PAVE’s Safety Experts state their own approach is Reckless and Untenable

It’s all here — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45mJGYiqrxY&feature=youtu.be

Over and over again the three human factors experts state handover L2/3 cannot be made safe enough to be used to develop and test these systems in the public domain. They state the obvious. You cannot provide humans enough time to regain proper situational awareness in time critical systems, people zone out no matter what you do and it gets worse as these systems get better. Unfortunately, these folks offer no real solution. That is because they are unaware DoD/aerospace simulation technology can create a legitimate digital twin. This will facilitate most of the public shadow and safety driving be moved to it from the real world. (Of course that simulation is informed and validated by the real world) The current simulation technology being used cannot come anywhere close to being able to do this because they have severe technical limitations brought on by using gaming technology and approaches.

More in my articles here. Including how to do this right.

The Autonomous Vehicle Industry can be Saved by doing the Opposite of what is being done now to create this technology

· https://medium.com/@imispgh/the-autonomous-vehicle-industry-can-be-saved-by-doing-the-opposite-of-what-is-being-done-now-b4e5c6ae9237

Proposal for Successfully Creating an Autonomous Ground or Air Vehicle

· https://medium.com/@imispgh/proposal-for-successfully-creating-an-autonomous-ground-or-air-vehicle-539bb10967b1

Simulation can create a Complete Digital Twin of the Real World if DoD/Aerospace Technology is used

Simulation Photorealism is almost Irrelevant for Autonomous Vehicle Development and Testing

· https://medium.com/@imispgh/simulation-photorealism-is-almost-irrelevant-for-autonomous-vehicle-development-and-testing-136871dee440

Autonomous Vehicles Need to Have Accidents to Develop this Technology

Using the Real World is better than Proper Simulation for AV Development — NONSENSE

The Hype of Geofencing for Autonomous Vehicles

Remote Control for Autonomous Vehicles — A far worse idea than the use of Public “Safety” Driving

· https://medium.com/@imispgh/remote-control-for-autonomous-vehicles-a-far-worse-idea-than-the-use-of-public-shadow-safety-df2ad64772c6

My name is Michael DeKort — I am a former system engineer, engineering and program manager for Lockheed Martin. I worked in aircraft simulation, the software engineering manager for all of NORAD, the Aegis Weapon System, and on C4ISR for DHS.

Key Industry Participation

- Founder SAE On-Road Autonomous Driving Simulation Task Force

- Member SAE ORAD Verification and Validation Task Force

- Stakeholder for UL4600 — Creating AV Safety Guidelines

- Member of the IEEE Artificial Intelligence & Autonomous Systems Policy Committee (AI&ASPC)

- Presented the IEEE Barus Ethics Award for Post 9/11 Efforts

My company is Dactle

We are building an aerospace/DoD/FAA level D, full L4/5 simulation-based testing and AI system with an end-state scenario matrix to address several of the critical issues in the AV/OEM industry I mentioned in my articles below. This includes replacing 99.9% of public shadow and safety driving. As well as dealing with significant real-time, model fidelity and loading/scaling issues caused by using gaming engines and other architectures. (Issues Unity will confirm. We are now working together. We are also working with UAV companies). If not remedied these issues will lead to false confidence and performance differences between what the Plan believes will happen and what actually happens. If someone would like to see a demo or discuss this further please let me know.

Written by

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store