AD #2198 – Daimler Tests V2V Platooning, OEMs Don’t Like Paying Tesla EV Credits, Subaru & Suzuki Tokyo Concepts

September 26th, 2017 at 11:49am

Runtime: 7:34

To watch this episode on YouTube click here.

- The North American Commercial Truck Show
- Daimler Trucks Tests Platooning in the U.S.
- Mercedes Teases New Sprinter Van
- Subaru VIZIV Performance Concept
- Suzuki Concept Has Jeep Flare
- Automakers Don’t Like California’s EV Mandate
- Super Cruise Takes CT6 Fleet Cross Country

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone , Dow Automotive Systems , Lear Corporation and Hyundai.

»Subscribe to Podcast | iTunes | RSS | Listen on Phone Stitcher | YouTube

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

18 Comments to “AD #2198 – Daimler Tests V2V Platooning, OEMs Don’t Like Paying Tesla EV Credits, Subaru & Suzuki Tokyo Concepts”

  1. Lisk Says:

    On the “platooning” of trucks, this is the last thing I want to encounter in my travels. If you’re on;y talking a pair of trucks, maybe this is ok, but from the the way most articles I read, they are talking about 10- or so trucks in a string. That is going to end up in a lot of frustration. And how are that many trucks going to change lanes in a smooth movement? Another idea that works on paper, but will fall short in the real world.

  2. Lex Says:

    I hope Subaru is going to incorporate some of the styling of previous Viziv concepts into the new Forester SUV for 2018.

  3. Lambo2015 Says:

    Daimler Platooning; Seems like a great way to take advantage of drafting and the fuel economy implications. Just wonder how the systems works to allow other vehicles entering the Hwy especially when you get 4 or 5 trucks platooning together? Also wonder how the cost impact will be distributed as that lead truck takes the lower MPG hit and everyone behind benefits.

  4. Lex Says:

    Then a number of vehicles are platooning what happens in an emergency situation like an vehicle accident or tree falling across the road or bad weather? All these platooning semi’s could jack knife all across the highway and cause even more injuries and property damage. Will these platooning vehicles have indicator lights or signage so I can get far away from them?

  5. Wim van Acker Says:

    @3: how about adjusting platoon size to traffic conditions? Road empty: 4,5, N trucks in a row. Road busy: split in pairs, or singles. That is not too hard, isn’t it?

  6. Wim van Acker Says:

    @4: then the vehicles will simply slow down or brake. Better than a human driver.

    IMHO, instead of asking what an automated would do if it has to brake, the right questions are along the lines of “what happens if the human driver is intoxicated, distracted, tired, looking for a purse, looking for a radio station, checking e mails or texting, looking for a phone number, …?” The answer: >30,000 casualties per year in the U.S. So, again IMHO, it can only get better by developing advanced driving technology which can replace partly or entirely the human driver. We believe we are great at driving; the figures prove that we are not.

  7. Kit Gerhart Says:

    How about re-establishing more railroads? That is a much more efficient means of platooning, without all of those redundant power trains, and we don’t have to share the road with them, as we wait an hour for the dithering vehicle to overtake the 1/4 mile long platoon.

  8. Wim van Acker Says:

    @7: more rail cargo would be great.

    I believe the right of existence for platooning is not if it beats rail cargo, it is whether it beats single trucks. Which share of cargo goes over rail or road is independent from the question whether you can make road transportation more safe and efficient.

    Having done work on multi-modal freight economics in the past: a minimum distance is needed to justify a different mode of transportation, since trucks are needed for the front end and the back end of most supply chains anyway.

  9. Lisk Says:

    Another problem I see with platooning is all the trucks will have to have near identical power teams, trailers, and cargo weights or else the the who;e operation will have to slow down to the slowest in the group. A flatbed hauling steel beams will not be able to interact with one hauling flat screen tvs.

  10. Lambo2015 Says:

    So maybe before cars can leave the factory and autonomously show up at the dealer or your house, as mentioned in last weeks AD, They will load up on a car carrier and be driven by an autonomous platooned semi. Hum which will come first?

  11. Roger T Says:

    platooning trucks – lots of cars now can drive themselves following the car ahead, even Tesla´s autopilot considers the track of the car ahead in the absence of road markings.
    #4 – I agree, platooning saves fuel if trucks follow closely, if the one ahead crashes, there would be a high likelihood they all would.
    #5 – You have a point. Platooning in traffic would be trickier as cars change lanes quickly and often, increasing likelihood of breaking the train, particularly where each truck will have different acceleration profiles due to load & truck characteristics.
    #7 – completely agree with you. Trains are not as effective for shorter distances, yet platooning would be more useful for longer rides, too, so they could be competing technologies.

  12. Lambo2015 Says:

    #4 & #11 Per the explaination in a previous episode the interaction between trucks is milliseconds. So essentially as the brake is applied on the first truck it is applied on all the trucks. Again, “theoretically” they should be able to make a hard stop without colliding. However knowing that the road is filled with trucks with a mass range from 25,000 lbs to 80,000 lbs that is unrealistic. The system would have to account for weight and assume all trucks brakes and tires are the same, leaving lots of room for error.

  13. G.A.Branigan Says:

    I don’t know if the regs have changed since the time I drove over the road rigs.It used to be we were confined to 80k lbs,(40 tons).Even brand new rigs,loaded to max legal weight,cannot stop on a dime. I personally don’t like the idea of platooning.

  14. Kit Gerhart Says:

    G.A., In looking up stopping distances for big trucks, I ran across an article saying that there is a delay between pressing the pedal and brake actuation with air brakes. Is that true?

  15. Bob Wilson Says:

    So how many EV credits bought from Tesla are needed for: (1) Chevy Volt or Bolt; (2) Ford C-MAX or Fusion, or (3) Chrysler Pacifica plug-in?

    The answer is NONE. Want to drive Tesla out of business, then make all of your products work like the ones that do not need Tesla credits. If you want to sell them only in the CARB states, good!

    Of course they’ll have an interesting problem of all the buyers in non-CARB states, like this Alabamian, who flew to Rhode Island to buy a Prius Prime.

  16. Kit Gerhart Says:

    It seems that Chevy should expedite selling Bolts everywhere. Here, in central Indiana, people seem to want them. The local dealer traded for one, (it made the 160 mile trip fron Chicago), and more people want them. They realize that it would not work as an only car, for those who take extended highway trips, but would work well for most driving.

  17. Lambo2015 Says:

    #14 Kit Driving a vehicle with air brakes is different and it does have a slight delay in comparison to hydraulic brakes. Also most large trucks still use drum brakes which are a lot more susceptible to brake fade when they get hot due to the drum expansion. Hence the runaway ramps in the mountain states for the truckers that ignore the “use low gear” warnings. Pumping was not an option but ABS has been available for a while now and discs are becoming more popular.

  18. Kit Gerhart Says:

    #17 Thanks for info