Belgium

At the ITS World Congress in Hamburg last week (October 11-15), Dutch intelligent mobility specialists Monotch and Belgian Be-Mobile signed a partnership agreement to implement and scale C-ITS services in the Netherlands, Flanders, France and the rest of Europe.

Within the framework of this cooperation, both sides emphasize the importance of a fully functioning C-ITS ecosystem, which provides many benefits for stakeholders, such as improving traffic flows and road safety, prioritizing road users and reducing emissions. Together, they can serve the entire mobility ecosystem and offer cities, road authorities and road users excellent opportunities to maximize the deployment of C-ITS services.

Monotch provides data streams through the TLEX I2V platform, connecting traffic light controllers and other roadside equipment to service providers, the automotive industry, road authorities, emergency services and, ultimately, road users.

The data flows exchanged by connecting traffic light controllers and other road equipment to road operators and service providers have enormous potential to improve traffic flows and road safety, prioritize certain road users and reduce emissions.

The road authorities can get an idea of the traffic situation in real time, direct traffic, as well as implement and analyze traffic policy without introducing expensive communication systems on the road. System integrators can use data to develop innovative solutions.

The collected data can be turned into services that offer travelers an uninterrupted driving experience based on personalized consultations, making the interaction between the driver and roadside systems a tangible reality.

Companies are preparing not only infrastructure for connected and automated mobility, but also allows large-scale deployment of C-ITS services in Europe. Services can make a significant contribution to more sustainable driving, traffic prioritization, traffic optimization and real-time traffic information for road users. Road users will benefit directly from combined market-ready C-ITS solutions, such as hazard notifications.

United Kingdom

Implementation of a 5G network to work on a tunnel that will connect London's Greenwich Peninsula and the Silvertown area

World Highways, 18.10.2021

Ferrovial is implementing the London Silvertown Road tunnel project, which is the UK's first operating 5G SA (autonomous) private wireless network.

The network was deployed in partnership with Nokia and Telent to work on a tunnel under the Thames that will connect the Greenwich Peninsula and the Silvertown area of East London.

Ferrovial will become its own 5G mobile operator for the Silvertown construction site using Nokia's Digital Automation Cloud 5G SA solution and Ofcom's common spectrum (n77 3.8-4.2 GHz).

The 25-year contract for design, construction, financing, operation and maintenance includes the design 1.4-kilometer double-barrel tunnel under the River Thames, as well as 0.6 km of access ramps.

The 5G network is already operational and will soon be extended to the other side of the Thames to provide full connectivity at work sites. To expand using equipment from different vendors, the Open RAN approach will be used, which will be organized through the Neutroon platform, a solution that allows you to manage the entire network from one place, easily turning the connection (Wi-Fi, LTE, 5G) into an intelligent connection through applications.

The network will improve wireless communication inside the tunnel and improve access control. It will also improve the environmental monitoring of the project and provide real-time visualization of the construction progress.

Ferrovial has also implemented other projects related to 5G technology. These include projects such as AIVIA, a project to develop 5G smart roads with advanced surveillance technology, sensorization and modeling in partnership with Microsoft, 3M, Kapsch TrafficCom and Capgemini. The project includes road infrastructure technologies to improve areas such as safety, reduced travel time and access to an infotainment system.

Problems in defining metrics for AV security assessment

Traffic Technology Today, 22.10.2021

In the early days of the development and testing of autonomous vehicles (AV), it is still unknown which indicators are best evaluated and how to measure safety. Ben Simpson, a security researcher at TRL, discussed the current issues and made recommendations.

One of the main motivations for the development and implementation of AV is to improve road safety. This is primarily achieved by reducing the severity and frequency of collisions resulting from human error. But how should we actually evaluate AV safety metrics? A direct comparison with human-driven vehicles based on collisions will require several million or even billions of miles for the system to travel before statistically significant conclusions can be drawn. This data simply won't be available in the early stages of AV deployment. Even so, AVS are likely to be constantly evolving through regular updates, unlike conventional vehicles that are manufactured and maintained to a fixed standard. A typical approval system that is currently used for conventional vehicles will only approve an AV in a snapshot of the moment it is first put into operation. So, what are the metrics by which we should evaluate AV security, and how can we monitor and evaluate them on an ongoing basis? The need for safety performance indicators is still a recurring recommendation of regulatory and research bodies, but to date, few responses have emerged.

Security metrics are divided into two main categories: lagging and leading. Lagging metrics are also known as safety outcomes and include well-defined events such as collisions. Leading metrics are precursors to these results, such as unsafe driving.

Part of the problem is that it's very difficult to pinpoint exactly what unsafe driving is that makes it unsafe. Intuitively, we know that actions such as driving at excessive speed or driving very close to others increase the risk of collision for human drivers. However, not enough data has been collected from AV to compare the exact links between such leading metrics and lagging security results that we are trying to avoid. This is another problem: some leading indicators may well apply to automated driving systems (ADS) compared to human drivers.

Definition of leading metrics for AV

During operation, AVS collect a huge amount of data from a variety of sensors for successful operation. This includes the positional and kinematic data of the vehicle, as well as detailed information about the environment and other subjects. Some of this data may hold the key to uncovering the relationship between how ADS conducts a driving task and the likelihood that it will be involved in a collision.

TRL also conducted research on this topic as part of the Endeavor project to further develop AV security processes. This included a literature review and informal interaction with a small number of industry stakeholders. As part of this study, we evaluated the suitability of a number of metrics. Each metric was reviewed for how well we thought it would meet the following goals:

§ Has a recognized association with an adverse security event

§ Does not encourage adverse driving or behavior and cannot be manipulated

§ Reliable, reproducible and measurable

We do not believe that this problem can be solved by applying a single metric. Rather, we anticipate that a set of metrics will be required, each of which will be part of the solution. The leading indicators that we have evaluated to date, as a rule, are divided into six broad categories. In each category, specific metrics can be used in isolation or as part of a broader dataset.

1.     A measure of driving-related violations. This may include running a red light or speeding. Violations have a statistically significant relationship with collisions in human drivers, and we believe that similar relationships will exist with AV and violations, especially with violations concerning the right of the wire.

2.     Potential or actual violations of protective envelopes. A safety envelope is a boundary around a vehicle, usually measured by distance or time, within which an object becomes a vehicle safety issue. Examples of metrics in this category include vehicle movement and collision time.

3.     A measure of driving style. This may include vehicle kinematics such as speed and acceleration, as well as vehicle safety system triggers.

4.     A measure of unfinished missions. This may include incomplete trips, the number of minimum risk Maneuver triggers (MRM), system failures, Operations Design Domain violations (ODD), and disconnections. Although disconnection in isolation has limited value, the events listed indicate the reasons why the vehicle was unable to complete its mission and would potentially lead to an unsafe event that would require further investigation.

5.     Identification and reaction of danger, as well as perception of risk. This may include the time when the risk was identified, or how well ADS successfully recognizes specific hazards.

6. High-quality feedback from users, including from passengers and other road users. In the foreseeable future, AV working in public places will interact with people in some way, so it is necessary to be able to do this in a controlled and predictable way.

There are many questions that need to be answered regarding which metrics should be used for continuous AV security assessment. This is a multi-faceted task with several unknown parameters, which will most likely take several iterations of real testing before anything resembling consensus is reached.

We expect them to evolve over time as more is understood about the relationship between these leading metrics and lagging security outcomes.

The more traffic you have on the road, the problem of congestion increases and flows from highways to arterial roads. These are the same roads that public transport buses often use (unless they have dedicated bus lanes), which affects both the quality of service and compliance with the schedule. These factors create a cycle that rotates as follows: congestion worsens, commuting time increases in public transport and the road network, customer satisfaction decreases, people change their choice of mode of transport away from public transport, and this, in turn, increases congestion.

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, many cities are experiencing an increase in the number of disposable private vehicles and congestion, while public transport operators see that the level of passenger traffic has decreased to 80%. So how do we break this vicious circle of congestion and how do cities take control of their transport networks?

Tip 1: Manage transport services and the road network in a holistic way

First, a city or region must manage public transport services, private mobility service providers, and the road network in a coherent and holistic manner.

Transport for New South Wales has implemented its Integrated Congestion Management Program (ICMP) to collect data on all available modes of transport to provide a broad overview of the activities of the entire region.

Tip 2: Constantly assess demand

Secondly, when cities begin to understand the current demand, they need to study methodologies to rebalance this demand for infrastructure so that it does not outpace the available capacity. There are many methods to achieve this, such as charging for road networks with congestion zone prices and discouraging suburban drivers during peak hours by offering differences in public transport prices during peak and off-peak times.

Tip 3: Coordinate modes for holistic multimodal travel

Third, in order to optimize demand, a local agency, authority or city must manage the number of stakeholders that provide mobility in the region. Private mobility service providers (PMSP) such as bicycle rental, scooter rental and demand-driven transport play a crucial role in expanding the mobile services provided by the public transport network. They should become a network to stimulate the use of the public transport system, as well as increase areas where transit is scarce.

However, the city must own and manage a platform that offers an agnostic solution to ensure fairness among all stakeholders and allows the city infrastructure to function effectively. A local agency should be able to regulate when and where private mobility service providers can work to offer a balanced level of mobility services that incentivizes and connects consumers to public transport systems.

Tip 4: Consider corridors and intersections in urban planning

Finally, we also need to consider the micro or street level. The management of corridors and intersections is crucial to ensure the safety and movement of a private vehicle operator, a public and private transport operator, as well as a cyclist and pedestrians. Artificial intelligence and machine learning drive intersection management solutions to ensure optimized flows within the city.

Combined with real-time data from public transport providers and using advanced data analytics, the city can take the location of vehicles and automatically change the priority of the signal, optimizing the flow of public transport, ensuring that the bus stops on schedule and that the passenger arrives at the destination as planned.

Thailand

Proposals are being made for the construction of a sea bridge in Thailand

World Highways, 22.10.2021

A 10-kilometer bridge is proposed to connect Koh Chang Island with the mainland.Thailand. The bridge was first proposed several years ago, and now the project seems to be nearing implementation. However, the estimated costs of the project have not yet been disclosed.

The bridge will replace the current ferry service, which operates only during the daytime and is often unable to cope with the volume of traffic, especially during the holidays. Drivers often have to wait in queues for 4-6 hours to make a 30-45-minute crossing now.