Automated Highway System Field Operational Tests: Potential Sites, Configurations, and Characteristics

Author(s):  
Randolph W. Hall ◽  
Viral Thakker ◽  
Thomas A. Horan ◽  
Jesse Glazer ◽  
Chris Hoene

In 2002 the National Automated Highway System Consortium (NAHSC) is scheduled to complete its work on development of an automated highway system prototype. Upon completion of its mission, NAHSC is likely to be followed by one or more field operational tests (FOTs) in which ordinary drivers will use automated vehicles on a real roadway under test conditions. Described are objectives for such a test, potential test sites in California, and the merits of these sites for conducting different types of tests. The evaluation is based on interviews with local officials, visits to 14 sites around the state, and collection of detailed data on these highways. It is concluded that there exist many potential FOT sites provided that the federal government pays for a large portion of infrastructure costs and that the new infrastructure is turned over to local agencies upon completion of the test.


2000 ◽  
Vol 88 (7) ◽  
pp. 913-925 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Horowitz ◽  
P. Varaiya


Worldview ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 22 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 45-45
Author(s):  
Richard J. Barnet

The policy of the Carter administration is to increase substantially civil defense expenditures. In terms of moiney it is not a “majority priority,” since the administration plans to lock us into overall military expenditures on the order of $1.8 trillion in 1977 dollars by 1988. The justification for the increased civil defense expenditure’ is that it is a “modest” increase in response to demands for a much bigger program and a counter to the Soviet program. There is a strong pork barrel element in the program too. Just as civil defense was the justification for building the nation's highway, system, it is now being quietly presented to local officials as a way to get some money into local communities in a time of austerity. It is also a way to buy off opposition to a SALT treaty, or so it is thought.All such justifications for the program are utterly irresponsible. To spend billions on civil defense when crucial programs essential to the strength of the nation are being slashed is pathological. Appeasing critics of the SALT treaty by throwing them a “harmless” bone is self-defeating, for the program lends credibility to their view of reality, not that of the treaty advocates, and creates a climate in which it is easier to defeat the treaty.



1996 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 7838-7843
Author(s):  
M. Broucke ◽  
P. Varaiya




1999 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dick de Waard ◽  
Monique van der Hulst ◽  
Marika Hoedemaeker ◽  
Karel A. Brookhuis


1998 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 345-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
JIN-CHUAN HSU ◽  
MASAYOSHI TOMIZUKA


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document