Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Sheetal.Pandey
User Rank
Manager
Re: Car-to-Car
Sheetal.Pandey   2/26/2014 12:02:49 PM
NO RATINGS
car to car talk is the futuristic feature and soon would become quite useful. The standards used and regulation is something to watch for. Also there are so many car manufacturer would this communication be independant of mfr. or each of them would have their proprietary. 

krisi
User Rank
CEO
Re: Car-to-Car
krisi   2/6/2014 4:18:57 PM
NO RATINGS
Why would I want to pay for an extra camera that serves no useful function in my mind? Thankfully reason prevailed and this wasn't mandated...thank you car industry for dragging your feet! Kris

krisi
User Rank
CEO
Re: Car-to-Car
krisi   2/6/2014 4:16:46 PM
NO RATINGS
I agree Bert this is posisble to accomplish...and km to miles conversion is so dumb simple that I am still amazed that multi-million dollar programs trip over this (including US rocket launch)...but car is a car, I want 100% probablity that it will drive, not 99% like my PC working or not 95% that WiFi will be working (I was visiting a major US University recently and my laptop would refuse to read emails despite having correct PHY connectivity, probalem was at the MAC or higher level of hierarchy)...and I don't want my car operation being dependent on talking to some other car...Kris

Bert22306
User Rank
CEO
Re: Car-to-Car
Bert22306   2/6/2014 4:07:40 PM
NO RATINGS
Bert, I can read your post too...hurray!, US English to Canadian English translation is working well ;-)...the reason is that Internet was invented and build quickly around the globe...

I agree that this is not always the case, but the reason that devices can interoperate over the Internet is that those who develop the protocols have so far seen the advantage of doing it this way. Enlightened self-interest.

Where I work, we used to have a complicated scheme of Softswitch gateways, to allow our IP, SNA, IPX, and DECnet networks in the company to interoperate. It didn't work very well, because naturally, it was practically impossible to make all the features of each protocol translate correctly into an equivalent feature of another protocol.

So, the auto industry can take it upon itself to follow the example of the IETF, or actually participate and use the IETF to ensure interoperability.

Different units of measure are no problem. Software can easily convert between them. All you need there is to identify the measurement standard along with the measurement, when you write the message standard. Or alternatively, the message frames can be mandated to always use the same system, say the metric system, and then any local display of the information can translate to the user's preference. (My car already allows this, btw, for the instrument panel.)

Analog radio, old-style vinyl records, and even CDs, have always interoperated globally. It's not impossible to achieve this. If there's a will, that is.

LarryM99
User Rank
CEO
Standards definition
LarryM99   2/6/2014 3:38:07 PM
NO RATINGS
I agree with the decentralized nature of the V2V discussed here. It is very tempting to try to centralize this, similar to centralized Air Traffic Control. As the article says, the latencies would be a real problem. That being said, there are still a lot of details to be worked out. Presumably the communications protocol would be self-describing and versioned, which would eliminate the "inches versus meters" problem mentioned earlier. If it included identification information and vehicle information (specifically speed) then police radar would become unnecessary (there's a selling point for you...). It would become very easy to put fixed receivers in place to track at least how many cars pass a particular point and potentially exactly who they are (another boon for the police). My first thought was that a decentralized implementation would have fewer privacy concerns, but that lasted about two minutes.

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Car-to-Car
junko.yoshida   2/6/2014 3:14:19 PM
NO RATINGS
@BrainiacVI, exactly. The auto industry is famous for dragging its heels.

Aside from seat belts, there is also an issue with backup cameras. The idea was to equip all new cars with backup camera so that drivers can see what's behind their car. It was almost mandated last year, but it fell through.  Here's a clip from Auotmotive News.

DOT proposed rules in 2010 that would have required backup cameras in all new cars and light trucks. Final rules were delayed multiple times after automakers and White House officials raised concerns over costs. Before leaving office this year, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood set a new goal of completing the standards by 2015.

krisi
User Rank
CEO
Re: adoption
krisi   2/6/2014 1:23:22 PM
NO RATINGS
I agree Zewde...unless government decides to mandate this technology it will be useless...hopefully there is enough push back against any attempts to legislate this...I don't want my car to be networked to anything!...the givernment should focus on delivering something useful like public transportation, buses are much more efficient than cars and they can network them as much as they want, I won't be behind the weel...Kris

BrainiacVI
User Rank
CEO
Re: Car-to-Car
BrainiacVI   2/6/2014 1:14:38 PM
NO RATINGS
Selt belts were fought tooth and nail and some people still don't see the advantages of them.

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Blogger
Re: adoption
junko.yoshida   2/6/2014 12:40:53 PM
NO RATINGS
@zewde, obviously, this won't happen overnight. But either a mandate (needs rulemaking) or an industry auotmotive safety rating (safety stars?) could help propel the penetration of cars with DSRC technology.

krisi
User Rank
CEO
Re: Car-to-Car
krisi   2/6/2014 12:26:27 PM
NO RATINGS
Bert, I can read your post too...hurray!, US English to Canadian English translation is working well ;-)...the reason is that Internet was invented and build quickly around the globe...other communication standards are different story...and I wil mention again km to mile translation, major engineering projects (space rockets, missiles, cars) failed because someone forgot to convert to units...I really don't want to have more technology in my car pls, I just to want to drive! Kris

Page 1 / 3   >   >>


Flash Poll
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Max Maxfield

Energizing the Young Engineers of Tomorrow
Max Maxfield
16 comments
It doesn't seem all that long ago when I was a bright-eyed, bushy-tailed young engineer. Now I feel like an old fool, but where are we going to find one at this time of the day (LOL)?

Jolt Judges and Andrew Binstock

Jolt Awards: The Best Books
Jolt Judges and Andrew Binstock
1 Comment
As we do every year, Dr. Dobb's recognizes the best books of the last 12 months via the Jolt Awards -- our cycle of product awards given out every two months in each of six categories. No ...

Engineering Investigations

Air Conditioner Falls From Window, Still Works
Engineering Investigations
2 comments
It's autumn in New England. The leaves are turning to red, orange, and gold, my roses are in their second bloom, and it's time to remove the air conditioner from the window. On September ...

David Blaza

The Other Tesla
David Blaza
5 comments
I find myself going to Kickstarter and Indiegogo on a regular basis these days because they have become real innovation marketplaces. As far as I'm concerned, this is where a lot of cool ...