car

Monday, October 18, 2010

Honda CBR 250 RR has been Launched

Honda CBR 250 RR
Jakarta - CBR 250 RR enliven will of the Indonesian automotive market exchanges. The assurance Came after PT Astra Honda Motor plans to market the AHM model or the latest sports duo of CBR.

According to Executive Vice President Director of AHM Johannes Loman, it indeed is planning to market the Honda CBR.

However, AHM Until now still studying how much potential the motorcycle market in Indonesia. The original plan, the motorcycle is supplied from Thailand as a whole (CBU).

"If a big market, our local raft on. But Because of the small, CBU," he said.

This plan Could Be going to break the dominance of the Kawasaki Ninja 250 so far That pitch alone. Especially if the price of cans be under a two-cylinder motor from the Kawasaki. However, for Loman it was not an easy job.

"Placing CBR 250 below the price of the Ninja 250 is not easy. But if I cans, Yes We will do," he concluded.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Google’s New Robot Car Raises Hopes

Google shocked the world this weekend by announcing that not only was it developing robot car technology, but that its fleet of autonomous cars had already racked up 140,000 miles driving experience. As described in the New York Times, seven converted Toyota Prius’ use laser range finders, cameras, radar, inertial sensors, and high-detail maps to autonomously drive while humans sit behind the wheel and monitor software. While robotic cars have made leaps forward in the past decade, spurred on by DARPA’s Grand Challenge  competition, Google’s accomplishment stands heads and shoulders above the rest. The search engine giant’s announcement has fueled enthusiasm across the blogosphere for the technology, and many are hoping for the first time that robot cars could be nearer than we think. They will be disappointed. Google’s venture into autonomous cars may be an epic win, but automotive regulation and government bureaucracy will raise a wall of fails in the future. Video of the Google car is available below. Celebrate the success while you can – the technology may be getting better, but society is not prepared to use it.
Google did many things very right in developing their autonomous car program. Foremost was the gathering of some of the most brilliant minds in robotic driving, as tested by DARPA’s Grand Challenge. Sebastian Thrun, head of the project, was one of the leads in the Stanford Racing Team when it won DARPA’s challenge. He also headed Google’s StreetView project. Before Chris Urmson was ‘on leave’ from Carnegie Mellon to work for Google, he developed the autonomous vehicles that brought the university victory at the Grand Challenge. Michael Montermerlo (who got his PhD in robotics from Carnegie) was the software lead for Stanford’s racing team. Anthony Levandowski made news a few years ago by developing PriBot, a Toyota Prius that drove itself through San Francisco. He also worked on autonomous motorcycles at UC Berkeley. Google’s current robot car seems like a next generation version of PriBot. All in all, Google had just 15 engineers in their robot car project, but they chose the best. That’s why a stealth project could be developed and quickly outperform so many other robotic car endeavors. Brilliant strategy, no doubt about it. You can see Urmson behind the wheel in the Google robotic Prius in the video from NY Times below.
The Google car looks great, and it’s performed well, but it’s likely many years from reaching the masses. From the NY Times:

The self-driving car initiative is an example of Google’s willingness to gamble on technology that may not pay off for years, Dr. Thrun said. Even the most optimistic predictions put the deployment of the technology more than eight years away.

It will simply be a matter of time before autonomous cars have the range of capabilities needed to replace human drivers. Yes, the Google fleet drove down Lombard Street’s curves, it handled the wind on the Golden Gate Bridge, and it dared the cliffs of the Pacific Coast Highway. Yet it hasn’t shown that it can defend itself around drunk drivers, dodge children dashing into the street, or notice that the bicyclist next to the road is signaling to cross into its lane. Human drivers face these problems all the time, even if they regularly make mistakes (1.2 million lives lost each year according to the World Health Organization). Google’s system currently relies on a lead car making detailed maps of the route ahead of the autonomous car’s passing. Robot vehicles still need semi-controlled situations to succeed. Years will pass before the controls needed are whittled down to match the variety of scenarios human drivers face all around the world every day. Even then, such systems will need to be tested and retested, made much more reliable than the computers we use (and crash) on our desktops today.

But let’s look ahead to that time, maybe a decade from now maybe much less, when robot vehicles can perform as well as humans. Already, we’ve seen how the Stanford team is developing a system that can race up Pike’s Peak. When robots can defeat rally car drivers the world will be suitably impressed. I’m sure there will be many exhibitions on NASCAR and Formula tracks everywhere highlighting their skill. It won’t matter much. Even once the robots are ready to drive in real world situations, I still think it will take many more years before we actually see automated cars on the road.

For all that was done right, Google did one major thing wrong – they approached the robot car like it was only a technology challenge. It’s not. It’s also a social-legal one. Those 1.2 million people who lose their lives to car accidents each year mostly have other humans to blame. Drivers are held accountable for the machines they control. Who is accountable for an autonomous vehicle? The Google project had manned test drives, and various means for the human to quickly grab control. Not because the car was making mistakes. It never caused a single accident, though it was rear-ended by a human driver. No, the Google robot cars needed to be manned because California state law, not to mention our sense of scientific ethics, demands a human be responsible for a potentially lethal activity.

When robots are ready to drive for us, there will still be accidents. Much fewer, one hopes, but millions in damages and thousands of lives lost all the same. Who will answer for that loss? The company that designs the robot’s software, the car manufacturer who installed it, or the driver who believed that they didn’t need to pay attention because their car was driving itself?

Toyota just spent millions repairing and recalling cars that occasionally had sticking accelerator pedals. They face ongoing lawsuits, and are likely to be confronted by more, blaming them for collisions. That’s just a single instance of a faulty piece of automotive technology. When human drivers cannot control their cars, the manufacturers face enormous legal consequences. When then will we want to pursue a vehicle that takes away the responsibility of driving from humans? No one could face the legal burden, no matter how safe their autonomous cars could be.

That doesn’t mean that robotic cars will never arrive. I just think they’ll appear in small steps. More stealth, less hype. Already we have systems in place that make driving easier, while never removing humans from the equation. Think about the automated systems already in your car: automatic transmissions, airbags, and anti-lock brakes. We’re adding more all the time. Vehicles have camera systems surrounding their cars to help with parking and to avoid collisions (Google uses commercial versions in their robot car). Some new cars automatically engage the brakes if they detect a slowing or stopped object ahead, and more companies will be adding these accident avoidance systems in the future. Technologies that ‘enhance’ the human driver, or ‘increase safety’ help sell cars, and edge us close to autonomy. The goal is to get people to be safer drivers, to provide automated systems to aid us when we’re about to make a mistake, not to take over the responsibility of driving completely. 100% autonomous vehicles are a legal nightmare…but 50%, 75%? That could be done, maybe sooner than we think, and with happy results. It doesn’t take a fully robotic car to save thousands of lives each year.

If I were to predict how Google’s autonomous car project would really affect our lives, I would point to all the possible applications it could enable that don’t involve the dream of robotic vehicles. Advanced laser range finding and radar sensors can be integrated into modern cars to help with anti-collision braking controls, or to create a warning system for drivers. Highly detailed maps could change the way we drive. Google’s Prius has a voice announce when you approach a crosswalk, or near a turn. Imagine a GPS guidance system that gave you 100% accurate help, and warned you of complex dangers like children that play nearby. There are many different ways in which the Google autonomous car projects could help us drive better.

…and yes, one of those ways will be, eventually, the adoption of fully robotic cars. I do believe that 100% autonomous vehicles will arrive, it will simply take longer than we think. Cars will become more and more helpful, removing more and more of the risks of driving, until automated systems are standard safety features for driving. From there we will make the leap to robotic cars. But there will be legal battles, social mores will have to be changed, and it’s likely to bankrupt at least one major car manufacturer in the process. Years after the robots are ready to drive, we’ll be ready to let them. For now we can applaud Google, and go back to our normal lives. Autonomous driving is not near.

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Breaking News | Porsche or Audi could join F1

                                    

Porsche or Audi could be on the Formula 1 grid soon, Porsche chairman Matthias Mueller said Friday at the Paris Motor Show. That’s right. Porsche may return to F1 or Audi might bring the rings to battle the Prancing Horse and the bulls and… umm…. a virgin?
Here he is, via Autocar:
“With LMP1, there are two classes and two brands – Audi and Porsche. We do not like to both go into LMP1 [against each other]; that is not so funny.
“So therefore we have to discuss whether it makes better sense for one of the [two] brands to go into LMP1, and the other brand into Formula 1. So we will have a round-table to discuss the pros and cons.”
I love the “that is not so funny” quote. Paging Red Bull!
The idea seems to be — this part is obvious — that one of the brands goes to Le Mans and the other into F1. On the F1 front, Porsche likely would return as an engine supplier, and Autocar adds this:
Autocar also understands VW Group’s vice president for powertrains Wolfgang Hatz has been heavily involved in discussions with the FIA regarding the proposed new four-cylinder turbocharged engines the sport plans to introduce from 2013.
(Quick digression: I love, LOVE the “Autocar also understands” phrase. I get it, but it sounds soooo Transformers.)
OK, I’m not sure that there was a story that drove more people crazy (at least in the F1B Forum) than “Audi to F1″. But here it is, right from the brand’s mouth.
Should Cosworth be a bit worried? How does a Williams-Porsche (or BMW Sauber Ferrari Porsche) team sound? How would you go about entering the sport if you were the VW group? And why the idea that Audi might switch series? That seems strange given its success and the great battle it now has with Peugeot.

Petit Le Mans: Audi miss the pole but get the plot | AUTOS BLOG

This weekend’s Petit Le Mans will represent the second race in the new Intercontinental Le Mans Cup (ILMC). The 2010 edition of the new world tournament includes three race in 2010 and seven in 2011. The Automobile Club de l’Ouest (ACO) organized the tournament and many of the teams have been very receptive. The challenge, of course, will be for the privateer as global travel and the expense it represents will prevent many teams from participating outside their respective series such as the American Le Mans Series or Europe’s Le Mans series.
One team that is embracing the new tournament is Audi Sport Team Joest. The team will contest the second race in the ILMC here at the Petit Le Mans at Road Atlanta this weekend after facing a defeat in round one at the 1000km at Silverstone by arch rival Peugeot. The German team will bring their R15+ chassis 202 and 203 to the battle and are banking on upgrades that should favor the unique circuit characteristics of Road Atlanta.
Audi have a stellar history at the Petit Le Mans with nine victories in the past ten years. Driver Allan McNish will be returning the scene of the crime that saw Peugeot snatch victory in a rain shortened race last year. He will be joined by veteran drivers Dindo Capello and Mr. Le Mans himself, Tom Kristensen. The sister car with be handled by Marcel Fassler, Andre Lotterer and Benoit Treluyer.
Of the three drivers, Dindo Capello has the most victories at the Petit Le Mans and despite an off Friday morning in practice, he’s looking forward to the event:
“I think that this track will suit our R15 plus a bit better. We were always very strong in this race in the past. That’s why I’m confident that we’ll be able to clinch victory for Audi. This race has always been very fortunate for me. I won five times there at seven events. That’s another reason why Road Atlanta is one of my favourite tracks.”
With four wins under his belt at the Petit Le Mans, Allan McNish has unfinished business from 2009 as he spun just prior tot he race being called for rain. We were here last year and it was a deluge. McNish was very quick and seems to expect a good showing this weekend:
“I love Petit Le Mans! 100,000 fans in such a compact arena as Road Atlanta––That’s simply great. And there’s hardly a track that suits me as well as this. It’s very fast and fluid. It demands an aggressive driving style. Every moment is a very intense experience”.
Tom Kristensen hasn’t been to the Petit Le Mans since 2002 and while it’s been a long time, he is Mr. Le Mans. That experience and pace can’t be denied and whil the circuit has changed since he last raced here, Tom is looking forward to it:
“It’s been quite a while that I last contested ‘Petit Le Mans.’ I’m very much looking forward to running there again after such a long time. I know from my two team colleagues that the track has since been resurfaced, which makes it even faster than it was back then.”
There is no doubt that the #7 car has seriously talented and experienced drivers. It should represent Audi’s best chance at defeating Peugeot this weekend but an interesting twist is that Audi’s #9 car will have three drivers who have never raced at the Petit Le Mans before. Lotterer, Fassler and Treluyer will face ten hour endurance race for the first time but it isn’t their maiden voyage for Audi having helped the marque sweep the 24 Hours of Le Mans earlier this year.
Practice sessions at Petit have revealed an approximate pace gap of 9/10’s of a second. That’s practice. The real pace of Audi and Peugeot will not be known until qualifying later today but if the speed delta is accurate, there are ten hours of racing that tactically could be Audi’s secret weapon. The build-up tot he race is proving to be exciting and it could represent one of the best Petit Le Mans in recent memory.

Friday, October 1, 2010

If Porsche enters F1 | They should do so as a supplier | MODIFICATION CONTEST

There has certainly been some discussion about Porsche or Audi entering F1 after today’s announcement here. Perhaps it was just an innocent observation or maybe Porsche chairman Matthias Mueller was having fun with the media––or as SJ Skid points out, it is Oktoberfest and maybe he’d had a little too much to drink. Regardless of the motive, it has gotten us to thinking about the prospect.

Porsche
First, would it be Porsche or Audi to enter the series? My bet is Porsche since they have a pedigree in the sport back in the sixties as a works team and then as a supplier to McLaren in the eighties. Why not Audi? They have a terrific sports car program that has revolutionized the sport with their Diesel TDI technology. Perhaps they would like to change gears and bring TDI to F1? Who knows but that would seem a long shot as diesel fuel isn’t an FIA equation at this point and Audi have always been comfortable in their shoes in Le Mans and at arms length with F1.
No, Porsche makes more sense at some level and while there is nothing wrong with the 911 in the GT class, it’s become a bit of a one-trick pony for the marque. Why not mix things up a bit and give consumers something to think about the next time they are looking at sports cars? Yes, I can see it now, the silver Porsche’s streaming down Eau Rouge then up the hill and down the long straight as they pass a Ferrari or two…wait…actually, no I can’t see that. Why?
I think Porsche should enter F1 as a supplier and not a manufacturer…at first anyway. The reason I think this may be a better plan is that there is little secrecy to the fact that getting into F1 is damned expensive. Just ask Norbert Haug at Mercedes, or Honda, BMW or Toyota. It costs a fortune to enter at the manufacturer level and do well and Porsche has a relationship in F1 already that makes much more sense. You’ll recall that I posted this story here about Williams supplying Porsche with their KERS unit for the 911 GT car that is racing this weekend at the Petit Le Mans.
Why not work that relationship in reverse and become a strategic partner to Williams F1? KERS will be back next year and Williams F1 could use a good partner like they had in BMW. In fact, Williams F1 had the best seasons they’ve produced in decades with BMW power and some guy named Montoya. Why not wok with Sir Frank, Patrick and Sam to become a partner and lift both Williams F1 and Porsche to the spotlight?
No question in my mind that BMW entered F1 the right way. They should have stayed and it was a mistake to bow out the way they did (from a fans perspective of course and not a balance sheet perspective). They were almost there and I fear that Porsche’s longevity in the sport may meet a quicker demise, given the length of time it takes to become successful in the sport, should they try to enter as a team.
The upside is that Porsche will have had a full season of racing with the Williams flywheel design KERS unit and that will give them an edge up. Porsche know how to take that energy and lay it down in an effective way. Williams F1 knows how to build a chassis and run a team in F1 and they have FIA credentials for the media booth (which is probably the most difficult thing to get). It seems like a good match to me but then I like Williams F1 and want them to succeed. I also like Porsche although I would be remiss in not mentioning that I love Audi and would relish the idea of the four rings entering F1 against the Mercs.