Jump to content

Self Driving Car Caching


Recommended Posts

It seems as though we are on the cusp of fully autonomous / self-driving vehicles and that we'll see them on the roads within the next few years.

I can't help thinking that they'd be really good for car caching - especially where there's nowhere to park. You could get the car to drop you off and then come back for you later, possibly summoning it using an app on your smartphone.

Many people I speak to say they could never trust a machine to drive them around so I thought I'd ask here and see what people's thoughts were... ^_^

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

No - but someone can pass the log down for it to sign ;)

 

That's a discussion that goes on forever, whether or not it's OK for your car to sign the log for the whole group.

It's often tough to find a suitable parking spot for a cache in a subdivision.  But not only are there self-driving cars, there may soon be ordinary cars driven by someone else.  That guy would come back to pick you up.  This is the future, man!  Brave new world.

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Ambrosia said:

I saw the video footage of that earlier today.

Basically the cyclist had no lights or relective clothing and set off across what looks like an unlit highway.

The human in the vehicle appears not to be looking at the road until it's too late to intervene. They may have been looking down at a smartphone.

By the time the cyclist becomes visible in the car's headlights it's too late.

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

17 minutes ago, Ambrosia said:

I saw the video footage of that earlier today.

Basically the cyclist had no lights or relective clothing and set off across what looks like an unlit highway.

The human in the vehicle appears not to be looking at the road until it's too late to intervene. They may have been looking down at a smartphone.

By the time the cyclist becomes visible in the car's headlights it's too late.

 

Yeah. I don't think anyone could have stopped in time. I just thought it was interesting, in light of this thread. 

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

I saw the video footage of that earlier today.

Basically the cyclist had no lights or relective clothing and set off across what looks like an unlit highway.

The human in the vehicle appears not to be looking at the road until it's too late to intervene. They may have been looking down at a smartphone.

By the time the cyclist becomes visible in the car's headlights it's too late.

I've been appalled at the reactions to automated car accidents since the common standard, especially by the media, appears to be zero accidents, yet the only logical thing to look at is relative amounts of accidents per mile. Logically, I'd expect automated cars to be way safer than humans since humans have a tendency to forget they're driving a car and start doing other things, like sleeping.

But my reaction to this incident is the opposite of yours. Yes, it looks like a human would have missed that, but it's actually exactly the case I want an automated car with it's superior sensory equipment to catch. Even with the suddenness of the obstacle, I can't help but think a human would have at least swerved and slammed on the breaks. At first glance, it doesn't look like the car did either.

Not an indictment of the car, but it's also embarrassing that the human monitoring the car looks like they were caught playing candy crush...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
18 minutes ago, dprovan said:

I've been appalled at the reactions to automated car accidents since the common standard, especially by the media, appears to be zero accidents, yet the only logical thing to look at is relative amounts of accidents per mile. Logically, I'd expect automated cars to be way safer than humans since humans have a tendency to forget they're driving a car and start doing other things, like sleeping.

But my reaction to this incident is the opposite of yours. Yes, it looks like a human would have missed that, but it's actually exactly the case I want an automated car with it's superior sensory equipment to catch. Even with the suddenness of the obstacle, I can't help but think a human would have at least swerved and slammed on the breaks. At first glance, it doesn't look like the car did either.

Not an indictment of the car, but it's also embarrassing that the human monitoring the car looks like they were caught playing candy crush...

I'm not actually coming down on one side or the other on this one.

I actually think, as you do, that the car should have been able to detect, monitor and avoid the upcoming moving obstacle better than a human would under the given conditions.

It does beg the question of what the specification of that particular car was and how it compares to the specification of other autonomous vehicles currently under development / in testing.

Regardless of whether the human operator could have done anything to reduce the impact, if they had been working for me they'd be out of a job PDQ.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I wouldn't trust a self driving car in rural areas. Too many things can happen in a split second when it comes to critters and cars.

Two years ago traveling a state road at 5AM a buck appeared right in the middle of the road. Can't go right. Can't go left. The only thing you can do is slam on the brakes and pray.

And so I did. And just at the point where you feel disaster has been avert, the buck lowers his shoulder, charges, taking out the headlight, rolls up denting the hood, falls off the quarterpanel fighting, and disappears before you can unbuckle your seatbelt.

Don't know what the total number of animal-car collisions are per year but a I'd bet a good number involve deer. It happens on interstates and intrastates as well. . 
Then there are weather related accidents such as sliding on a slick spot in snow, doing three 360s and coming to rest against the guardrail.

They might be nice for puttering around town though. Of course that puts an added burden on everyone around it to make sure the car can "see" them and the obstacles, and be able to process the information fast enough to react.

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

I can't help thinking that they'd be really good for car caching - especially where there's nowhere to park. You could get the car to drop you off and then come back for you later, possibly summoning it using an app on your smartphone.

An interesting perspective.  One of the applications that I have considered viable is when the autonomous vehicle would be used to drop you off somewhere (for example, at an airport) and then be able to summon a vehicle (with an app) and have one quickly appear to take you somewhere next.  That would suggesting an having an autonomous vehicle parking area close to places like airport terminals, the train station, mall, business parks, etc.  That just one part of infrastructure improvements that I feel would be needed to make autonomous vehicles ubiquitous.  It seems to me, that the creation of autonomous vehicle only lanes would improve traffic flow and make things a lot safer (autonomous vehicles can communicate with each other).   Autonomous vehicle only lanes could essentially replace light rails.  

For the purpose of geocaching, an autonomous vehicle which could drop you off at a specific location would likely have access to GIS data so that it wouldn't drop you off on a highway or some spot that didn't have any parking because it would be a spot unsafe to park a vehicle.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

Basically the cyclist had no lights or relective clothing and set off across what looks like an unlit highway.

That shouldn't really be a factor as, unlike humans, the braking system could be designed using RADAR, IR, LIDAR, etc; indeed there are already automatic emergency braking systems in regular cars which use these technologies. Like you later said I'd like to know what the spec of the braking system in that vehicle was, but from looking at the video there didn't appear to be any braking even at the last second, so perhaps something failed.

I don't think autonomous cars are there yet, but it won't be long before they get there and when they do get there they will be waaaaaay safer than human drivers.

To answer the OP I would definitely use one and feel comfortable about it, much better than some of the meat sacks I've been driven around by.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, dprovan said:

Even with the suddenness of the obstacle, I can't help but think a human would have at least swerved and slammed on the breaks. At first glance, it doesn't look like the car did either.

In the video I saw, there was less than 2 seconds between the appearance of the pedestrian's white sneakers and the collision. There was less than 1 second between the appearance of a recognizable human form and the collision. I think most humans drivers would have hit the pedestrian. A few human drivers who were being especially attentive might have swerved to avoid the pedestrian. A few human drivers who were being especially attentive might have hit the brakes and hit the pedestrian at a slightly slower speed.

But back on topic...

5 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

I can't help thinking that they'd be really good for car caching - especially where there's nowhere to park. You could get the car to drop you off and then come back for you later, possibly summoning it using an app on your smartphone.

For numbers runs (whether on a numbers trail like the ET Highway trail, or just zipping around an area saturated with low D/T caches), the car could let you out, pick you up, take you to the next cache, let you out, pick you up, and so on. There was an account in the forums a while back of a numbers run where someone had a non-geocaching family member drive him down a numbers trail. It would be like that, except with a more patient computer driving the car for you.

For geocaches at the end of a hike, the car could drop you off at the trailhead, and then return to pick you up later. The car's recall feature could even be tied to your geocaching/GPS app, so the car could time its return to the trailhead to match your return to the trailhead. This could be useful where trailhead parking is at a premium, or at trailheads where vandalism/burglary might discourage geocachers from leaving their vehicles at the trailhead unattended.

Link to comment

I feel the many drawbacks coming from those supposedly supporting their plans keep it from being viable ... like that guy who had his feet out the windows, almost begging to get stopped by a cop  (and did), this latest death, and all with their noses in their phones, sleeping, eating full meals, etc.  

If even the  people testing can't be counted on to "assist" when needed, it's just not gonna work...

 I'm still waiting for powerball to finally realize I need it, so I can be dropped off/picked up by helicopter when parking's not available.   :)

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

A more useful feature would be on a linear hike: have the car drop you at the start of the trail, and then send it  to the other end to await your arrival.

This would make those section hiking the AT happy to not have to rely on friends/relatives.   :)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
22 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

If even the  people testing can't be counted on to "assist" when needed, it's just not gonna work...

I've heard suggestions from others that autonomous vehicles be allowed only if there is a licensed driver ready to take over. But people just don't work that way. If the vehicle is doing the work, then even paid "safety drivers" are going to find it difficult to remain alert and ready to take over. What chance will a typical human driver have of being alert and ready to take over when it's really needed?

No, autonomous vehicles need to be able to operate autonomously. If they aren't ready to operate without a human driver, then they aren't ready for general use.

But back on topic...

27 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:
53 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

A more useful feature would be on a linear hike: have the car drop you at the start of the trail, and then send it  to the other end to await your arrival.

This would make those section hiking the AT happy to not have to rely on friends/relatives.   :)

I hadn't thought of this, but yeah, pretty much any "linear" outdoor activity (backpacking, river rafting/canoeing, whatever) would benefit from having autonomous vehicles, to eliminate the need for staging vehicles at both endpoints, or having a non-participant drop you off and pick you up.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

An interesting perspective.  One of the applications that I have considered viable is when the autonomous vehicle would be used to drop you off somewhere (for example, at an airport) and then be able to summon a vehicle (with an app) and have one quickly appear to take you somewhere next.  That would suggesting an having an autonomous vehicle parking area close to places like airport terminals, the train station, mall, business parks, etc.  That just one part of infrastructure improvements that I feel would be needed to make autonomous vehicles ubiquitous. 

I don't see there being a need for large areas where vehicles are parked up waiting to provide services.

I anticipate the car network being largely decentralised and the number of cars in cirulation being just enough to cope with demand.

When a service call is placed, probably using a smartphone app, the nearest available car of the right capacity will be directed to the chosen pickup point. When that car drops you off it will re-enter the pool and take the next job closest to that location, and so on. Cars could end up travelling the length and breadth of the country during their life span, visiting the nearest service centre for routine maintenance and cleaning during off-peak times.

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

visiting the nearest service centre for routine maintenance and cleaning during off-peak times.

Or when someone logs an NM I suppose.

I'm currently working my way along the 250km Great North Walk from Sydney to Newcastle, doing it as a series of daywalks on average about 15km each and finding some interesting caches along the way, but the section I'm in at the moment through the Watagan Mountains requires a friend to meet me at the finishing point, where I leave my car, and then drive me to the starting point for the day's hike. I'd been thinking that on-demand autonomous cars would be handy in a situation like that, to just drop me off at the start and come and get me at the end, maybe connecting to the nearest railway station.

Link to comment

I have to wonder about this situation (when it comes self-driving-cars): What happens when a car has to make the following, split second decision and cannot stop in time (due to the obvious limits of physics). Going at high speed, vehicle coming head on in a two lane road. Mountain wall on the right, cliff dropping thousand feet on the left. Robot car can A) skid against the right wall and head on into the car in front. B ) hit the school bus full of kids the car in your lane was passing, or C) drive off the cliff. Who programs decisions that the computer is going to choose? Isn't that like playing god? Aren't those the kinds of decisions humans in control of the situation should make? Or do we let a corporation make that call? And, can the computer be fooled into which is the best choice?

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Uncle Alaska said:

I have to wonder about this situation (when it comes self-driving-cars): What happens when a car has to make the following, split second decision and cannot stop in time (due to the obvious limits of physics). Going at high speed, vehicle coming head on in a two lane road. Mountain wall on the right, cliff dropping thousand feet on the left. Robot car can A) skid against the right wall and head on into the car in front. B ) hit the school bus full of kids the car in your lane was passing, or C) drive off the cliff. Who programs decisions that the computer is going to choose? Isn't that like playing god? Aren't those the kinds of decisions humans in control of the situation should make? Or do we let a corporation make that call? And, can the computer be fooled into which is the best choice?

Whatever decision the car makes in that situation it can do it in a millisecond whereas reaction time of a driver starting from perceived threat to actually physically responding could be to late anyway. At 60mph with reaction time of 2 seconds you've already travelled 176'. So, even if the car just brakes it can wash off a lot of speed in that time.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

A more useful feature would be on a linear hike: have the car drop you at the start of the trail, and then send it  to the other end to await your arrival.

Yes.   It wouldn't even have to be a linear hike.  Anytime someone wanted to cache across town, starting near one cache and ending near another, an autonomous vehicle would be perfect.   

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

I don't see there being a need for large areas where vehicles are parked up waiting to provide services.

I anticipate the car network being largely decentralised and the number of cars in cirulation being just enough to cope with demand.

When a service call is placed, probably using a smartphone app, the nearest available car of the right capacity will be directed to the chosen pickup point. When that car drops you off it will re-enter the pool and take the next job closest to that location, and so on. Cars could end up travelling the length and breadth of the country during their life span, visiting the nearest service centre for routine maintenance and cleaning during off-peak times.

I'm just saying that the demand would be high in places like airports,  malls, etc.  Look at any large airport and you'll see a long taxi line where people and taxis queue up. For an area with a high demand, a spot where vehicles could park, waiting for the next summon.   A large decentralized network, unless there were a very high number of vehicles might result in very large delays before a summoned vehicle arrives. I know that when I arrive at an airport I'm often willing to just hope in a taxi rather than wait for a shuttle.

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:
11 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

I don't see there being a need for large areas where vehicles are parked up waiting to provide services.

I anticipate the car network being largely decentralised and the number of cars in cirulation being just enough to cope with demand.

When a service call is placed, probably using a smartphone app, the nearest available car of the right capacity will be directed to the chosen pickup point. When that car drops you off it will re-enter the pool and take the next job closest to that location, and so on. Cars could end up travelling the length and breadth of the country during their life span, visiting the nearest service centre for routine maintenance and cleaning during off-peak times.

I'm just saying that the demand would be high in places like airports,  malls, etc.  Look at any large airport and you'll see a long taxi line where people and taxis queue up. For an area with a high demand, a spot where vehicles could park, waiting for the next summon.   A large decentralized network, unless there were a very high number of vehicles might result in very large delays before a summoned vehicle arrives. I know that when I arrive at an airport I'm often willing to just hope in a taxi rather than wait for a shuttle.

I guess an airport terminus would be a logical location for an autonomous vehicle 'base', given the 24 hour nature of airport traffic.

I do though imagine more numerous, smaller 'bases' where cars can recharge without travelling very far from their last drop-off point rather than travelling empty.

Supermarket car parks might be a good example - although if autonomy dominates, supermarket car parks could become an awful lot smaller than they currently need to be.

On the other hand, supermarkets might make highly logical 'bases' for autonomous vehicles given their existing distribution and the frequency of our visits to them?

 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

I guess an airport terminus would be a logical location for an autonomous vehicle 'base', given the 24 hour nature of airport traffic.

I do though imagine more numerous, smaller 'bases' where cars can recharge without travelling very far from their last drop-off point rather than travelling empty.

Supermarket car parks might be a good example - although if autonomy dominates, supermarket car parks could become an awful lot smaller than they currently need to be.

On the other hand, supermarkets might make highly logical 'bases' for autonomous vehicles given their existing distribution and the frequency of our visits to them?

 

Super markets and large malls also have large parking lots that could be converted into autonomous vehicle parking/service areas.  Personally, if I were to use autonomous vehicles I'd like to see it get regular preventative maintenance more frequently than many people maintain their vehicles.  As these vehicles may be spending a lot more time on the road that personally owned vehicles they're going to be refueled/recharged frequently.  They may have worked out most of the kinks on the driving part but it would still require a person to refuel/recharge the vehicle and do maintenance checks.  

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Super markets and large malls also have large parking lots that could be converted into autonomous vehicle parking/service areas.  Personally, if I were to use autonomous vehicles I'd like to see it get regular preventative maintenance more frequently than many people maintain their vehicles.  As these vehicles may be spending a lot more time on the road that personally owned vehicles they're going to be refueled/recharged frequently.  They may have worked out most of the kinks on the driving part but it would still require a person to refuel/recharge the vehicle and do maintenance checks.  

I fully expect they will be regularly maintained - because I think that personal ownership will drop massively and that road transit will become more of a service industry.

It should be a simple matter with an adequately sized vehicle pool for vehicles to call in for regular routine maintenance in a highly optimal way. I can see Henry Ford's vision of the production line - which turned out to be a great success, flowing through into the maintenance provision, so that there's a steady stream of vehicles turning up for maintenance at a rate optimal to the staffing levels in those service centres.

As for charging - you can bet that fully autonomous vehicles will have the means to pull up and attach to a charging station without human intervention.

 

Link to comment

It would also be relatively easy to use analytics to predict where demand is likely to be highest. 

E.G.

During early weekday mornings empty vehicles would tend to migrate out to the suburbs ready for the morning commute, whereas at the end of the day they would migrate towards the town centre ready to take people home.

At weekends empty vehicles might migrate towards parks, shopping centres, or sports stadiums ready for closing time.

They could be configured such that if the number of free vehicles at the Airport or other transport hubs drops below a critical mass then empty vehicles from areas of lower demand could be brought towards these zones.

 

It all sounds like some sort of utopia - I wonder whether it will happen and if so how soon?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

Have the autonomous vehicle drop you at the bottom and pick you up again at the top - or vice-versa?

Definitely. And I know some geocachers who would prefer to start at the bottom (going downhill is hard on their knees), and others who would prefer to start at the top (going downhill is easier than climbing).

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

As for charging - you can bet that fully autonomous vehicles will have the means to pull up and attach to a charging station without human intervention.

Since we're predicting the future, I suppose we can assume that vehicles will somehow be able to plug themselves in.

Last weekend I attended an event in which my (14yo) son participated at a university a couple of hours away.  After parking I walked to the venue for the event and saw about 10 parking spots for plugin/hybrid vehicles.  I think half of them had vehicles plugged in.   It would be nice if autonomous vehicles were able to plug in themselves, but I'd have no problem with having autonomous vehicle service areas with live humans performing maintenance tasks.  Sort of like how Oregon and New Jersey still have gas station attendants.  I'm old enough to remember when every gas station had attendants that would pump gas, clean your windshield, and check your motor oil level.  

Coincidentally, the event my son was at was a regional robotics competition called "FIRST Robotics".   After spending six weeks building a robot (they actually built two) they went to a couple of competitions with 50 something teams (including a couple from China and one from Brazil).  In the event, each robot was in an alliance with two other robots and played a match agains another alliance.  Each alliance was randomly created for the 10 qualifying rounds that each team played.  The robots had to do three things.  They had to drive around a course and pick up cubes (about the size of a milk crate) and place them in different spots.  They had to "climb".  Basically there was a horizontal bar about 1 foot long about 8 feet off the ground.  They had to grab onto it and elevate 12" off the ground.  For the first 20 seconds of each match, the robots were completely autonomous.  For example, they could program it to go from the starting spot (already holding a cube) and place it in one of the locations where they would get "points".  After 20 seconds, the robots were "driven" for the remaining 3 minutes or so of the match.  These are high school students building autonomous robots.  My sons team finished with the #3 ranking overall and lost in the tie-breaker match in the semi-finals, which, unfortunately wasn't enough to qualify them for the world championship tournament.  If you're interested I can point to a couple of videos which show these robots in action.  

Does the future of geocaching include autonomous robots sent off to find a cache (using lat/long coordinates) and a camera?

Link to comment
4 hours ago, colleda said:

 

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't the person that was killed have some responsibity for outcome of her actions? This doesn't seem to get a mention unless I've missed it.

 

I think that it's a trend lately online. People are afraid that they'll be criticized for "victim blaming". But I can't imagine just walking out in traffic like that and not noticing oncoming cars, or expecting them to stop for me. But that's happening more and more. It's getting scary to drive, with people driving right into you, people walking out in front of your car, etc. Situational awareness is getting lost.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Ambrosia said:

I think that it's a trend lately online. People are afraid that they'll be criticized for "victim blaming". But I can't imagine just walking out in traffic like that and not noticing oncoming cars, or expecting them to stop for me. But that's happening more and more. It's getting scary to drive, with people driving right into you, people walking out in front of your car, etc. Situational awareness is getting lost.

Yep.  Sad, but true. I'd bet we all have noticed folks bumping into/walking in the path of things, either simply not paying attention, or entitlement negating common sense (though noses in their phones the most noticeable). Most cavern/mountain ridge accidents here are caused by "that perfect selfie".  Many probably remember the lady attentive to her phone, walking right into a mall fountain.  Embarrassed, she started suit after the video made her an international  Darwin award runner-up (then busted when it was found she used a stolen card for purchases).

A law here is roadway space for cyclists.  As a car driver, I'm supposed to be a certain distance when passing cyclists on the road.  Most our roads can't handle the new distance (simply weren't designed for it years ago), yet some cyclists push their luck, thinking they're in the right.  That's fine, but Darwin awards go to those that wanna enforce those beliefs.  A feeling of entitlement over common sense...

Link to comment

So now I'm asking myself this question:

Is my automated car caching going to be less fun because I'm worried that my car might be in an accident while I'm not supervising it?

Then again - would it even be my car? Personally I doubt it would be - why would anyone spend all that money owning something that is parked up doing nothing 95% of the time?

And why limit ourselves to a single vehicle when we can select from a range of vehicles to suit our requirements for each particular trip?

Solo caching? Take a tiny car, hopefully for a lower fee.

Group caching? Get a minibus to pick us up / drop us off.

 

Link to comment
On 3/23/2018 at 5:15 PM, colleda said:

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't the person that was killed have some responsibity for outcome of her actions? This doesn't seem to get a mention unless I've missed it.

I do agree that Ambrosia's comment about victim blaming is a big part, but I think the fact that we're talking about an impersonal machine matters, too. We don't know the details, but so far from what I know, I wouldn't be blaming a human if one had been driving this car. If it were a human driver, I think the question would be more could they have done something, not whether they're at fault for not avoiding the pedestrian. But the whole thing about automated cars is that we expect them to be better than humans, so our standard here is whether the technology could have prevented the tragedy even in the face of the ultimate cause being a mistake by the pedestrian. If the technology could have prevented her death, it should have.

For me, at least, sure, in the background, it's ultimately the person's fault for crossing in an unsafe manner. I consider that a given, so I think the conversation starts beyond that where we discuss what could have gone better given this terrible mistake the pedestrian made.

But having said that, I sometimes feel like the consensus on that attitude is going against me. More and more, the discussion in the US is all about how everyone can be protected from anything no matter what stupid mistakes they make.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Read an article in the paper today about a pedestrian crossing the Garden State Parkway.  No one had any idea why a pedestrian would be crossing he Parkway.  Hit by three cars, and he died.  People crossing highways have the responsibility to follow laws.  Then again, when I do my street-walking after work (Two miles at four MPH) I glare at cars sitting on the pedestrian crosswalks.  And a lot of them back up to let me cross.  Right-of-way. 

Link to comment

Interesting discussions about self driving cars. As I read through it, I kept thinking - couldn't Uber/Lyft be used for that?

After testing out the autodrive features in a Tesla, I don't think my nerves are suited to riding in an autonomously driven car. Even when the car performs fine when creeping in traffic jams, it was nerve-wracking when on the highway and changing lanes.

Our local bus system has a trailhead route that they ran last summer and are expanding for this summer. I've already looked into how I could use it for thru-hikes. So far, it seems that I've already cached out the trails that are serviced by the routes, but the expanded routes they've proposed sound promising.

 

On 3/23/2018 at 9:36 AM, niraD said:
On 3/23/2018 at 5:13 AM, Team Microdot said:

Have the autonomous vehicle drop you at the bottom and pick you up again at the top - or vice-versa?

Definitely. And I know some geocachers who would prefer to start at the bottom (going downhill is hard on their knees), and others who would prefer to start at the top (going downhill is easier than climbing).

For the former:  If allowed, drive car with bike and lock up the bike at the top, then drive down and park the car.  Hike uphill, unlock bike (don't leave the lock keys in the car!) when reaching the top, coast downhill on the bike to return to the car. There's been at least two times when I wish would have thought of this BEFORE hiking up, and then hiking back down again.

For me:  Hiking uphill is more tiring, but hiking downhill is more painful.  My knees do not like downhill!

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...