen as necessarily self-contained with all sensors and processing built in and connectivity optional or unnecessary.

For remote control vehicles connectivity is essential – which flies in the face of automotive engineering conventional wisdom: You can never rely on connectivity for safety applications.?Doubters beware, because remote control vehicles are here.

As Ericsson demonstrated at MWC, in partnership with remote control-enabled car sharing provider Vay and wireless provider Deutsche Telekom, cars can be readily and safely operated from hundreds if not thousands of miles away.?Ericsson used the opportunity to spotlight its L4S (Low Latency Low Loss Scalable) wireless technology.?Ericsson’s Cradlepoint connectivity solution is applied in the U.K. by Imperium Drive for the same purpose.

Partially fueling these endeavors from the likes of Halo in the U.S., Imperium Drive in the U.K., and Vay, is the lack of regulation.?In most regulatory jurisdictions there are no rules against controlling vehicles remotely – though this is sure to change soon.

The U.K. Law Commission has set forth its own guidelines for remote control of vehicles beyond line-of-sight as follows:

1. We suggest two categories, one for remote driving used as an add-on to self-driving (where the company would fall under automated vehicle licensing requirements); and another for ‘independemt’ remote driving (such companies would need to get a separate license as an ‘Entity for Remote Driver Operation’ (ERDO) ).
2. Remote driving from abroad should be banned until appropriate international agreements are in place to provide appropriate enforcement.
3. Victims of road traffic collisions involving remote drivers should be entitled to no-fault compensation on a similar basis to the insurance provisions for automated vehicles.
4. Responsibility for maintaining safety in areas beyond the remote driver’s knowledge or control should lie with the organization not the individual.
5. In the short-term, we concluded that the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 should be amended to include a new prohibition.?Beyond line-of-sight remote driving should only be allowed with an in-vehicle safety driver unless there is a ‘Vehicle Special Order’ (VSO) in place.?The VSO would provide exemptions from or modifications of those construction and use regulations which developers highlighted as problematic.

Most notable from the U.K. Law Commission’s recommendations are the use of a safety driver and a ban on remote driving “from abroad.”?Such a ban would have negated the MWC Barcelona-to-Berlin demonstration.?It seems like a minor point, but the implications are serious. In the event of a mishap, a remote driver would be beyond the reach of relevant enforcement authorities.?

Such a ban would also remove remote driving from the realm of a potential outsourcing activity at least for now.?It’s an amusing idea to ponder, though.?Overseas remote driving sweatshops delivering cars or goods from far away – maybe not that far in the future??Or remote automated driving??Put a pin in that.

The dependence on wireless connectivity is the key takeaway.?If ever there was a network designed for the low latency demands of teleoperation of vehicles it is 5G.?The remote driver no matter how near or far is only as good as the local wireless connection.?Remote control highlights this dependency as never before.

This potential point of failure – wireless connectivity - also highlights the need for collaboration between remote control and built-in vehicle control systems.?When connectivity fails, there must be a fall back.

This is where Emergency Stop Assistance technology comes into play.?Already widely available in human driven luxury cars from Lexus, BMW, Polestar, Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Ford, and Cadillac, Emergency Stop Assistance is designed to detect driver inattention or incapacitation and safely slow the vehicle to a stop..?

Remote control car sharing operator Imperium Drive has added so-called minimum risk maneuver technology to its cars currently operating in Milton Keynes.?If connectivity fails, the cars will slow to a stop and, if possible, pull over.?(Emergency Stop Assistance normally only stops in the existing travel lane.)

Emergency Stop Assistance technology is an increasingly popular element of advanced driver assistance systems and comes integrated with driver monitoring systems (mandated for new cars in the E.U. since June 2022).?These systems are designed to slow a vehicle to a stop in the travel lane in the event of driver inattention or incapacitation.

Which brings me to one final note, which is that though the occurrence of driver inattention or incapacitation may be infrequent, the emergency stop assistance function has its own risks to both the drivers of the effected vehicles and oncoming cars.?

The feature generally stops the car gently in the current lane of travel – switches on the flashers – summons emergency assistance – and unlocks the doors.?There are those who believe that higher frequency flashing ought to be employed to alert approaching and passing motorists and emergency responders that a medical emergency is in progress.?Where appropriate, I’d have to agree.

The long and the short of the matter is that cars will be increasingly driving themselves or be driven from afar.?This brave new world of enhanced driving demands reliable wireless connectivity and dependable failsafe solutions such as Emergency Stop Assistance – coming soon to a car near you.

The broader implications of remote control of vehicles are worth pondering, especially in the context of existing solutions.?Both General Motors and Hyundai vehicles are already equipped with remote vehicle slow down functionality used in cooperation with law enforcement to intercept stolen vehicles (provided the stolen vehicle is in sight of law enforcement officers).?Robotaxis from Cruise have shown some emergency stop assistance functionality in San Francisco and Waymo vehicles have shown some remote control capabilities in the wild.

The possibilities are endless.?Ford has filed patents on a solution designed to enable the remote recovery of vehicles from delinquent consumers.?Remote control of commercial and industrial vehicles, such as mining equipment, are well known – often managed via private wireless networks.

Multiple jurisdictions actually require that autonomous vehicles come equipped with teleoperation capabilities.?So it seems that one way or another at some future date human beings are going to be kicked out of the driver seat.?Until that time comes, the machines will be watching the humans just to make sure we are paying attention – and if we aren’t paying attention, they’ll always be there to save the day, right?