對(duì)大多數(shù)的消費(fèi)者來(lái)說(shuō)，自動(dòng)駕駛車輛仍然會(huì)是未來(lái)式；雖然谷歌已經(jīng)展示了受歡迎的無(wú)人駕駛車輛，但那些在媒體上令人驚嘆的報(bào)導(dǎo)其實(shí)是唬人的成分比較多，我們其中有很多人恐怕無(wú)法活得夠長(zhǎng)，能看到自動(dòng)駕駛車輛滿街跑。 對(duì)消費(fèi)者來(lái)說(shuō)，無(wú)人駕駛車輛就像是飛行背包那樣的科幻產(chǎn)物；但相反的，對(duì)汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)來(lái)說(shuō)，自動(dòng)駕駛車輛是真實(shí)、急迫且重要的未來(lái)。為了讓該技術(shù)成真，產(chǎn)業(yè)界在今日的專心一致、工程資源的投入，以及明智的決策是有必要的，不能等到十年以后。 目前在汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)意見(jiàn)分歧的問(wèn)題是，各種V2X (vehicle to x)服務(wù)的程度到底該做到甚么程度──包括車輛對(duì)車輛通訊(vehicle to vehicle，V2V)、車輛對(duì)基礎(chǔ)建設(shè)通訊(vehicle to infrastructure，V2I)──才能讓未來(lái)的全自動(dòng)駕駛車輛成真？

谷歌自動(dòng)駕駛車輛
Yx4esmc

也就是說(shuō)，隨著智能車輛使用的先進(jìn)駕駛輔助系統(tǒng)(ADAS) 進(jìn)一步改善，以及LTE等蜂巢式通訊服務(wù)普及化，自動(dòng)駕駛車輛還需要等待未來(lái)專用的V2X嗎？市場(chǎng)研究機(jī)構(gòu) Strategy Analytics 的分析師Roger Lanctot 直言，主管機(jī)關(guān)的法令制定程序至少就要花上8年，再加上要讓足夠的車輛了解V2X恐怕要花15~20年時(shí)間：“基本上，那不會(huì)實(shí)現(xiàn)?！? 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 第二頁(yè)：四大因素顛覆2X概念原始藍(lán)圖 第三頁(yè)：拋開(kāi)LTE談愿景是個(gè)大錯(cuò)誤

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 自動(dòng)駕駛汽車前路漫漫而修遠(yuǎn)兮
• 自動(dòng)駕駛技術(shù)上路還有哪些問(wèn)題？
• 美國(guó)開(kāi)放無(wú)人駕駛車測(cè)試，掛牌上路還需時(shí)日Yx4esmc

{pagination} 四大因素顛覆2X概念原始藍(lán)圖 但目前有幾個(gè)因素可能會(huì)大幅改變由汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)與政府主管機(jī)關(guān)在幾年前所擬定的V2X概念原始藍(lán)圖。首先，橫掃汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)最大的一個(gè)因素就是智能手機(jī)；一位 ITS Japan的發(fā)言人最近接受EETimes訪問(wèn)時(shí)表示：“日本在2007年首度訂定V2I計(jì)劃時(shí)，我們根本想象不到智能手機(jī)會(huì)如此普及。” 此外，谷歌也是因素之一，該公司展示了不須V2X支援的半自動(dòng)駕駛車輛。“車輛內(nèi)建的雷射雷達(dá)(LIDAR)/ 雷達(dá)(RADAR)與攝影機(jī)技術(shù)并非V2X，”Strategy Analytics另一位汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)分析師Ian Riches表示：“該種車輛不進(jìn)行任何通訊，而是直接獨(dú)立感測(cè)周遭環(huán)境的其他車輛以及基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施?！?另外第三個(gè)因素則是布建V2X的成本；對(duì)此市場(chǎng)研究機(jī)構(gòu)Juniper Research的分析師Anthony Cox表示，V2X要真正運(yùn)作需要廣泛布建，且須要有高采用率(97%)才會(huì)真正有效；到目前為止，很難預(yù)測(cè)那會(huì)多快發(fā)生，但可以確定的是還有很長(zhǎng)一段路。 Cox指出：“要讓V2X技術(shù)進(jìn)駐車輛會(huì)是最大的挑戰(zhàn)；是有可能強(qiáng)制新車配備V2X技術(shù)，但問(wèn)題是如何讓V2X安裝在還有好幾年壽命的現(xiàn)有車輛上?！?第四個(gè)因素則是，除了美國(guó)正在考量應(yīng)用于V2V通訊、運(yùn)作于5.9GHz、以802.11p標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為基礎(chǔ)的專屬短距離通訊(Dedicated Short Range Communication，DSRC)技術(shù)，市面上還有太多其他可用的技術(shù)。對(duì)此Strategy Analytics的Lanctot 指出：“有太多替代方案能以感測(cè)器、電信或是Wi-Fi為基礎(chǔ)的技術(shù)，能提供與V2X差不多的性能?！? Lanctot補(bǔ)充指出：“最有可能崛起的替代技術(shù)是 LTE Advanced──該技術(shù)支援模組之間的近距離通訊，不一定要依賴塔臺(tái)通訊──與 WiFi Direct ，還有嵌入式數(shù)據(jù)機(jī)、以智能手機(jī)為基礎(chǔ)的技術(shù)。” 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 第三頁(yè)：拋開(kāi)LTE談愿景是個(gè)大錯(cuò)誤

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 自動(dòng)駕駛汽車前路漫漫而修遠(yuǎn)兮
• 自動(dòng)駕駛技術(shù)上路還有哪些問(wèn)題？
• 美國(guó)開(kāi)放無(wú)人駕駛車測(cè)試，掛牌上路還需時(shí)日Yx4esmc

{pagination} 拋開(kāi)LTE談愿景是個(gè)大錯(cuò)誤 此外Lanctot也表示，通用汽車(GM)與高通(Qualcomm)都提議將DSRC技術(shù)布建于手機(jī)，以支援行人偵測(cè)，但DSRC純粹主義者對(duì)此類應(yīng)用嗤之以鼻。將DSRC整合到智能手機(jī)里的概念值得玩味，這有可能解決如何改裝未配備DSRC車輛的問(wèn)題。 Strategy Analytics 的Riches則表示：“幾乎所有的車輛駕駛?cè)硕紦碛兄悄苁謾C(jī)，你有看過(guò)誰(shuí)沒(méi)有的嗎？”他認(rèn)為， LTE 平臺(tái)的使用，將可以更快地實(shí)現(xiàn)車隊(duì)的V2X功能。有一些批評(píng)者擔(dān)心LTE的延遲問(wèn)題；Riches也坦承這一點(diǎn)，并指出：“可能會(huì)有一些高度時(shí)間關(guān)鍵的狀況，但這類狀況通常用內(nèi)置傳感器來(lái)解決會(huì)比較好?！?市場(chǎng)研究機(jī)構(gòu)IHS的汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)首席分析師Egil Juliussen認(rèn)為，也許美國(guó)的V2X愿景最大錯(cuò)誤，就是在計(jì)劃過(guò)程中讓移動(dòng)通信業(yè)者缺席；他指出，移動(dòng)通信業(yè)者應(yīng)該是V2X的必要參與者，因?yàn)樗麄兊幕嘏_(tái)能與V2I整合，若不利用，V2X建置成本會(huì)高出很多。而在歐洲，移動(dòng)通信產(chǎn)業(yè)已經(jīng)主動(dòng)參與V2X的試驗(yàn)。 Strategy Analytics 的Riches也認(rèn)為，美國(guó)政府主管機(jī)關(guān)與汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)在V2X的發(fā)展上都避開(kāi)LTE：“這會(huì)是一個(gè)大錯(cuò)誤。”他進(jìn)一步解釋：“如果一些特定的車輛功能一定要連結(jié)到某種型態(tài)的V2X才能運(yùn)作，那些功能只能在路網(wǎng)或車隊(duì)大幅支援該種技術(shù)時(shí)才能起飛，但那必須要從頭開(kāi)始布建一個(gè)新網(wǎng)絡(luò)?！?產(chǎn)業(yè)界究竟將如何解決V2X缺乏可擴(kuò)展性的問(wèn)題還不清楚；Riches表示：“這有點(diǎn)瘋狂，沒(méi)有人能告訴我誰(shuí)要來(lái)解決這一切?！? 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 編譯：Judith Cheng 參考原文： If a Car’s Really 'Autonomous,' Why V2X?，by Junko Yoshida

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 自動(dòng)駕駛汽車前路漫漫而修遠(yuǎn)兮
• 自動(dòng)駕駛技術(shù)上路還有哪些問(wèn)題？
• 美國(guó)開(kāi)放無(wú)人駕駛車測(cè)試，掛牌上路還需時(shí)日Yx4esmc

{pagination} For most consumers, self-driving cars are still stuff of the future, despite Google's popular driverless car demo and its breathless coverage in some of the media's more gullible precincts. Many of us may not live long enough to be driven in one of those. Think jetpacks. In contrast, for the automotive industry, the future of autonomous cars is real, urgent, and significant. For this technology, the industry's undivided attention, engineering efforts, and smart decisions are needed today, not 10 years from now. The question splitting the automotive industry now is what level of V2X services -- including both communication between vehicles, V2V (vehicle to vehicle) services, and V2I (vehicle to infrastructure) services -- are necessary before the future of fully autonomous cars becomes reality. In other words, as the Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS) used in smartcars further improves, and cellular services such as LTE proliferate, do autonomous cars even need to wait for the elusive V2X future? Speaking of the lengthy regulatory process necessary to get the mandate done ("a minimum of eight years") and the time it takes ("15 to 20 years") to actually put a sufficient proportion of cars on the road to realize the V2X dream, Roger Lanctot, associate director of Strategy Analytics, bluntly told me, "Bottom line, this is really not going to happen." What changed? Several forces, currently at work, might dramatically change the original V2X concept from the blueprint initially drawn up by the automotive industry and government bureaucrats years ago. First, the biggest force sweeping the automotive industry today is the smartphone. "Back in 2007, when Japan originally mapped out the V2I plan, we've never imagined the proliferation of smartphones in this magnitude," observed a spokesman of ITS Japan in a recent interview with EE Times in Tokyo. There's also the Google factor. Google currently runs its semi-autonomous vehicles with no V2X support. "On-board LIDAR/RADAR/ camera technology is not V2X," stressed Ian Riches, Strategy Analytics' director responsible for global automotive practice. "The vehicle is not communicating with anything, but rather directly sensing its environment independently of every other vehicle and the infrastructure." A third factor is the cost to deploy V2X. Juniper Research's Anthony Cox, in his blog posted earlier this year, wrote: For V2X to really work it needs to be wide-scale and it is only truly effective if the take-up level is high (some suggest over 97%). To date there is little indication of how quickly this will happen but, for sure, it must be a long way off. Getting V2X technology into vehicles will be the biggest challenge. While it is possible that it could be mandated that new vehicles should be furnished with V2X technology, the challenge on how V2X should be installed in existing vehicles will remain for many years to come. Fourth, there are too many other technologies available now, beyond Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC) tech operating at the 5.9 GHz frequency based on 802.11p, whose mandate in a future car for V2V communication is being considered in the United States. Strategy Analytics' Lanctot noted, there are "too many alternative paths to delivering comparable performance [to V2X] from sensor-based, telecom-based or WiFi-based technologies." Lanctot added, "Most important likely and emerging alternatives are LTE Advanced -- which includes proximity communication between modules not requiring tower-only communication -- WiFi Direct, and both embedded modems and smartphone-based technologies." Further, "executives at both GM and Qualcomm have proposed handset deployment of DSRC technology, which may even enable pedestrian detection, though DSRC purists scoff at this." The very notion of integrating DSRC into smartphones is interesting. It could even bypass the quandary of how to retrofit cars without DSRC. Strategy Analytics' Riches told EE Times, "The smartphone is becoming ubiquitous amongst vehicle owners. When is the last time you took a drive without one?" He contends that leveraging the LTE platform could lead to a much more rapid rollout of V2X capabilities across the fleet. Of course, there are critics who are worried about LTE's latency issues. Riches, while conceding the point, noted, "They may have a point for some highly time-critical situations -- but these are the ones that are often better served with on-board sensors." Big mistake Perhaps, one of the biggest mistakes the United States is making in its vision for the future of V2X is the conspicuous absence of US mobile operators in the debate, according to Egil Juliussen, HIS Automotive's principal analyst responsible for infotainment and ADAS. He pointed out that cellular operators are natural partners for V2X, because their cell towers can integrate V2I. Without leveraging the cellular infrastructure to integrate V2I, V2X will be a much more expensive proposition. In contrast, he told us, in Europe, the mobile industry has been actively participating in V2X trials. Riches, pointing out that most government and big-industry developments are avoiding LTE, said, "That could be a big mistake." He elaborated: "If certain vehicle functions are only available when the car is connected via some form of V2X, then those functions can only take off when there is a significant proportion of the road network and/or fleet that supports those technologies. It's building a new network from scratch." How the industry will deal with V2X's lack of scalability remains unknown. "It's a bit crazy," Riches added, "and no one has really explained to me who is going to pay for it all." Meanwhile, Japan, which has gone ahead with building ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) spot services infrastructure, appears to be going through a major rethinking of its strategy. (See: Japan No Longer Gung-Ho on Vehicle-to-Infra Alone.)

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 自動(dòng)駕駛汽車前路漫漫而修遠(yuǎn)兮
• 自動(dòng)駕駛技術(shù)上路還有哪些問(wèn)題？
• 美國(guó)開(kāi)放無(wú)人駕駛車測(cè)試，掛牌上路還需時(shí)日Yx4esmc