Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Saturday August 15 2015, @04:32PM   Printer-friendly
from the Less-space-than-a-nomad dept.

Apple is building a self-driving car in Silicon Valley, and is scouting for secure locations in the San Francisco Bay area to test it, the Guardian has learned. Documents show the oft-rumoured Apple car project appears to be further along than many suspected.

In May, engineers from Apple’s secretive Special Project group met with officials from GoMentum Station, a 2,100-acre former naval base near San Francisco that is being turned into a high-security testing ground for autonomous vehicles.

In correspondence obtained by the Guardian under a public records act request, Apple engineer Frank Fearon wrote: “We would ... like to get an understanding of timing and availability for the space, and how we would need to coordinate around other parties who would be using [it].”

Automobile manufacturing is a radical departure from Apple's core business. Can they pull it off?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by RedBear on Saturday August 15 2015, @08:20PM

    by RedBear (1734) on Saturday August 15 2015, @08:20PM (#223346)

    Curious that it is never mentioned in the summary (although the word appears in the article) that it is supposed to be a fully battery-electric vehicle like the Nissan LEAF or Tesla Model S/X. To my mind this is the most important aspect of the vehicle, that yet another non-car company believes they can put out a BEV and compete with all the traditional car companies (and Tesla). This is another sign to me that the electric car is finally here to stay and can't be killed off anymore. I believe that if they manage to come out with something with decent range and styling it will be quite popular and will prove yet another kick in the gut to the traditional automakers. Imagine if they actually did the smart thing and built the charging costs into the price of the car so they could accept Tesla's offer to share in their Supercharger network. Any other BEV that has the ability to use Tesla's Supercharger network will immediately be extremely popular. The other main "standard" high-speed charging options (CHAdeMO and CCS) still have significantly lower market penetration and much lower charging speeds. By the time Apple's car comes out there will be Superchargers all over North America and Europe and significant penetration in the Asian countries.

    The fact that the car may have some autonomous driving features is just a side effect of the fact that this is becoming one of the new defining features to improve driving safety and draw people to buy new cars. Articles like this are really a distraction from the important bit about the fact that a company that makes computers and cellphones thinks it's time to make a car. And they have plenty of cash on hand to outdo Tesla at its own game and put out something pretty good right out of the starting gate. Apple's participation in the EV market will create even more interest in EVs from mainstream car buyers and will cause other car companies to speed up their own tepid plans for EVs for fear that they will end up losing market share to Apple, of all things. And if Apple's vehicle is successful, who wants to bet that some other big tech companies like Samsung won't immediately try to do the same thing? I certainly wouldn't bet against that possibility. Even if you hate Apple as a company and hate all their products, you have to admit that they have several times acted as a fulcrum that moves entire markets and industries in a new direction.

    If Apple really does this, the whole auto manufacturer landscape could look significantly different 10-15 years from now.

    --
    ¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
    ... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday August 15 2015, @08:30PM

    by frojack (1554) on Saturday August 15 2015, @08:30PM (#223349) Journal

    Range doesn't matter unless you own the vehicle.

    If, as some speculate, Apple does not plan to sell to individuals, but rather provide taxi-like rentals of driverless vehicles in big cities, the fact that it has to go charge itself after taking you to the office each morning really won't bother you. You won't have to bother with it.

    By the way, the vast majority of charging stations in this country have nothing to do with Tesla.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 2) by RedBear on Saturday August 15 2015, @09:10PM

      by RedBear (1734) on Saturday August 15 2015, @09:10PM (#223360)

      That's a hell of a speculation that I put no stock in. There are still too many tests to be done and regulations to be written before fully autonomous vehicles are going to be allowed to drive around by themselves on public roads. It will be years before you'll be able to order up a self-driving taxi. No, people are going to want to own these things.

      I am perfectly well aware that most of the public charging infrastructure has nothing to do with Tesla. It's also mostly level 2 charging with the standard J1772 plug. Great for nightly home charging or charging during work. But I was referring to the available high speed charging options. So far Tesla's Supercharger network is the only one that is capable of charging a high-range vehicle fast enough to impress even mainstream drivers who still pretty much view BEVs as a joke. The fact that you normally don't need any type of quick charging option just doesn't register with traditional drivers. So the existence of the Supercharger network is a huge asset to Tesla. It makes people psychologically comfortable with buying a Tesla BEV rather than some range-extended hybrid.

      --
      ¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
      ... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
      • (Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday August 16 2015, @12:36AM

        by frojack (1554) on Sunday August 16 2015, @12:36AM (#223401) Journal

        There are still too many tests to be done and regulations to be written before fully autonomous vehicles are going to be allowed to drive around by themselves on public roads.

        Are yee daft mon?

        4 states currently license the use of self driving cars on the public roads in normal traffic.

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 2) by RedBear on Sunday August 16 2015, @11:20AM

          by RedBear (1734) on Sunday August 16 2015, @11:20AM (#223505)

          Are yee daft mon?
          4 states currently license the use of self driving cars on the public roads in normal traffic.

          'Tis yee who art daft, me boyo.

          Those licenses are only for testing purposes and there must be a qualified human driver at the wheel ready to take over at all times. That does not fit the definition of a "fully autonomous vehicle" capable of driving itself to meet you and then driving itself back to some charging station with no human occupant.

          No public officials are going to allow cars to drive themselves on public roads without a supervising human test driver sitting at the wheel for quite some time, until the technology has matured and been proven many times over to actually be more reliable than a human driver under all testable circumstances. My guess is a minimum of 7-12 years for this progression of testing and validation. That's just the way it is. The technology is still in its early stages. It's progressing quickly but still needs extensive testing. If nothing else we still need to work out insurance rates and legal/liability issues around what happens when there is finally a horrible accident involving one or more fully autonomous vehicles. Bad weather, bad luck and human drivers guarantee a major accident will eventually happen. With no driver, who do you blame? Who do you sue? Who goes to jail, if anyone? Is the manufacturer liable, or just the vehicle owner? Why, or why not? These and many other questions need answers.

          Depending on the circumstances around the first few major accidents (a few kids getting run over, for instance) there could easily be an irrational fear-based public backlash against self-driving cars that would bring the whole idea to a screeching halt for another 20 years. Seeing fully autonomous vehicles on the road in the near future is very far from any kind of a sure thing. Therefore for Apple to be planning on selling their electric car as nothing but a self-driving taxi makes very little sense to me.

          --
          ¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
          ... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
  • (Score: 2) by Username on Sunday August 16 2015, @07:31AM

    by Username (4557) on Sunday August 16 2015, @07:31AM (#223466)

    Samsung has been making electric vehicles since the 70s. It’s just they’re all industrial vehicles like forklifts, cranes, mining dollies, etc. They’ve had the technology to make an electric car for a long time, but I’m guessing they haven’t entered the market since it’s not profitable. Once it is, I bet they will start making cars. Then apple will probably sue them, and get the courts to block the sales of the samsung cars even though samsung had the technology for years.