About time to be realistic about self-driving cars

Time to be realistic when it comes to self-driving cars! What do we as customers need in our daily lives when it comes to transportation and when it comes to making use of the time we are being transported? Do we need self-driving cars replacing cars we need to drive? No, we don’t! Do we need transport as a service? Yes, we do! Self-driving cars, only for replacing cars driven by humans, are mainly needed by entrepreneurs and investors, to raise money for the development of Technology and then selling off, or to make profits on successful investments respectively. Not necessarily because the entrepreneurs succeeded with their Tech vision, but because there was a big enough hype to generate a huge profit for those who sold before the bubble burst, and consequently a huge loss for those who bought too late. Nothing wrong with that except of course for the total absence of Customer focus.

An easy and in this case adequate way to divide or categorize the world’s population, is to say that we are either living in cities, or we are living in the countryside. And because an ever-increasing number of people are moving from the countryside to a city, the accumulated distances needed for daily and individual transport get drastically shorter, which brings us to a situation where more and more people do not see the need to own, or even use, a car.

In the transition from being able to own and having to drive your car for daily commuting and other needs of transportation, to instead solve this need with a service that you order and pay for only when used, the brilliant of idea shared and hailed transport and self-driving cars has surfaced as the solution for most everything imaginable. In fact, the electric cars are the solution to some environmental problems, but they certainly do not have to be self-driving for that. But, and this is a big but, the self-driving car does not really solve the Customer need for better and more efficient transportation, it might solve the needs for all kinds of other business interests that want to profit from getting undivided access to the Customer while being transported. Here is why it is time to get realistic about self-driving cars:

The self-driving car is said to be much more utilized, so the total number of cars on the roads decreases drastically. It does not matter if the self-driving car is part of a ride hailing service (and not very convenient for the Customer who wants a personalized transportation experience) or owned by the Customer, the number people who are prepared to pay the premium for individual transportation will be the same, so no less cars on the road. During the rush hour traffic peaks, where most people need transportation, a lot more self-driving cars would be needed than during other times of the day, no difference to now, there will be as many, if not more cars on the streets during rush hour (why would there be more ride sharing compared to now when it is said that the self-driving car could be an extension of your home?), and the problem with congestion is not solved just because traffic will be “safer” or “smoother”. If the self-driving car is only to be used downtown and with low speeds, it can be more compact, but most of the commuting where “lots of valuable time can be used for more important things than driving” is driving also on highways from the suburbs… Measures to ease rush hour traffic can be implemented with or without self-driving cars.

With self-driving cars, a lot less valuable real estate space is needed for parking. True, some less parking space in terms of area and accessibility is needed, but as the actual demand for transportation will not decrease (unless a lot of people suddenly shift to public transportation), and as transportation mostly is needed during rush hours, also the self-driving car needs to be parked somewhere close to where it will be needed at next traffic peak, unless it just drives around idle on the roads waiting for transportation requests (but then it will increase rather than decrease congestion). And rest assured, the property owner’s revenue from today’s parking spaces will be added to office and shop rent fees. If there was a more profitable way to use underground parking space, it would be used for that.

With self-driving cars, why should those who now use public transportation, switch? In big cities, there already is an infrastructure with public transportation such as buses, trams, subways and taxis. The passengers already have access to wi-fi for work or entertainment. Some might be prepared to pay extra for a personal transportation device, but many who use a car today, might also switch to public transportation as it gets better and better. The self-driving car might be cheap initially, while there is still belief in another big hype, collecting and selling Big Data, but eventually there will be a need to charge the Customer to cover costs and make profit, and then public transportation will be a lot cheaper. Except for taxis, the rent bicycles are another existing solution for “last mile” transportation. Sure, there will be more space for you and your coffee in a self-driving vehicle compared to public transportation, but why would it be more comfortable, convenient or efficient than being driven by a human driver? There will be nobody to open the door for you, or get your heavy suitcase in and out of the trunk. Comparing to the metro or tram or bus, all weighing at least ten times more than the car, it certainly will be a jerkier ride on the bumpy roads of today, and even if (self) driving carefully and with planning ahead, if an average speed comparable to the metro is to be achieved, there needs to be accelerating and braking and cornering pulling more g’s than the metro.

As for the countryside, the Customers are inherently more self-reliant and for sure will still want to drive themselves, of course safety related and functions for convenience, that avoid or mitigate crashes and replace or assist the driver in well-defined driving situations, will be a request. Also, cars with enough space for “countryside” transportation needs and sufficient structural integrity for safe driving on countryside roads and at highway speeds will be requested.

It would be more rational but less sexy to define the transportation needs for Customers in cities and countryside, than to try adding the Tech aspect to the Freedom machine image of the car. With a more rational approach, a more diverse range of road vehicle products would be developed, without the prejudice that there will be absolutely nobody who wants to drive self anymore, and without the totally unrealistic promise to deliver a self-driving car that is truly autonomous in any current traffic environment. The Customer could choose from a range of road vehicle products that are tailored (optimized) to their actual usage instead of “extensions of our homes” (which by the way indicates we would own them, unless of course our home is a part of a cooperative) or robot taxis feeling like public toilets. Self-driving cars and buses would be used in cities or areas where they are kept separated from people who are not inside such vehicles, just like in the metro. But if the “new” automotive industry only talks about rational solutions, it would be harder to attract investor money.

It is time to ignore the cherry picking sci-fi nonsense, and request more realism and serious care about the Customer need for self-driving cars! DRIVE2ARRIVE.

?Birger Schlaich 2017