AN OLD joke
among pilots asks: what do you need to fly a modern aeroplane?
The answer is a computer, a pilot and a dog.
The computer’s job is to fly the plane.
The pilot’s job is to feed the dog.
The dog’s job is to bite the pilot if he tries to touch anything.
It may be
an exaggeration, but not by much: most long-haul flights are handled by autopilots
from just after take-off
until right before landing. And if the airport has the necessary technology,
even the landing can be handed to the computer.
Computerised
control of transport is not new: the first autopilot, which allows a plane
to maintain a steady course without
pilot intervention, was developed in 1912.
Two problems
have been behind their stubborn no-show: one technical, the other psychological.
Computer-driven cars have proved technically more difficult than aeroplanes
or trains because of the terrain on which
they travel. Aeroplanes spend much of the time in relatively empty skies,
and the “stacks” they join while waiting to land
at airports are tightly controlled by human decision-makers on the ground.
Flying a
plane is simple enough that many modern autopilots use Intel’s veteran 80386
processor—at 24 years old,
an antediluvian relic in computing terms, with less horsepower than the chip
found in a modern mobile phone.
Trains,
meanwhile, are conceptually simple: they can only move forwards or backwards,
and most of the time drivers
need only watch for red signals and keep the train moving at the right speed.
Cars are
more complicated because they must navigate a road system that is much more
extensive and much less
standardised than a rail network. Roads are anarchic places compared with
railways, which tend to be fenced off.
That helps to stop people or animals getting on to the tracks.
An automatic
car would have to deal with all sorts of unexpected hazards, from accidents
in other cars, to steering
clear of emergency-service vehicles, to stopping when a football rolls out
into the road—with a child,
still hidden from view, in hot pursuit.
Yet engineers
are still working on the problem because the advantages are so enticing.
Once cars can reliably
sense hazards, they will react far faster than people. Communication between
cars would allow traffic speeds to be
optimised, and avoid the wasteful overtaking and slowing down that people
are so fond of
(and which helps, paradoxically, to cause traffic jams).
It could
also revolutionise car design. With little need for human input, a car’s
traditional layout could be abandoned in
favour of sofas, televisions, tables and even beds. That vision is slowly
moving towards reality.
An €800m ($1.1 billion) European project made headlines in 1994 when a pair
of driverless vehicles drove through
heavy Parisian traffic at speeds up to 80mph for 625 miles with only occasional
human intervention.
A more recent
competition to find the best computer-controlled car was organised by DARPA,
America’s military
research agency. In 2007 a converted Chevy Tahoe navigated 40 miles of urban-style
driving on an airbase in California,
obeying all the traffic laws, merging into traffic and averaging 14mph, to
win a $2m prize. What may prove harder to
overcome is the psychological reluctance that people have to handing control
to a computer, albeit one that is lightning
quick and tireless.
One of the
reasons aeroplanes are able to be computerised so extensively is that passengers
are unaware of when they
are being flown by the pilot and when they are controlled by a computer.
Although it may seem odd to see no driver on a
train, passengers on trains are not used to being in control even when a
driver is in charge, as is also the case with aeroplanes.
Yet even
if people could be persuaded to give up their steering wheels for reasons
of safety and comfort, many enjoy
driving their cars. It is hard to see how a computerised car can be reconciled
with the idea of driving for pleasure.
But the slow
rate at which the technological obstacles are being tackled could help overcome
the psychological ones.
Many experts reckon fully autonomous, self-driving cars are two to three
decades away, and that they will arrive through
lots of little changes rather than a single revolutionary invention.
The computers
have already begun their takeover: computer-controlled cruise control, which
uses laser or radar to maintain
distance from the car in front, has been available since the late 1990s.
Several manufacturers, including Mercedes-Benz
and Volvo, offer cars that will brake automatically if they detect an imminent
collision with a vehicle in front. The system is
advanced enough to handle cutting in from the side. Even if the driver does
react in time, the computer will provide extra
power to the brakes to avoid a collision.
In 2007
Lexus, the luxury marque of Japanese car-giant Toyota, brought out a car
featuring semi-automatic parallel parking:
the driver tells the car where he wants it parked and the machine does the
rest. If the computer takeover happens slowly
and imperceptibly, it will be easier to learn to live with.