Document Sample
					       The Fully Networked Car Workshop, Palexpo, Geneva, 3-4 March 2010

                                           Meeting Report



The workshop was opened by Robert Steele, ISO Secretary General, on behalf of World Standards
Cooperation (ITU, ISO, IEC). Mr. Steele began by thanking all those involved in putting together the
event. He stated that one of the goals of the workshop was to establish constructive dialogue among all
the stakeholders, to create a better understanding between the ICT and automotive sectors, and to help
develop standards for the benefit of all. He thanked Freescale Semiconductor for their sponsorship of
the event, and mentioned the presence of the Green GT car in the exhibition. He pointed out that “the
car industry is undergoing major changes, not only in propulsion technologies, but also with new
services in areas such as security, safety, navigation, car maintenance, fleet management, the car as a
mobile office and entertainment center. These changes represent both opportunities and challenges.
Standardization should be seen as a major enabler of the vehicle industry to clean up its future”. Mr.
Steele highlighted the need for revolutionary change because of the global crisis, and the industry’s
need to react quickly, to offer innovative solutions with better value for money and a strong green
component. “Electricity is seen as the preferred route, along with more environmentally friendly means
of producing that electricity”. He also highlighted the need for the standardization of essential
technologies, to provide a solid base for further innovation, and to consider the interoperability of all of
the new technologies, in the car and in the wider infrastructure. He added that “standardization and
coordination between vehicle manufacturing standards, standards organizations, regulatory authorities
and ICT industries is crucial to the commercialization of the new technologies”, quoting the example of
electric cars as a storage medium and stressing the international character of this endeavor. He
concluded by saying that “the challenge for the future of fully networked cars is to succinctly identify,
and then capitalize on the highest priorities. To do this, we must effectively coordinate our efforts”. In
doing so, “one of the key challenges is the move from the development stage to actual implementation,
and there is a growing realization that standardization has to be a growing part of this”.


Christoph Huss, Senior Vice President at BMW, responsible for homologation, and President of the
Executive Board of FISITA. Mr. Huss pointed out that he was speaking as President of FISITA,
representing 39 engineering societies in 38 countries and 168,000 automotive engineers. His first
example was that of RDS-TMC [Radio Data Systems Traffic Message Channel], using only 100 bytes per
second, compared to the 16 million bytes per second of an internet connection. It was and still is

successful because it addresses a basic need for information, relies on already paid for FM broadcasting,
requires no additional infrastructure or costs, is based on a well-established standard for TMC, and
supports profit-making use cases for OEM vendors. The question is not how we can make the fully
networked car a reality, but why. It is necessary to address fundamental customer needs: mobility,
safety, efficiency and convenience. Traffic information remains the number one use case that customers
are willing to pay for. Applications that increase safety are just as important, requiring precise and
reliable information. Fuel efficiency has also become an important field of innovation, with implications
for precise traffic information and management. The convenience of having information such as parking
availability or public transport schedules is another benefit that customers are willing to pay for. All
these applications rely on precise and up to date information and data. It is therefore essential that it be
made available, although some authorities may be reluctant to share it. With respect to deployment,
finding the right introduction scenario is key, and it can help to build on existing and already paid for
technology. Large technological leaps are not always supported by needed business cases and return on
investment. For there is finally the question of profit. The key business of all the players needs to be
considered, and “from an OEM perspective, it is selling cars.” “For content and service providers it is
creating valuable information out of raw data, for network providers it is about selling network
bandwidth, for universities it is collecting research money and tuition fees, for consultants it is acquiring
consultation jobs and for the public sector it is about taking care of public needs and in turn winning
elections”. Much technical progress has been made; standardization bodies have done tremendous
work. What is needed is a strong focus on real life deployment and business development for the fully
networked car to become a reality.



Opening comments: Mr. Sampson mentioned the pressures on road networks and on industry, and the
fact that vehicle-infrastructure linking and the fully connected car had benefits for all parties.

Juhani Jääskeläinen, European Commission, DG Information Society and Media. Mr. Jaaskelainen
pointed out that he was happy to see a global forum, as global harmonization of standards, for example,
is what the European Commission is trying to achieve. The work being done by the Commission in the
field of connected cars will be exhibited in Amsterdam from March 23-26. It is clear that there are
benefits related to safety, energy efficiency and commercial service to be considered. There has been a
logical progression from passive to active safety, and to cooperative systems, needed to reduce
accidents and fatalities. This will be one of the major applications of connected vehicles. Energy
efficiency is another priority, where Commission studies have shown that it is possible to reduce CO2 by
26% with ICT. Traffic management is also a key application, at a local and city level, and the introduction
of eCall will be an important step. These are the main areas of potential deployment, and the business
case, affordability and user acceptance need also to be considered.

Samuel Loyson, Orange, France. Mr. Loyson started by saying that customers are looking for the most
convenient door-to-door mobility services. Cars play a major role in this, but more and more we need to

consider other transportation modes, the office, home and being on the move, to offer a seamless
service experience. And in the future people may be in cars but driving less, as a passenger or using car-
sharing or pooling services. Mobile phones will be key for customers to program and manage their
mobility. In the car, there are two different sets of requirements for services. On the one hand there are
core telematic services, requiring absolute reliability and integration into the car, and not too much
bandwidth. These services need embedded connectivity, provided by the car manufacturer. For
infotainment services, the most up-to-date bandwidth is required. Data consumption will vary from one
customer to another. Customer expectations will be managed by the consumer electronics and telecom
industries. Because of different life cycles, it is very difficult to integrate these services into the car. For
example, from 2004 to 2009 in Europe, the available bandwidth was multiplied by 200. At the same
time, the cost of connectivity was divided by four. This situation calls for mobile connectivity for
consuming infotainments. There are four possible scenarios to bring infotainment into the car: fully
embedded, where everything is provided with the car; fully autonomous, using one’s own mobile
device; a hybrid approach, where the mobile device is used as a modem to provide connectivity to the
car; or smart mobile integration, where part of the applications and intelligence will run on the mobile
phone, but will also be able to use displays in the car. There is an opportunity to create more value
through industry collaboration, with better integration. Standards will clearly be needed for this to be

Raymond Resendes, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), USA. Mr. Resendes
stated that as a representative of the vehicle regulatory agency, he has a bias towards the safety
benefits of the networked vehicle, but is also addressing their mobility and environmental applications.
Nevertheless, the greatest potential lies in the vehicle safety area, especially with vehicle to vehicle
(V2V) communications. 85% of crashes can be addressed in this way. Effectiveness rates of 10-20% for
vehicle-based systems have been achieved. Vehicle to infrastructure communication can address 15% of
crashes, and as for nomadic devices, their greatest safety potential is in helping to avoid pedestrian
crashes. However, with these latter, there is also a concern about distraction. Few safety benefits are
seen with advisory messages, as they do not address all factors that can lead to an accident. It will take a
collaborative effort between industry and government to deploy safety systems, and so in 2013 there
will be a decision on regulation in the US concerning the requirement to have V2V equipment on all new
vehicles. There is also concern about the existing fleet, as it takes about 20 years to renew it, and after-
market devices are being looked at. Within 10 years there would be enough new vehicles equipped to
make the system effective, but incentives would also be needed for people to install devices on their
existing vehicles. Interoperability, standards and privacy issues are being addressed. The biggest recent
issue has been the reliability of embedded electronic systems, which is key to customer acceptance of

Q1 (Eric Sampson): Who are the best candidates for payment, and how is it done? Is it an after-payment
or a roll-up in the price of a new vehicle?

A1 (Raymond Resendes): That's really one of the benefits of the vehicle deployment scenario. It is rolled
up in the cost of the new vehicle. A monthly fee should not be required. To get vehicle to vehicle safety
applications, what is still needed is to provide security updates for the system, which is the only link to
infrastructure. In the United States at least, we have identified a couple of security implementations
that would be provided by the public sector.

[Implementation scenario and Deployment]
Q2 (Christoph Huss): I would like to see the scenario of the implementation of vehicle to vehicle
communications. Who is responsible for that? Does government step into these things?
A2-1 (Raymond Resendes): The regulatory scenario would require a some ten-year rolling period.
A2-2 (Christoph Huss): The regulatory scenario drives the cost to the customers, and at the end, maybe
to the car manufacturers. Because without a regulatory requirement there is no chance to sell this
technology with more sophisticated devices as an option or in the higher price segment.
A2-3 (Raymond Resendes): When talking about fully networked cars and vehicle communications,
there's a myriad of communication technologies such as 4G, WiFi. Therefore, we have to strongly
support a regulatory push so that DSRC (Dedicated Short Range Communication) would get deployed,
which is the only way to provide the crash-imminent safety applications.
A2-4 (Juhani Jääskeläinen): We have so far organized five international workshops on vehicle
communication and have been discussing the deployment. The situation is that the public sector is
providing certain services, and then everybody is buying the in-vehicle equipment which is fairly cheap.
However, it is clear that if the customer does not see value in this it is not going to work. Then the
customer needs to get something from day one. I don't think that it can be applied on safety, only
because safety is supposed to be given. When they get more complicated and better telematics systems
and services, they are willing to pay for it.
A2-5 (Samuel Loyson): It would take a few years for vehicle to vehicle communications to reach the
market. Maybe in the US with a strong government push it will be quicker, but at least in Europe it will
take some time before we see that on the market.I'm not sure that customers are willing to pay just for
safety propositions because the customer feeling is that cars are already very safe. We have to find
other value propositions and to embed the safety within this proposition.
A2-6 (Christoph Huss): The customers are willing to pay for better traffic information they can get via
our services than they can get from free and publicly available traffic information. Since 2001 we have
this business model, and if we can convince customers that our quality is much better than the other
one, then they are willing to pay. And we need to make clear that the measuring of quality and the
quality of the service is a very important factor. Safety is the second issue. If we have only a single safety
aspect the willingness to pay would be very small. This is what we experienced during the discussion of
the e-call system, it is not the question of technology alone, it is the question of what are the packages,
and what are the services after the e-call. And that means first aid services.

Q3 (Nigel Wall): I'm assuming that each vehicle manufacturer will be responsible for its own product.
But if something goes wrong and there is a problem between two vehicles, how will that be solved?

A3-1 (Raymond Resendes): The basic issue is that it primarily is going to fall to the auto manufacturer.
They are experienced at figuring out what their liability is with their products, so this is just an extension
of what they have already used to examine.
A3-2 (Christoph Huss): Cars are closed systems. If we open up our systems to communications coming
from outside the car, saying that the liability issue will be solved by the car industry is maybe a bit too
A3-3 (Juhani Jääskeläinen): I think that basically the assumption is that the benefits will be larger than
the problems; therefore we have to sort out the liability issue. In a service chain, each one of them has
to take care of their part and they'll have their own liability.
A3-4 (Eric Sampson): I think that in the medical world the liability is taken by government agencies. That
clearly provokes a lot of thought.

[Electric vehicle]
Q4 (Cyriacus Bleijs): I have three questions. When will vehicle-to-vehicle communication be applied to
electric vehicles? Do you think that most of the telecommunication systems on such vehicles will
actually be derived directly from the existing vehicle? Do you envisage that the payment systems
required would have on-board payment systems or independent payment systems?
A4-1 (Samuel Loyson): Our belief is that electric vehicles will be communicating vehicles and connected
vehicles, because the need for communication solutions is even reinforced with electric vehicle services.
In some ways we see that what we will develop for electric vehicles will generalize to all other vehicles.
For the payment system, both payment systems will exist because there is not such a clear relationship
between a car and one owner.
A4-2 (Christoph Huss): We have to develop services for electric vehicles. This would be realized by the
combination of vehicle information systems and navigation systems which provides the driver with
public transportation services such as the next charging station and the train information. But because
this information about public transportation services can be also delivered to others, I don’t see a point
where we have two different kinds of developments. In regard to charging systems in Japan, because we
have the smart card integrated in the connector of the interior mirror system, you can change your
personal card from one vehicle into the other.
A4-3 (Christoph Huss): I think each and every car technology will be introduced and implemented over
the high-end and into the mass market. What I can see as a change is that the time of first introduction
in high-end cars and then going into the mass market becomes shorter and shorter.
A4-4 (Samuel Loyson): For the low-cost trend, I think also that this nomadic device integration is very
interesting because lots of people are already equipped with smart phones.

Q5: The service e-call has been mentioned a couple of times just now. Are you going to implement this
e-call service within BMW. If yes, when? Which cost will be included in the base car cost or an additional
A5 (Christoph Huss): You need to subscribe to the extra service at the moment, and in Europe as well as
in the United States we have e-call systems available. Currently the first year is free, the second year is
for subscription.

[Relationship between liability and standard]
Q6 (Hans Gierlich): Regarding liability issue, if you look at telecommunication, in a sense we have the
same issue there. Someone has to guarantee that it works. This someone eventually is most probably a
standard, which you have to conform to. How can the car industry or these car to car communication
systems validate whether the implementation conforms, and whether it's mostly error-free?
A6-1 (Christoph Huss): Yes, I think without the standard it doesn't work.
A6-2 (Juhani Jääskeläinen): I can confirm that in the case of e-call, this is the case. We have the
functional standards such as how to send the data as well as performance standards such as
A6-3 (Samuel Loyson): There is a quite huge almost philosophical approach between the two industries.
I think telco industries is a best effort industry. Although cell phones are probably the most used devices
to emergency calls in a car or outside the car, in the automotive industries, even if there is one failure,
you almost can be assured there will be a trial. Therefore, you cannot always apply a telco recipe to the
automotive industry.
Q6’ (Eric Sampson): Is there a standard for the non-failure of an airbag?
A6’-1 (Raymond Resendes): No. Just a standard for the airbag.: Liability is an incredibly complicated
issue. But, vehicle to vehicle commuication is relatively easy, when we get to vehicle to iinfrastructure
we bring more players to the table. Then we have more people, or more organizations to decide who
has the liability. And then no matter what we decide, and especially in the United States, the first time
something happens, then it goes to court and liability may get redistributed.


Opening comments from Mr. Sampson, Moderator: In the first roundtable, we asked speakers to focus
on opportunities, and in the second, more on problems and solutions.

David Schutt, SAE International, USA. Mr. Schutt began by referring briefly to the 100 year history of
SAE, and to its ability to develop technical standards. In some respects, he continued, we are past the
fully networked car, and are now dealing with the networked, or intelligent transportation system,
linking vehicles, infrastructures and the internet. SAE has launched the Mobility Electronics Council to
look at electronic megatrends to achieve safer, smarter and greener mobility. SAE has developed over
2,000 standards for vehicles, many dealing with electronics. A new trend in this area is being driven by
the need for open transportation architectures, enabling cooperative systems between vehicles and
infrastructures. These require a new approach to standards based on use cases, and SAE has developed
a new process called “closed-loop” standards for the standards environment. Design- or performance-
based standards can inhibit creativity, especially with emerging technologies. What is needed now is
transportation-enabling standards, similar to those used for the PC, with thousands of standardized
protocols and interfaces. This will make the vehicle much more relevant to connected people’s lifestyles.
Standards need to precede development of ITS systems, to enable interoperability and save deployment
costs. An interesting model is the deployment of smart phones. The technology life cycle and growth of
wireless services provides lessons for bringing these tools into smart vehicle scenarios. Privacy and

security issues relating to smart phones have already been accepted. Vehicle manufacturers can help
with a cooperative human-machine interface approach. A standard application interface may be
required for all smart phones across all vehicles, leaving doors open for creative applications and
services. This could help reduce driver distraction. SAE has worked on standards for embedded systems,
and more recently on dedicated short-range communications. Message sets need to be understood by
each vehicle, and communications need to be reliable and 100% accurate. SAE has also been looking on
future of electric cars, and a connectivity standard for the car to the smart grid network. This includes a
standard plug that it is hoped will be adopted around the world. Concerning the role of government
versus technical standards, Mr. Schutt hopes that the relationship will be as graceful as a waltz, and
without the tension of the tango.

Yasuro Nakanomori, OKI, Japan. Mr. Nakamori discussed the benefits of deploying NGN for ITS value
and applications. ITS communication concerns information processed in actual road transportation, and
information used at the office, at home, by individuals, and which can be of benefit to public
institutions. The use of NGN in the second case can be of great value to human society. In the case of
actual driving, the value of the information needed decreases with the passage of time, for example in
the case of accident avoidance. It can be supplemented by cooperating with ad hoc networks. In the
case of traffic and other useful information, the value of this information increases with time, especially
with the use of NGN. Examples include information on bus schedules for park & ride, and
communication with call centers, dealerships and for other services. In order to achieve ubiquitous
services with NGN, it is necessary to deal with issues such as standardization, rules and regulations and

Reinhard Scholl, Telecommunications Standardization Bureau, International Telecommunications
Bureau (TSB/ITU-T). Mr. Scholl started by saying that without standards, the world as we know it would
come to a halt. But it is very hard to put a monetary value on this fact. The first attempt to do this was
carried out by the German DIN institute, which estimated that standards represent about 1% of GNP.
Whatever the actual figure, the order of magnitude is huge. Over the last decade, there have been many
studies to obtain quantitative data, and ISO is about to complete a study on how to measure the
benefits of standardization. The first sector being used for this methodology is the automotive industry.
The automotive sector is very complex, but if one looks at manufacturing, procurement and engineering,
the benefit of standards is about 0.5 to 2.5% of the total sales value. Translated into monetary value,
that represents 30 to 60 billion dollars annually. We believe at ITU, ISO and IEC that standardization is an
issue that requires decisions by top management. It involves large sums of money, and the automotive
industry should adopt standards and avoid proprietary systems as much as possible.

Russell Shields, Ygomi, USA. Mr. Shields stated that in running profitable businesses, it became
apparent a long time ago that standards were important. As we evolve with new technologies, we
should realize that they will happen. Most people do not realize how long it takes. Going back to the
early 1980s, it took more than 15 years for people to start making money with mobile phones. With GPS
systems, it took Mr. Shields more than 17 years at Navteq before he made any money. Mr. Shields is
also involved in wireless data, and as recently as a year ago at a major mobile world congress in
Barcelona, he could not convince any senior executive of a wireless carrier that he had or would have

data capacity problems. This year in Barcelona, not one said that he did not have a data capacity
problem. The same is true of connectivity with cars, where work has been going on for many years.
Some standards have been developed, some processes are in place, and progress has been made. Most
people now have some kind of GPS device, but this is a recent phenomenon. In the case of connectivity,
despite the efforts made, all the standards needed are still not there. It is harder than in other areas,
because it involves a bridge between two industries, the automotive and the communications industry,
which are very difficult to bring together. To take one example, driver distraction will be a tremendous
issue. Yet despite the lip service, there are no standards on how devices brought into the car will work
with the vehicle and be used safely. Many of the pieces are there, but what is lacking is an overriding
mechanism that will really make it all work. The car and communications people need to be brought
together to make sure that what is necessary is done.

[Worldwide vs regional standards]
Q1 (Eric Sampson): We have already had most of the pieces, but there isn't any overarching
organization. Is it obvious whose job it is, and does it matter if it's done separately in Asia-Pacific,
Americas, Europe?
A1 (Russ Shields): I firmly believe it should be done worldwide from a business standpoint. The cars and
the mobile devices such as iPhones are sold worldwide, and everybody is now in the Chinese market,
the Japanese market, the European, the US market. From a user standpoint we need it as well because
we have more and more international travel, people do rent cars, the hire car business continues to
expand, and the issues that come with a car and mobile.

[Different mode of transportation and plug issue]
Q2 (Reinhard Scholl): There are a lot of different modes of transportation such as cars, trams, trains, air
transport, and water transport. What about the interoperability of different modes of transportation?
Are their standards lacking?
Another question is the connector issue. I guess probably one of the biggest failures of standardization is
the lack of global standardized plug. If we have different plugs for the electric vehicles, it would just be a
A2 (David Schutt): The problem is extraordinarily complex. When the cell phones were developed, it
was about human to human communication. Never was it thought about in terms of controlling and
interacting within a vehicle and an infrastructure. So we have to figure out ways of having additional
dialogues with different elements of the system.
An open architecture not only has to understand today's technology, but also be adaptable for future
technologies that may emerge. We really have to be extraordinarily smart, work collectively, work with
the regulatory bodies, work with the designers, the manufacturers, the suppliers, to develop best known
solutions and keep it open for the future.

[Benefits of standards including plugs, charging station and smart grid issues]
Q3 (Eric Sampson): We have three fundamental pillars of the connected car; the safety benefit, the
environmental benefit and the user convenience benefit. Are they joining up well?

A3-1 (Christoph Huss): I think the discussion of standards is very important and fruitful on all this, but
before we are going further, we need to ask for innovations of structures. These kinds of structural
thinking need to be overcome and then we are much easier off with standardization. We need to work
much more on communication between the different owners of systems. And this is also in regard to
the electric vehicle. The standardization of plugs is important, but it is not the most important issue,
because normally cars which are running in China are not the other day in Europe or in the United
States. But the communication issues between the charging station and the car system is much more
important, and this needs to be standardized. What we need, too, is the communication between
automotive industry, researchers, battery manufacturers and utilities in a much more transparent and
open way in terms of business models. I have not understood why each and every one is talking about
smart grids because it is difficult that millions of cars will suddenly solve the problem of balancing their
A3-2 (Russ Shields): I think the electric vehicle will be a truly important and substantial change. I see the
same thing happening in the car industry and the electric industry. The smart grid, it's now a great buzz
word. As we have gone through telematics as a buzz word, it's not going to lead to business in the short
term. SAE has a nice plug standard. ISO TC 22 pushed by Renault has a slightly different plug standard
because they have a slightly different business interest. On the communication side, ISO TC 22 isn't
supposed to be responsible for the communications outside the vehicle. That belongs to ISO TC 204.
There were arguments about which standards organization should be responsible for doing it. These
things are really difficult. And the communications between the car and the electric companies, some of
which will be through the plug, some of which will be wireless, so that I get more global things, is just
one area where we're not making much progress.

[Redundancy of standards]
Q4 (Ziva Patir): We are not in the position that we have a lack of standards, but we have a redundancy
of standards. How can we reduce this redundancy of standards?
A4-1 (Reinhard Scholl): You have a choice among standards. You have to make sure that, in your
negotiation process, you really focus on one standard and that you eliminate too many options. But it's
just a very difficult negotiation process.
A4-2 (David Schutt): We (SAE) are having those conversations now with ISO. As you know, we all have
our costs that we have to recover. We tremendously rely on the volunteer contributions of the industry.
We provide an infrastructure for them to come together and talk through their issues. And in the end,
the whole system has to work. Therefore, we were in those conversations today, in fact.
A4-3 (Reinhard Scholl): This workshop is organized by ITU, ISO and IEC. We form the World Standards
Cooperation, and there is increasing dialogue not just among the management of these standards
organizations, but also among the various working groups. It is evident that standards-making is
becoming more and more global. But it's not a straightforward path. There will be quite a few curves to
get there.

[Standardization in India]
Q5 (Participant from India): India is a growing market in automobiles. What kind of standardization are
you going to implement in India? Do you have certain plans for that?
                                                   - 10 -

A5-1 (David Schutt): I don't know if it's up to an SAE or an ISO to come and apply standards within a
given country. I think it's the other way around, that the country's need to adopt the standards that
meet their needs. One of the critical parts for an emerging country like India is to ensure that their
engineers are engaged in the standards development process, so that we understand the unique needs
that are coming from those parts of the world, and that they're being adapted into the global standards.
So my encouragement is for India to be involved in the standards process.
A5-2 (Reinhard Scholl): India already made a first big step forward, through the formation of the Global
ICT Standardization Forum for India (GISFI).
A5-3 (Russ Shields): I should add that India, just in the last few months, became a full participating
member in ISO TC 204. I don't think an organization like SAE should take a US standard and try to push it
in India. I think our aim through ISO, through ITU, which India also participates in, is to create the
standards that can be brought into India and made appropriate to the Indian market.

[Supervisory body including prospect for electric car and telematics]
Q6 (Eric Sampson): There are a number of bodies which are active in the area, but there's no
supervisory body or no coordinating body, with the possible exception of UN ECE Working Party 29. Is
there a better solution to that? Or is the solution that WP 29 has got to reorganize and refocus?
A6 (Russ Shields): First of all, because WP 29’s official role is harmonizing the regulations, and that's an
important enough issue with enough problems, I would be hesitant to see it expand further. The issue
that we have in ITS and the issue that we're going to have in electric vehicles is that there are well-
structured industry areas. But we're working across industries. And within the communications area, ITU
is leading the global standards coordination among the different countries. With the electric car, I'm not
particularly worried about the plug, but I’m worried about the communications with the electric utilities.
There are few CEOs of car companies who state that more than 10 per cent of the new cars sold in 2020
will be electric. That's not a big number. In some ways, we just have to wait, and have patience, because
we finally got to the tipping point where the consumer needs and the ability for people to produce
products crossed the line that people were willing to pay for. For telematics, for the vehicle to vehicle
communications, those tipping points will come. They may well come in the next five years. I think
people in Europe should pay much more attention to the US decision to regulate vehicle to vehicle
communications by 2013. In Europe, I don't yet see an awareness of how much of an impact that will
have. Because it gets regulated in one part of the world, it will be a good step for others to follow along.
So they will happen.


Session Chairman: Kevin Borras, H3B Media Ltd., UK

Paul J. Vorster, CEO Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) South Africa. Mr. Vorster’s presentation
addressed the subject of “Preparing the Way for the Networked Car in a New World Economy:
Overview of ITS Infrastructure in South Africa.” He began by saying that what we are doing should not
be technology driven, but based on the needs of the people we want to serve. He highlighted the great
contrasts in the country, with a huge gap between rich and poor, high tech on the one hand and no tech
on the other. Minibus taxis carry 65% of commuters. Official unemployment is 24%, but actually is much
                                                   - 11 -

higher. 5 out of 10 people are practically unemployed, implying huge social needs. Euro 80 billion is now
being spent on infrastructure projects, and the forthcoming soccer World Cup has created a strong
sense of urgency. The networked car has to be seen in the context of transport challenges the country
faces. One is reducing congestion nearing gridlock in many cases, which means improving traffic
management and law enforcement, and developing integrated public transport systems to reduce
dependence on private transport. This implies a better modal balance, and will require travel and
commuter information services. Improving safety and reducing environmental impact are also priorities,
and funding must be found for all this. All of these issues represent major opportunities for ITS and
related products. A number of flagship projects have been undertaken, including rapid rail, freeways,
open-road tolling systems, freeway management for metropolitan areas, airport upgrades, and electric
vehicles. The constraints limiting progress include existing social inequalities, competing budget
priorities, the infrastructure back log, the poor state of existing road infrastructure, the age of cars on
the road, limited discretionary spending on technology, insufficient tax collection, and the imbalance
between road and rail, meaning that much freight is transported by road. The drivers for progress
include the high amount of spending on high-tech infrastructure, a strong ICT industry, the unacceptably
high level of road fatalities requiring action involving ITS, road safety improvement, involvement in
standards development, the promotion of ITS (the point being that technology is needed because the
country is poor), electronic vehicle identification, the high level of vehicle-related crime, which can only
be addressed with technology. It is important to balance the drivers and constraints in a very challenging
social and political environment.


Q: For the World Cup, what is being done to transport fans from one location to another? Is any ITS
technology being used to manage football traffic?

A: It is a difficult question, because of the issue of using World Cup legacy systems. We cannot afford to
create a legacy where there is not a need. The day to day movement will be addressed by emergency
measures, such as special bus services between city centers and the venues.

Q: How are things proceeding with stolen cars, overall traffic volume or traffic management, and road
fatalities? Has there been any improvement from standards activities or technology implementation?

A: The ITS data now available will greatly expand traffic management services. But we have a hugely
growing population, where private vehicles are very aspirational, as well as fundamental, along with a
shortage of proper public transport. So the number of vehicles on the road is increasing faster than the
network can be expanded, and drivers tend to be very aggressive. Then you have the age of the vehicles
and the lack of proper maintenance. We currently do not have sufficient, accurate and reliable traffic
data. The automobile association claims that there are 4 million drivers with invalid licenses on the road.
So we have a very dangerous cocktail at the moment. You can only manage what you can measure, and
we are currently unable to measure accurately, which means that measures taken may not be as
accurate as they should be. The problems will not be solved without technology, and the government is
aware of this.
                                                   - 12 -

Sed Saad, Waseda University, Japan. Dr. Saad, whose subject was “Towards ITS, a Japanese Long-term
Strategy” started by saying that one of the goals of ITS in Japan is to build a ubiquitous society, based on
policy-technology partnerships. From the 1980s, ITS in Japan was part of transport policy, and in 1995, it
shifted to telecommunications. In 2004 the government launched the ubiquitous society project, using
ubiquitous network technologies. ITS is an engine for such developments. It is considered as a
comprehensive info-communication system, using transportation, and as a tool to develop
telecommunications opportunities. To implement the ubiquitous society, there is a mobility gap, and the
aim of the policy is to fill it through the use of ITS. Japan adopted this approach based on ITS for a
number of reasons. In the 1990s, it saw itself as lagging behind the US, and was anxious to launch the
information society project, using IT and telecommunications. After Al Gore lost the election in the US,
Japan leaped ten years ahead in terms of ITS. The second goal in Japan is energy-related, known as
“green ITS.” The key complex challenge is to combine energy, vehicles, transportation and
telecommunications. One of the government’s objectives is to create a new ITS industry. It is acting as
an “entrepreneurial state”, where technology has reached a limit and requires additional support, with
the state assuming related risks. The powerful Japanese car industry considers ITS as a shift from a
product-based to a service-based industry, and a huge engine for the Japanese economy. A number of
public-private partnerships have been established to this effect, where for example, the government is
placing telecom sensors along the road infrastructure while pushing car navigation, and all for free.
Partnerships are needed in ITS, because public sector action has a profound influence on industry and
business models. This type of project has been very successful, illustrating a shift from
telecommunications to an internet business model; the car industry would be advised to do the same
with ITS.


Q: The development of new technologies is often linked to what is going on in the economy. To what
extent are Japan’s ambitious projects affected by the downturn?

A: ITS is a long-term project. Major investments were started in the 1990s, and are not affected by the
current situation. The new ITS industry is also expected to be very profitable. I believe it is a realistic
hope, and the same applies in Korea. Whatever the difficulties, the government is assuming the risk, not
the private sector, which is why we call it the “entrepreneur” state.

Q: How do you see standardization in Japan? Who are the counterparts? As we at the EU are seeking
global harmonization, how do we deal with Japan?

A: Japan cannot be seen as one unit. There are five ministries dealing with ITS in Japan, and each has its
own standardization body. In addition, there are multiple NGOs dealing with standardization. Japan
looks at ITS mainly from a business perspective, and not standardization.

Bruno Grandjean, Pole Vehicule du Futur, France. Mr. Grandjean’s subject was the “Customer-oriented
networked car: results from the observatories of the cluster ‘Pole Vehicule du Futur’”. He explained
that the main activity of his cluster was collaborative R&D projects, for ITS, mobility solutions and
electric vehicles. Since these developments concern customers, two observatories have been
                                                   - 13 -

established to observe market trends, end-user expectations, and various aspects of vehicles and
mobility. In the research conducted, based on interviews and focus groups, the average citizen does not
relate spontaneously to networking in cars, which appears very remote. But there are expectations, for
example a desire to download data from the home to the car, and latent demand. In more directed
interviews, there was a wide range of expectations for the networked car. These include anti-collision
systems, congestion information, and in France in particular, police radar detection. With prompting,
some said they wished to be able to communicate with other drivers in front of or behind their car,
somewhat like Facebook on the road, along with web 2.0 applications. Location based information was
also mentioned, such as park & ride, transport schedules, local activities, the pre-visualization of
unknown places, cost factors, environmental impact information and comfort and convenience-related
information. Thanks to the smart phone, many new needs and applications are emerging, and
Mr Grandjean thinks we will see the fully connected person before the fully connected car. Products are
expected to be as transparent as possible, with no additional annoyance for the driver or user, and to
correspond to a real need, as customers do not like to pay for applications that will rarely be using. For
example, users want safety applications to be mandatory and free. Another issue is that public
authorities and individuals may have different expectations. In the case of a traffic jam, drivers will want
to avoid them, whereas the authorities want cars to stay where they are in the traffic jam, to protect
other roads for normal traffic or emergencies and avoid jams elsewhere.


Q: Perfect traffic management would have public authorities not only in charge, but also giving different
information to different individual drivers. Is that correct?

A: Everybody having all the information does not favor the general welfare, so one has to give specific
information to specific people, favoring some over others. That is where we are headed, and that is the

Robert Cone, Chair, Permanent International Association of Road Congress (PIARC)/FISITA Joint Task
Force for the connected vehicle. Mr. Cone discussed “The connected vehicle – driven by consumers or
policymakers”? He explained that the role of PIARC is to provide advice to the world’s road operators.
The base is civil engineering, but technology has become a heavy component. Both PIARC and FISITA
need to understand what each expects from the road network and the automotive sector. Over the
years the policy focus has shifted from efficiency to safety and carbon savings, with ambitious targets
such as reducing the number of road fatalities by 50% by 2010, which in the UK has been achieved. In
reaching this target, there has been a radical change in vehicle design, with less change in infrastructure
design. From the road operators’ point of view, economic difficulties mean a reduction in capital
investment. This means that many things in ITS which were taken for granted will not be possible in the
future. It means working more closely with automotive suppliers to obtain information about road
networks that was obtained directly before. Since consumers have to pay, we need to know what they
will want from the product. The modern driving environment is much more complicated than ever
before. The social question linked to this is whether roads should be tailored to those who can cope, or
to those, such as the very young and the very old, who are more accident-prone. Since many ITS
                                                  - 14 -

technologies can help them avoid accidents, developments may be driven largely by demographics. New
applications such as Twitter in traffic queues may also be driving change. One may ask whether making
intelligent, autonomous and more complicated vehicles is not the easy way out, leading to unnecessary
functions. Another question is how to finance the telecommunications element of the connected
vehicle. Consumers are very reluctant to pay ongoing running costs, so new business models may be
needed. Data and litigation are another area of concern. The ownership of especially the dynamic data
thus becomes a major concern, for who takes responsibility if it is incorrect? In the UK there are forensic
police vehicles which can recover much information, but that raises privacy concerns. Road operators
tend to be risk-averse, and with connected cars, the best advice may be to wait and see. Technology is
not an issue; its problems will be solved. Standards are coming along nicely. Governments are becoming
more engaged. But there are still many questions surrounding the legal situation.


Q: There is a mandated event data recorder coming into effect in the US in 2011. There may be a
different philosophy about the technology in Europe. What is the state of EDR mandates or
implementation in Europe?

A: In the UK, the police and emergency services carry EDRs. There is no particular interest in convincing
the public to carry them. The auto insurance companies also have a role, but they are equally
unenthusiastic. The only way forward is to mandate it.


Session Chairman: Hans W. Gierlich, Head Acoustics GmbH/Germany

As introduction he explained that the presentations of session 2 will be focused on the interface
between the user and the cars and on the solutions to support various types of applications.

Mr. Adda Ali-Pacha was unable to attend the workshop, therefore session 2 finally consisted of 3

H.W. Gierlich started with the first presentation on “Speech Technologies in Cars and the Role of ITU-T

Driver distraction is becoming a serious problem and speech technologies may contribute to improve
the situation. The driving task mainly involves the human visual system, hands and legs as well as
auditory system (listening). Speech represents therefore an important information channel from the
driver to the car and can support a number of applications in particular in the areas of speech
recognition systems and enhanced in-car communication systems between passengers. Compared to an
“orthotelefonic reference position” with 1 meter of distance between the persons, speech recognition,
speech synthesis, text to speech systems and dialog systems require specific characteristics in terms of
quality, bandwidth, noise cancellation and delay to provide seamless man-machine interaction. Through
demonstrations of different speech bandwidths and noise background, H.W.Gierlich stressed the need
to enable wideband telephony (100 Hz- 8 kHz) in cars.
                                                    - 15 -

In-car communication is also an area where signal processing can bring major benefits and general
requirements were presented.

Finally the role of ITU-T Study Group 12 and Study Group 16 in ITU-T in the area of definition and
qualification of speech signal processing was presented, this includes also testing for hands free devices
in cars. The need to standardize this kind of system (optimization and validation) was recognized by the
car industry (VDE/Germany) about 10 years ago.

ITU-T Focus Group on Car Communication has been created in 2008. This kind of working structure is
open to all interested parties, nowadays car manufacturers, telecom industry, algorithm developers and
universities participate to the FG work. Regarding speech dialogue systems, ITU-T has already a number
of standards available covering both in car and networked based systems.
Speech recognition is considered as a difficult issue for standardization in particular to ensure
interoperability. The Focus Group has now started to work on acoustical front end for speech
recognition, for which standards are still missing. As conclusions H.W. Gierlich stressed the role of
speech processing as a key technology to introduce new services in cars and to reduce driver distraction
and encourages experts to participate actively in the work of ITU-T in particular of the Focus Group.


Q: How far can the acoustic channel influence driver distraction, in case quality is degraded quality?

A: It seems that this problem has not been analyzed in details, probably this could be done using driver

Udo Haiber from SVOX/Germany presentation on “Connected speech in Cars” addressed human
machine interface based on speech in the area of convenience, which together with safety and mobility
forms the three basic areas for connected car applications. The role and impact of speech technology on
the user and stake holders was explained. From the user perspective, today the “always connected
generation” wants to use internet in cars. Regarding car distraction, U. Haiber presented briefly the
results of a study on lane deviation, from which music seems to be the most critical media. Therefore
hands-free and eyes-free solutions are needed. After a review of speech relevant existing and future in-
car services (communication, driving support, infotainment/convenience), he analyzed the effects on
the traditional and always connected generation users. For the speech input, engine and user interface
requirements were described. Regarding speech output requirements for text-to-speech applications
like eReader (e-book), RSS feed and e-mail have been explained.

This new situation will have an impact on the stake holders. On the commercial side new and more
complex business models will appear while in the technical area more developers will be involved (e.g.
open software). On the legal side, liability and responsibility in case of accident and recall will need to be
carefully considered.

According to U. Haiber, the needs of the “always connected generation” will open the way for killer
applications based on speech and products are expected to enter the market this year.
                                                    - 16 -


Q: What is the impact of the emotional dimension (related to the content of a message) on driver

A: This parameter is difficult to measure, however speech solution represents a major improvement
compared to the present situation.

Q: What about the integration of nomadic devices in cars and the capability to warn the driver to not
use specific devices in particular driving situation (e.g. not to make a call when turning)

A: The conclusion is that so far embedded solutions already exist but no standards are available.

The last presentation of session 2 on Use of Technology (TTS and ASR) as an interface between the
driver and the vehicle was done by Mr. Paolo Coppo from Loquendo/Italy. He described driver’s
expectation with reference to movies like “Knight Rider” and “Automan” and presented the status of
implementation in today’s navigation systems using text-to-speech (TTS) and automatic speech
recognition (ASR). ASR is a more difficult issue, e.g. for destination entry it is not yet a commodity and if
it does not work properly, it will increase driver distraction.

Mobile phones and PDA have ASR for voice dialing, but not designed to be used when driving (e.g. in a
noisy environment). Another issue is the possibility to use different ASR software in a device (Apple did
not allow at the beginning 3rd party applications for voice dialing on iphones!). For navigation,
depending where the applications and functionalities are, speech recognition will have to be
implemented either in the device, in the car or in the network.

In the future, the access to information in the network will be important (“connected” businessmen).
Mr. P. Coppo demonstrated a service launched last year by Bell Canada allowing the management by
voice of e-mails and calendar.

Regarding e-mail, user expectations for ASR are still very high, in particular on accuracy (100 % would
need human supervision located in the network!).

Finally Mr. P. Coppo reviewed the implications on speech of future HMI, like structure of commands and
control, capability to handle statistical language models and trade off between usability and accuracy.

From the standardization viewpoint, a framework similar to the speech telephony market place like
VXML (voice applications) and SCXML (dialogue applications) would be needed for embedded systems. A
standardized interface would allow to leverage the community of developers for voice-enabled
applications, keeping in mind the security aspects and open standards for speech technology.


Q: The question of a regulatory framework in order to minimize distractions was asked to the session
                                                   - 17 -

A: Standards already exist from ISO (e.g. timing for warning signal) and from the car manufacturers
association (e.g. place of the screen on the dashboard).

It was found important that such regulatory requirements do not block innovation. With the “always
connected generation”, there may be a need for regulation.

In addition, the question to group the display information on the windshield (head-up) instead of a lot of
devices spread over the dashboard was briefly discussed. It was found that road security experts should
be involved in such a decision and not only experts from the car industry.


Session Chairman: Denis Griot, Freescale Semi-conductor, Inc.

In his introduction, he stressed the great evolution of cars during the last decade with reference to the
networks inside today’s vehicle.

Real time Ethernet was the title of the first presentation by Messrs Helge Zinner and Norbert Balbierer
from Continental Automotive GmbH.

Ethernet is already implemented in a few cars and the trend will go on, as this technology should allow a
reduction of complexity and costs of in-car networks.

The presentation focused on two specific aspects: Audio Video Bridging (AVB) and Networking
Configuration Management.

AVB is becoming an IEEE standard under 802.1 and covers time synchronization, forwarding/queuing
enhancements and stream reservation. IEEE has created a group to work on the car industry
requirements to AVB. H. Zinner gave examples of implementation of these 3 standards in an in-vehicle
network to provide QoS for real-time services. The integration of AVB in automotive ECUs is one the
current activities at Continental.

The second part of the presentation on network and configuration management was done by Mr. N.
Balbierer. He addressed the specific aspect of deactivation and activation of individual selected ECUs
and subsystems in automotive networks, reducing energy and fuel consumption. Existing systems based
on CAN, MOST, Flexray, etc. do not support this functionality. In an Ethernet network, this can be done
using link pulses sent when the physical connection is set up (link test in 10BaseTX resp. auto-
negotiation in 100/1000BaseT). The link energy module is able to active or deactivate the ECU through a
network manager communicating (SNMP) with the switch.

In conclusion, N. Balbierer listed current activities on Ethernet like the integration of SNMP into an
automotive environment, the analysis of energy saving capabilities and the realization of an
experimental model to evaluate the concept.
                                                  - 18 -


Q: In the discussion, the question of the transition of the existing standards like Flexray and MOST to
Ethernet was asked.

A: Ethernet looks very promising, it is already implemented in airplanes and industrial automation. In a
first phase, experiences will be gained for the entertainment part of the car networks especially
regarding real time capabilities. In the long term it should replaced existing standards, consequently
migration scenarios will be necessary.

It seems that this approach is supported by the car industry in general.

The second presentation of the session by V. Pramod from the Bharti School of Telecommunication
Technology and Management, Indian Institute of Technology in Delhi, described the Development of
open-core Flexray Controller for OEM ultra low cost automotive applications.

In future cars, the Flexray backbone will allow the integration of the various applications connected by
different networking protocols (MOST, CAN, Flexray). Each node of the backbone consists of a host
processor, a bus driver and a Flexray Communication controller. The “smart” Flexray controller includes
an 8 bit open core processor (“picoblaze”). This approach will bring more flexibility to the designer for
the support of large range of applications form the simplest (e.g. seat control) to the more complicated
(e.g. gateways) ones. It will reduce the power consumption (elimination of the host processor) and also
bring down the cost per ECU.
Open-source silicon will be to the automobiles what open-source is to software.


Q: What is the position of the car industry regarding open core silicon?

A: V. Pramod answered that from the developing countries perspective, this solution would allow to
bring such applications also to the cars offered on those markets.
The open core work is concentrating on Flexray in priority, because of the cost issue, application to
other networks like CAN, LIN will follow later.

Regarding implementation in the low cost segment, V. Pramod indicated that the architecture is still
under testing in particular regarding the performance.

A representative of the car industry made reference to several realizations based on open source
software, showing that it is already reality in the automotive industry.

Gateways: Latest evolution in vehicle networking was the topic addressed by Marc Osajda from
Freescale Semiconductor Inc in the third presentation of session 3.

He stressed the complexity of the in-vehicle network (6 ECU in 1996, more than 70 in 2010) and its
impact on cost, weight, energy consumption, etc. Consequently, there is a clear need to simplify the
architecture (ECU integration, emergence of domain controllers connected to the central gateway).
                                                    - 19 -

For safety critical applications, Flexray will continue to be used, while Ethernet seems to become the
preferred solution for AVB types of network and to replace MOST, especially for high bandwidth and
time critical applications. Ethernet technology for in-car networking has several advantages, for instance
substantial cost saving can be achieved using unshielded twisted pairs, providing that EMC/EMI issues
are under control.

 M. Osajda took as an example a high end car using Ethernet (including switching) for infotainment and
explained the role of the semiconductor industry to develop the corresponding devices like interfaces,
controllers, etc.

About reliability and risk of failure of the electronic, the ISO26262 standard on “Functional safety”, is
defining methods to classify the level of risk (risk classes), the notion of “acceptable residual risk” and
procedure to confirm that such an acceptable level of risk is achieved (certification). This standard will
have a great impact on the design and deployment of electronic applications in cars.


Q: More information on the role, the complexity and the deployment of the Central gateway was

A: M. Osajda indicated that this device is the key element of the in-vehicle Ethernet network (to which
almost all domain controllers will be connected) and have a large volume of data to process.

Such Central Gateways solutions are already deployed in high-end cars.

Q: Another question was the possible contradiction between the need for open source software in ITS
and the requirements in terms of safety like those of ISO26262.

A: M. Osajda’s opinion is that, even if the driving forces are different, the general objective is to achieve
secure cars.

The next presentation on Context-Driven Disruption Tolerant Networking for Vehicle Applications was
given by Mr. Ratul Guha from Telcordia Technologies.

DTN is an already known concept to cope with frequent disruptions in the dissemination and exchange
of information among vehicles and RSUs (Road Side Units). DTN challenges are to achieve long duration
information download, to use the dynamic vehicle position and to cope with frequent disconnections of
links. R. Guba described briefly different approaches to solve these problems. Among them, the Context-
Driven DTN (C-DTN) which can be used for applications in the area of environment and driver
information was explained in more details.

Packet delivery ratio and average delay have been simulated for two evaluation scenarios. The results
show that the packet delivery ratio can reach 80% and the delay is about 150-200 secs. Critical
parameters are the density of vehicles per mile and the motion of vehicles.
                                                   - 20 -


Q: The application of this technology to driver assistance was briefly discussed.

A: Because of the delay, it would only be suitable for driver assistance to event information far away
from the present driver position and not in the immediate vicinity like blind spot detection.

In the last presentation of the session, Thierry Ernst from INRIA/France gave an update of the Geonet
project, which is a combination of IPV6 and geonetworking.

Geonet is a 2 year European project which was concluded last month. Geonetworking is at present the
preferred architecture for ITS communications for Car to Car (C2C and Car to Infrastructure (C2I). IPv6
extends the capability of Geonetworking and vice-versa. The reasons to move to IPV6 are the extension
of the addressing capabilities and of the functionalities (e.g security, multicast). GeoNet is addressing
the network layer. The project rely on IEEE 811.p, however the architecture can be applied to other
access technologies. Geonetworking is hidden to the application layer which only sees IPV6. A vertical
management layer was introduced mainly for security and privacy issues which are relevant to several

As part of the project, a demonstration with 3 vehicles was done to test multi-hop routing for safety
applications with no delay constraints (traffic hazard).

The project is now concluded and has led to a number of important results, including reference
specification, prototype implementation, experimentation, conformance test, etc. These results have
now started to be used in the standardization activities of ETSI and ISO/TC204 (project CVIS).


Q: What are the security issues in using IPv6?

A: T. Ernst answered that this was an important issue during the project. A module was developed for
location privacy and also for authentication. Most of the detailed work needs still to be done. He said
also that security in ITS should be considered at all layers.

In his conclusions, D. Griot said that that the presentations have shown that the technology is available
and that no gap in the standards has been identified, even if some duplication in the work exists.
Therefore, it is It now time for the stake holders to implement these solutions.


Session Chairman: Bernard Dugerdil, Freescale Semidconductor Inc.

This session was organized in two parts.

First an ISO study on the Economic Benefits of Standards in the Automotive Industry was presented by
Mr. Daniele Gerundino from ISO.
                                                  - 21 -

In the second part of the session, a roundtable took place grouping representatives of the key SDOs
involved in ITS.

This session started with the summary of ISO study performed by Roland Berger Consulting given by
Daniele Gerundino from ISO.

There are already many studies to assess the value of standards, however there is so far no recognized
methodology. The objectives of the ISO study were to measure the impact of standards on an
organization, to define criteria to asses the value of using standards and to provide guidance when
developing further studies to assess the benefits of standards within an industry sector.

According to the ISO study, it is necessary to consider the benefits over the entire value chain of an
organization and to proceed in four steps: understand the value chain, analyze the value drivers, identify
and quantify the impacts of standards and assess/consolidate the results (EBIT).

The methodology and its application are described in the Methodology Guide.

In the second part of his presentation, D. Gerundino presented the estimate of contributing impact of
standards in the worldwide automotive industry. The combined effects (saving) including OEMs and
suppliers (R+D, procurement, production) is estimated to 1,24 to 1,77 % of sales, corresponding to 28-55
bn of USD. This should be considered as a first estimation since there is a need to improve the reliability
of the data used.

At the roundtable, each representative gave a summary of the present and future activities relevant to

B. Dugerdil gave a short overview of the activity in ITU-R/WP5A which covers millimeter wave
communication systems for ITS (including DSRC). In addition, ITU-R is also studying Software Defined
Radio (SDR), Cognitive radio (CG), adaptive antennas and other topics relevant to ITS.

Mr. Chab Sub Lee, Chairman of ITU-T Study Group 13 (Future Networks) presented the vision of the
NGN experts regarding fully network car. In NGN, a fully networked car is considered as a multifunction
terminal or a multifunction home network and is part of the fix-mobile convergence concept. NGN is
providing broadband over any access technologies and managed IP-capabilities. ITU-T SG13 is at present
developing a Recommendation Y.2281 (Y.NGN-Vehicle) defining key features, functional models,
reference configuration and functional requirements for V2I, V2V and V2H. The Approval of this new Rec
is scheduled for April 2010.

Mr. Yushi Naito, Chairman of ITU-T Study Group 16 (Multimedia Coding systems and applications) gave
an overview of the ITS relevant work in SG16. On End-to-end speech quality, ITU-T SG16 which is
responsible for the standardization of speech and voice coding algorithm, works together with ITU-T
SG12 and the Focus Group on Car Communications. ITU-T SG16 also working on vehicle gateway
platform as part of the home network work supporting ubiquitous multimedia applications. Accessibility
is also an area where ITU-T SG16 is active which is relevant to ITS (accessibility to ICT services and
applications for users with disabilities).
                                                   - 22 -

At present, ITU-T is considering the creation of a new Focus group on Smart Grid.

Mr. Y. Naito indicated that collaboration is important in the development of ITS standards and that SG16
has a long experience in the development of common standards with other SDOs, H262/MPEG-2 and
H.264/MPEG4-Part 10 are good examples.

ISO/TC204 – Intelligent Transport Systems activities were presented by Mr. Ryan D. Lamm. TC204 has
already published 95 standards, technical specifications and technical reports, about 100 new texts are
under development. At present 12 working groups are active, a new one is proposed on cooperative
systems (WG18).

TC204 has a number of liaisons with other SDOs, in particular with CEN/TC278, ITU-R/WP8A, APEC,
ETSI/TC-ITS, UN/CEFACT/BG3, Open Geospatial Consortium, IETF and SDR Forum.

Mr. R. Lamm presented a sample of the new projects for 2010, which included vehicle specific topics like
“Lane keeping assistance systems”, “Cooperative intersection signal information and violation warning
systems” and “Forward Vehicle Collision Mitigation Systems”.

Mr. Gérard Ségarra, Chairman of the ETSI/ITS WG1 presented the standardization activities in ETSI and
CEN which is focused on the development of a minimum set of standards within the EC mandate M/453
for a basic set of applications (time frame: 2-3 years). Conformance testing and interoperability are key
issues. The automotive industry is participating in the development of the standards through the C2C
consortium, which cooperate closely with TC ITS in ETSI. The suppliers and OEMs are involved through a
C2C technical committee.

Mr. G. Ségarra stressed the need of a public private partnership, in particular the road operators should
be on board.

A minimum set of standards shall ensure Interoperability across Europe, and Europe shall develop
consistent and stable offer as contribution to the international harmonization of the standards.

For Mr. Cyracus Bleijs, Chairman of IEC/TC69 Road Vehicle, e-cars are at the crossroad of different
industries and one of the challenges of TC69 is to bring the various stake holders to work together.
Regarding connection of e-cars to the grid, there is unfortunately no universal plug, for example the SAE
plug cannot be used in Europe (3 phases). Another example is e-vhc to grid communication, roaming,
where different standards are under development. To charge e-vehicles, it will be necessary to orientate
the client to choose optimum charging time in order to avoid overload of the power grid at the local
level. For this purpose standardized protocols are needed, which will be used not only for e-vehicle (it is
likely that vehicles in general will connect to the home network).

According to Mr. C. Bleijs, there is at present a trend to over design the systems, several entities are
working on standards which are not compatible. He considers that the decision will have to be imposed
in Europe by the EC. Therefore, he recommends to set up a joint governing body between ISO and IEC
on the strategic level.
                                                   - 23 -


Q: The general question was asked, when interoperable standards can be expected for the first phase of
deployment of fully networked cars?

A: For IEC/TC69, a distinction should be made between renewable and non-renewable physical objects.
ITS belongs to the first category and the corresponding standards can be expected within 2 years.

ETSI and the C2C-Consortium have a mandate from the European Commission and the first phase of
deployment is planned in about 2 years. However, the standards should be able to evolve, considering
the long life-time of vehicles (15 years).

For TC204 interoperability is seen as the major issue for the introduction of ITS, investigations are
underway in USA on this issue.

For ITU-T SG16, not only the different standards developed by international organizations are important
but also the regional standards. Interoperability is one of the driving forces behind the activity on
vehicle gateway platform ITU-T SG16.

In ITU-T SG13, regarding interoperability, NGN is seen as the network to support V-2-I services and
applications. In addition, it is also important to ensure interoperability between cars and home networks
as well as between nomadic devices and in vehicle networks.

Q: With reference to the ISO study the cost of the delay in the development of standards was asked.

A: According to D. Gerundino from ISO, it is difficult to give a figure. He quoted the example of the DVD
(Blue Day / HDD), where according to industry analysts about 15 to 20 Billions $ were lost due to the
fragmentation of the market. For the automotive industry, delay in the standardization may bring the
risk to miss the great opportunity offered by the market (e.g. electric vehicle).

Q: Can we start to implement ITS with the existing infrastructure and what are the standards needed?

A: For ETSI and the C2C Consortium, C-2-C communications could be implemented without existing
infrastructure, but it would take 5 to 10 years. However, for traffic management applications (C-2-I), the
infrastructure is needed. This is for his reason that the concept is based on cooperative systems.

For TC204, V-2-V and V-2-I should be at same extend decoupled, V-2V applications can be implemented
without relaying on the existing infrastructure.

Within NGN, SG13 is considering the requirements for C-2-I communications in terms of security,
mobility and quality of services in the scope of the work on fix-mobile convergence.

Q: When does IEC/TC69 expect the European electrical plug to be ready?

A: Mr. C. Beijs stressed the difference between the European and USA distribution systems. Regarding
the plug, Europe needs a plug (available within 3 months) for the wall while SAE has standardized a plug
for the car. It is likely that the SAE plug will be used in Europe for vehicles with 1 phase. During the
                                                    - 24 -

debate, it was indicated that SAE has standardized the plug two years ago, driven by the industry and
with major incentives to come quickly to the market.

Q: Question to ETSI, are they gaps and/or overlaps in the standards?

A: Mr. G. Ségarra indicated that standardization roadmaps should be harmonized in order to avoid
duplication. Two types of standards should be considered: for interoperability and modularity
((flexibility/evolution). The EC has asked for a minimum set of ITS standards within 2-3 years.

Q: So far no references have been made in C-2-I to e-call and electronic tolling systems?

A: According to Mr. G. Ségarra, e-call is an application different from typical C-2-I communications and
the standards are available. Electronic tolling systems is a typical C-2-I systems and one of the major
issue is the harmonization of the DSRC frequency bands.

Q: How can the cooperation between ISO, IEC, ITU (e.g. between TC204/WG16 and ITU-T/SG13) be

A: B. Dugerdil indicated that this is already an action point identified by the so-called CTO-Meeting
(yearly event organized by ITU-T) and that need for closer cooperation is recognized. A good example for
cooperation is the partnership project in mobile communication (3GPPs).


Session Chairman: James Rosenstein, ITS consultant

Opening comments: Electric vehicles and climate change have become a very fashionable, widely
discussed topic, driving policy in many countries, and involving huge investments and R&D efforts.
Making it happen is a different story, and many questions remain.

George Arnold, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), USA. Dr. Arnold said that the
focus of his talk on “Enabling Electric Vehicles Using the Smart Grid” would be how electric vehicles fit
into an overall infrastructure. The structure of the electric grid has not changed in 100 years. It has been
modernized, but not nearly as much as other infrastructures, such as telecommunications. There are
four major goals for the smart grid in the US. The first is to modernize the grid. The second is to increase
the use of renewables, such as wind and solar, which the grid cannot currently handle because of their
variability and unpredictability. The third is to support the shift from oil to electric transportation, given
that 50% of imported oil in the US is used for transportation. The fourth goal is to enhance the reliability
and security of the electric system. The fundamental re-engineering of the grid, a key national priority, is
very similar to the transformation of the telecom networks, when information technology and data
networking were applied to automate the operations and maintenance of the telecom infrastructure. In
addition to providing the sensors and intelligence to monitor and control the grid in an automated way,
it will also provide for the transformation of the grid from an architecture optimized to deliver power
from large, bulk generation sources such as nuclear or coal plants to end customers, to a much more
distributed environment, where there will be a two-way flow not only of information, but also of
                                                   - 25 -

electricity. Strong federal leadership is required for such a transformation, and not just from the private
sector. In 2007, the US Congress passed the Energy Independence and Security Act, laying out a
comprehensive national policy for the smart grid, and defining the roles of the various federal agencies.
It recognizes that an infrastructure such as this has to be founded on open standards. The role of NIST is
to provide leadership and coordination to ensure a standards framework for a secure and interoperable
smart grid. There are eight focus areas to guide the work: demand response and consumer energy
efficiency, wide area situational awareness, electric storage, electric transportation, advanced metering
infrastructure, distribution grid management, cyber security and network communications. The US has a
strong interest in electric vehicles for a number of reasons. If 70% of vehicles and light trucks were
electrified, half of US oil imports would be displaced; there would be major environmental benefits; 70%
of the energy needs of today’s fleet would be covered without adding any capacity; and with improved
storage capacity, batteries in EVs could provide power during peak demand. Electric vehicles should also
be attractive to consumers, with linear torque, independent wheel drive and new vehicle configurations.
Supporting electric vehicles on the grid will require new use cases. They include flexible charging
scenarios such as roaming, to bill for electric use; support for load control, in particular in areas with a
high concentration of electric vehicles; and eventually using the vehicles as a source of power for the
grid. If charging can be managed so that it takes place during overnight hours, there would be no impact
on existing capacity. The need for interaction between the vehicle and the grid is key to making
operation practical from an infrastructure point of view. Protocols between the vehicle and the grid
need to transmit information on vehicle and customer ID, vehicle monitoring such as state of charge,
pricing, energy requests and timing information. In terms of practical deployment, we have to realize
that there are way too many standards, and our role is to select the ones to be adopted in the grid and
to fill gaps where needed. These standards need to be coordinated and developed by many


Q: Power utilities do not necessarily like the idea of electric vehicles selling power back to the grid. How
will that work in the future?

A: This is a complicated issue, involving regulation as well as technology. Regulation is needed to allow
power to be injected and sold back on to the grid. Some of the 50 states have been thinking about this,
others have not. Interconnection standards are also needed. There are 3100 electric utilities in the US.
Some are very progressive and are leading the way; others are not in the vanguard.

Q: We have the same mandate in Europe for a homogeneous grid network. But there appears to be a
divergence on the upper application level, concerning the message and language set. I think we should
work together to see how this message set can be used and go back into the vehicle. We have to
prepare message sets for the electric vehicle, and we do not know if they will go through the air or by
wire. There is an absolute need for collaboration on this.

A: Yes, our policy is to base our smart grid on international standards wherever possible, and we are
participating actively in international organizations. We have also opened up our process, and are
                                                   - 26 -

inviting organizations, companies and government agencies from around the world to participate as
members of the standards panel working with us on this program. There are 550 companies and
organizations on it, with 1700 members. Over 50 of the companies are not based in the US, and there
are government agencies from other parts of the world on the panel.

Bernhard Jansen, EDISON Project, IBM, Switzerland. The subject of Mr. Jansen’s presentation was:
“Project EDISON: Networking in a Vehicle to Grid (V2G) project”. He said that the goal of EDISON was
similar to the US smart grid project, but implemented in Denmark, and focusing on electric vehicles and
the integration of wind power. The current penetration of wind power is about 22%, and the plan is to
reach 50% by 2025. There is also a goal to reach 10-20% of electric vehicles in the same time frame. That
is ambitious, but there is 180% tax on the purchase of regular cars, from which electric cars are
exempted. The project is funded by the Danish government, with several partners. The role of IBM is to
develop a management system to control charging of EVs in accordance with the availability of wind
energy while enabling optimal use of the electric grid. Bringing many electric vehicles onto the grid
requires much ICT. First, there are authentication requirements. The user would have to authenticate at
the charging spot, mainly to protect against vandalism. The user, and not just the EV owner, would
identify through the EVPP (Edison Virtual Power Plant, an aggregator or clearing house, controlling
charging and V2G). This is needed for energy accounting and billing. The charging spot also needs to be
identified through the EVPP, for meter readings and also to avoid fraud. RFID or a contact-less smart
card can be used for user authentication. For the user at the EVPP, a contact-less smart card is
preferred, or online authentication. For the charging spot at the EVPP, secure online authentication is
needed. With networking in V2G, there is an information exchange, covering authentication, safety and
location information, charging control signals, energy accounting data and user requirements. There are
two different control mechanisms for networking in V2G: indirect distributed control for charging and
feedback (open loop control), or direct centrally controlled charging and feedback (closed loop control).
These different mechanisms require different control patterns. Some security properties must apply
with indirect control, with integrity, authenticity, non-repudiation and freshness, to avoid delaying or
replaying a signal. With direct central control, charging and feedback decisions are made in a central
control system, optimized for a single EV and the grid. A SIP/SIMPLE based approach can also be used,
with more scalability. There are pros and cons with each V2G networking system.


Q: Car manufacturers also have information concerns, in particular related to warranty. They will want
to follow closely all their cars and all their batteries, as well as customer behavior in some cases. Can you
integrate OEM requirements with the systems you are developing?

A: We are thinking about it, and there is an added-value channel which I did not show, and which could
be used by the OEMs.

Ziva Patir, Better Place, Israel. Ms Patir discussed “The Better Place solution to create sustainable,
open, innovative and accessible mobility”. She stated that we now understand why electric vehicles are
needed, for environmental, social and economic reasons. Oil consumption will continue to rise
                                                      - 27 -

inexorably if nothing is done. Can small green cars solve the problem? Car manufacturers may be
making larger hybrids, but only small electric cars. Hybrid cars are an intermediate solution, and cannot
solve the problem of global warming. Most cars bought today are mid-sized, and most CO2 emissions
today come from medium to large-sized cars. Small city cars therefore cannot solve the overall problem,
but can solve city pollution problems, and are therefore good for health. Better Place, created three
years ago, believes that the car is part of a whole system, including the utility, the smart grid, the use of
renewable energy, the battery, which has a range of about 160km, and charging infrastructure, which
should be available everywhere. This infrastructure implies two charging spots per car. If one exceeds
the 160km, one can then have a battery exchange at a dedicated station, which is a very fast process.
The heart of the Better Place solution is the customer interface, where the smart grid is managed. This
means flattening demand, so that charging takes place during times of low demand. There are also
driver services, meaning that ITS is embedded in the system. This includes safety and energy
management, and back office functions with on-board voice activation. The car is mid-sized, and is sold
at a normal price. The external costs of emissions in terms of environmental damage have been
assessed (externality studies), showing that the best sources of energy are renewable. Coal and gas are
the worst cases. Concerning standardization, all the parties need to sit together to sort out problems. It
is a unique opportunity to be able to agree on standards for cars that have not yet arrived. There has
been a proliferation of standards, but the point is not to sell standards, but to create a better world
through an open, interchangeable, interoperable system for all.


Q: How to convince car manufacturers to become a part of the Better Place system, which may imply,
for example, standard sized batteries? How do you plan to overcome their resistance?

A: The players in this game are not just the OEMs. Governments have something to say; consumers have
a lot to say. Mandates have been given in Europe and the US for the mass deployment of electric
vehicles, and for that, standardization is a must. So it is a question of time. The OEMs compete with
each other, but their first-tier suppliers work for them all, and they will be doing the standardization,
and have an interest in supplying similar batteries and connectors to all.

Q: Don’t you think that your system would work only if solar energy were the main basis of the concept?
Otherwise there would be no CO2 benefit.

A: If you look at externality studies, you see that if all the energy is renewable, it’s excellent. If the
source of the energy is not renewable and you have a smart grid, along with electric cars, you are
already taking care of urban pollution and lowering CO2 by 20%.

Q: With battery exchange, will the battery be owned by the end customer, by Better Place or by the

A: In our business model, the only problem is the price of the batteries, which can be around $10,000.
But people pay for gas in the first three years about the same amount that they pay for their car. Just as
you pay per minute for a mobile phone, you pay per kilometer for the electric car. So you become a
                                                   - 28 -

subscriber, and just pay through your subscription fee. But you never pay for the battery, and you would
never want to own someone else’s battery.

Steven Jeremy Ntambi, Vehicle Design Summit, Africa. Mr. Ntambi said that his topic, “Vehicle Design
Summit 2.0”, was similar to that of Better Place. The Vehicle Design Summit project was developed at
M.I.T., and is a student-led consortium of various universities globally. It has been developing a new
paradigm of collaboration, known as the X-teams model, and its aim was to achieve a leapfrog of new
technologies in the short term. The X-teams model from M.I.T. looks at the failure of traditional team
models because of a mainly inward focus, and is based on four principles: external outreach to
stakeholders, extensive ties, expandable tiers, and extensive leadership and flexible membership. This
model implies that each member specializes in a particular area, instead of having all parties doing the
same thing, and then brings back to the center the fruit of their work. Various cars were developed: a
hybrid car and an “assisted human electric hybrid”, where one both pedals and uses electricity, mainly
for developing countries without a consistent supply of electric energy. A third was a fuel cell electric
hybrid, aimed at markets such as in Africa where there is a greater availability of water to convert to
hydrogen. A fourth model was based on the use of vegetable oil as a power source. These models were
forerunners to the Vehicle Design Summit 2.0, the aim of which was to design a prototype 4-6 seat
hybrid electric networked vehicle, which would become purely electric in 2008, and with a range of 200
miles. The production study focused on India. The short-term goal was to create a car with minimal life
cycle costs, and with a factor 20 improvement in materials and energy input and use. This would be best
achieved if the car were fully networked, and with drive and brake-by-wire. Each team around the world
developed sub-systems, which were then put together. Control area networks were used for the vehicle,
built on two separate bus lines, along with regenerative braking. The auxiliary power unit could run on
hydrogen, CNG, methane-based ethanol or biodiesel. The car could also run on straight electricity. For
the future, suggestions were: to adopt the X-teams models for new markets, to start by converting
existing vehicles rather than impose the purchase of a new one, to explore new markets such as in
Africa, to locate industry where labor is cheap and to use public transportation for the first models.

Comment: The X-teams approach may be a good model for the standards efforts now under way.
Instead of having multiple organizations doing essentially the same thing, why not have them work
together? Also, the future of the automobile will be very dependent on what happens in emerging
markets, and developments such as this should continue in developing countries, because that is where
the volume will come from.


Q: Is China’s ownership of rare metals really going to bring down the price of batteries?

A: Lithium is one alternative, as well as nickel metal hydride, but solar may become a better and cheaper
alternative, because it is available 24 hours, and can be transmitted with microwave systems.

Jean-François Weber, GreenGT SA, Switzerland. Mr. Weber started his presentation on the “GreenGT
Car” by saying that the goal of GreenGT is to use car racing to convince the public that electric vehicles
will be part of our future, to help protect the planet, but at the same time to maintain the emotion,
                                                  - 29 -

passion and pleasure of driving. An example would be a completely clean 24 hours of Le Mans race. In
car racing, we have this passion, emotion and love of risk, but is that compatible with our need for
environmental protection and greater safety in and around the car? For the Le Mans race, there are 10
practice sessions, 24 hours of racing, and there are 55 cars involved. For the whole event, 125,000 liters
of fuel are burned. What this means is that each race car uses the same amount of fuel as two road cars
for one year. Efforts are being made today to reduce the consumption of race cars, for example with
biofuel, clean tire programs and the use of hybrid cars that are allowed by the new rules in F1 and next
year at Le Mans. No engines can now be used to heat tires, and the number of practice sessions has
been decreased. The Green GT is a race car, and the first idea was to use only renewable energy such as
solar. Since race cars are used only two to three weeks, during the down time solar energy can be used
to produce hydrogen for tanks that can be used during the race. But the hydrogen fuel cell approach
was very expensive, and so now there are only electric batteries in the car. The car has a carbon fiber
body, and 250 kg of lithium-ion batteries. The vehicle has 410 hp and close to 2400 Nm of torque. The
electric management system of the car uses a standard CAN bus, a separate ECU for energy
management, and regenerative braking. Major safety efforts were made as well, because of the electric
charge carried by the car. Solar panels are used to recharge the car batteries.

Comment: This kind of initiative is really important for the future of electric cars and all sources of
alternative fuel. The reason is that people buy cars for rational, but also for emotional reasons. One of
the issues with hybrid cars at the beginning was that customers thought they were boring. Adding some
excitement to electric cars sets a very good example, and can help with the important issue of customer


Session Chairman: Jack Pokrzywa, SAE International (USA)

The first presentation on “A Vehicle Communication Scheme to Achieve Optimal Cooperative
Positioning” was done by Mr. Ashgar Tabatabaei Balaei from the University of New South Wales in

For ITS-applications based on DSRC (IEEE (02.11p), the accuracy of GNSS (GPS) is about 5-10 meters
which is not enough. With cooperative positioning around 0.5 meter can be achieved. The principle is to
combine the signals from other cars and from the infrastructure with the GPS signal to improve the
reliability and accuracy of the positioning information. In the solution presented, ad hoc localization
from DSRC connected cars has been used to combine with the GPS information. Simulation results of the
accuracy were shown with a benchmark of 0.5 m with “idle” communication. The impact of several
parameters (number of cars, packet size, etc..) on the accuracy has been investigated.

In conclusion, simulation has shown that reliable and accurate positioning information can be achieved
through cooperative positioning. The impact of the quality of the DSRC network needs to be further
investigated in practical situations.
                                                    - 30 -


Q. In an urban area, did you model multipath propagation and can you limit the degradation of the
ranging error?

A: The multipath was not modeled.

For ranging, three different blocks have been considered: DSRC ranging, algorithm and communication.
The three blocks are assuming that they receive the data with a certain level of accuracy.

Q: Did you consider intentional Interference?

A: So far, the interferences considered were GPS related (availability of GPS signals).

Mr. Stefano Busanelli from the University of Parma made the second presentation of the session on
“Efficient Broadcasting, through Irresponsible Forwarding, in ITS”.

Broadcasting is needed for the dissemination of topology information and event driven information. The
presentation is focusing on the latter type of applications for which latency is a critical parameter. For
the decision to be made by each node to rebroadcast or to not rebroadcast the information, a
probabilistic approach is proposed with the distance from the source and the spatial density as

Simulation results of irresponsible forwarding (IF) are presented in a 802.11 linear networks. A major
problem is the reachability (40 %). An improvement is proposed using cluster of nodes. The simulation
shows a slight increase of the delay (100ms) with 80 % of reachability.

In conclusion, this concept, which does not need a dedicated control channel, with a few adjustments,
can be the solution.


Q: Regarding the proposed irresponsible forwarding protocol, how did you achieve your results and are
they connected to the industry?

A: So far the work was based on simulation. The project started a year ago and the next step is contact
the industry to test the system in practical situations.

“Security risk analysis approach for on-board vehicle networks” was the title of the presentation of Mr.
Alastair Ruddle from MIRA Limited/UK.

He presented the EU project EVITA which aims to prototype a toolkit of techniques and components to
ensure the security of in-vehicle systems. EVITA is focused on the investigation of network security
solutions at vehicle level. Since it is not possible to protect against every threat, a risk analysis should
allow to define priorities of countermeasures.
EVITA threat analysis is based on 18 potential use cases.
                                                   - 31 -

The methodology to analyze the security risks includes an attack tree (to identify assets attack from use
cases, attacker type and motivation), a 4-component security risk vector (level of risk including security
related safety issues) and the evaluation of the probability of attack potential and controllability.


Q: Who is ultimately responsible for navigation and communication systems failures?

A: In the EVITA project, there is a work package on legal aspects which takes into account the legislation
across Europe (work in progress!).

The last presentation of session 6 was done by Mr. Ryan D. Lamm from Southwest Research Institute
(SRI)/USA on “The Benefits of Enabling a Fully Autonomous Vehicle with Wireless Communications”.

The presentation is dealing with fully autonomous cars and how they can benefit from wireless
technologies to communicate with other cars, in a true multi-agent or cooperative system. By definition,
an autonomous vehicle operates according to its own ability to understand an environment to execute a
higher level mission or goal. What has not yet been investigated is what happens if an autonomous
vehicle can “hear” with communications. V-2-I and V-2-V will offer new services and improve safety and
mobility. This will result in an increase of cooperation among individual vehicles. For some applications,
the driver will have to rely more on vehicle control.

R. D. Lamm briefly described three cases studies in which the SRI was involved.

The first one is about the design of a Cooperative Sensor Sharing, where other vehicles sensors are used
as extension of perception system. It was demonstrated in France and USA.

The second project on Cooperative Cruise Control system used cooperative positioning. Tested with a
fully autonomous throttle controlled and human operated vehicle, it has been included into the DSRC
message set of SAE standard J2735.

Finally the third project looks at integration of a fully autonomous vehicle into a convoy of other vehicles
to achieve military objectives.

In conclusion the benefits of a “Cooperative “ autonomous vehicle system are increased mobility and
safety and reducing the environmental impact. Robust communications strategies are becoming
important, since the more autonomy a vehicle will have, the more it will need to interact with other
vehicles and the surrounding.


Q: Is there any research on the acceptance of customer to be part of a convoy of autonomous vehicles?

A: The focus of the presented work was on the technology, however activities are still going on in this
filed, for example in Japan (autonomous trucks) and Europe (smart road trains).
Adoption of new technology is often a question of generation, that’s probably the case for autonomous
                                                  - 32 -

vehicles. The young generation would like it and elderly driver may also see advantages in driving

Q: What about the liability in autonomous vehicles where the car and its function become liable?

A: This remains a challenge, in particular at the international level. Some places around the world may
have legal system which would ease the introduction of such system. Furthermore, the risk may be
reduced by dedicating lanes, introducing speed limits, etc.

The reason to consider this kind of system already now, is to ensure that standards are open enough for
future implementation.


Session Chairman: Gérard Ségarra, Renault/France

Mr. Robert Pieckocki from the University of Bristol/UK made the first presentation of the session on
“Spatial Diversity for IEEE 802.11p V2V Safety Broadcast in a Highway Environment”.

Vehicular communications requires longer range than Wi-Fi standards like IEEE 802.11a/g/n and should
work in extreme multipath and high speed environment (with Doppler effect). Improvement of the
communication is proposed at the physical layer using spatial diversity (multiple antennas). Multiple
antennas are not part of the 802.11p standard. In a post-crash scenario, V2V emergency and periodic
messages are send in a congested channel. The objective is to quantify the benefits spatial diversity and
identify also improvements to the standards. The effect of multipath and Doppler is analyzed. Due to
multiple antennas, the efficiency of the communication is somewhat reduced because of the need to
have as many training frames as they are antennas. For safety, it is not crucial because of the low data
rate. In fact, it is more important to improve the reliability of the communication system. Very extensive
simulation work was done to investigate the Packet Error Rate against the Signal to Noise Ratio. Then
the Packet Delivery Ratio was calculated against the transmission distance.

As examples, the simulation results show that spatial diversity with 2 antennas increase the
communication range by 50 to 80 % with 4 antennas, this value is 65 to 100% (this figures are valid with
the priority scheme Enhanced Distributed Access specified in 802.11p).

In conclusion spatial diversity shows very promising improvements and the technology is available. This
should be further investigated in high density environment.


Q: The car industry has asked for five channels in the 5.9 GHz band, does this mean that 10 antennas are
requested and what is the spacing between the antennas?

A: The antennas have enough bandwidth to operate on the five channels. The spacing should be chosen
so that uncorrelated signals are received.
                                                   - 33 -

The second presentation of session 7 on “Virtual single Cells over a micro-cellular network along roads
supporting vehicular multimedia” was done by Mr. Takahiko Yamada from the Ritsumeikan University
in Japan.

The presentation is focused on mobile multimedia network and proposes a new paradigm, using virtual
single cells.

Macro-cellular networks are compared to micro-cellular networks to support multimedia
communication for mobile users. The conclusions is that in future both networks will coexist and that
micro-cellular networks (made of a group of micro-cells forming a virtual single cell) will be necessary in
some specific areas (e.g. along roads) to support the high volume of traffic for mobile ubiquitous
communications. The two types of network need to be harmonized. Mobile terminals based on SDR able
to connect to both networks are proposed.

This concept of virtual cell has the merit to allow high bit rate packet transfer to fast multimedia
terminals and can reduce the traffic in the macro-cellular network.

Integrated mobile network and IP-based paging network with virtual single cell will be the key elements
of the future mobile network.

Q: What kind of handover was considered?

A: The study was focused on horizontal handover.

The last presentation was done by Ms Anna Maria Vegni from the University of Roma/Italy on
“Opportunistic Vehicular Network by Satellite Links for Safety applications”.

The feasibility of satellite links for emergency communications is analyzed in this presentation. It is the
only solution in cases where isolated vehicles need help or no connectivity over other networks (cellular,
V2V) is available.

The pros and cons of satellite links are described. The advantages are global connectivity, robustness in
case of natural/man-made disasters and the broadcasting/multicasting capabilities. Among the
weaknesses, propagation related issues like multipath, shadowing and blockage and the challenging link
budget are listed. The size and shape of the on-board antenna can also be in some cases a problem. In
general, satellite links can reduce the use of terrestrial infrastructure and of DSRC multi-hops and allow
an extension of the coverage of the terrestrial infrastructure.

Among the different systems, a choice has to be made considering parameter like orbit (LEO or MEO),
access protocol (FDMA, TDMA, CDMA), frequency band (Ka most appropriate). A dedicated analysis of
the link budget (down and up link) was done with assumption regarding the message bit rate (500 bit/s),
the performance (BER=10E-5), the size of the antennas and the atmosphere worst conditions. From this
analysis, the MEO orbit system seems to be more suitable for the applications considered here.

Different users cases are described in terms of connectivity.
                                                   - 34 -


Q: Are there any figures regarding the cost to implement such solutions?

A: No exact figures are available so far, this will be one of the next steps. Up to now, a model for the
calculation at the European level has been defined based on 100 users/sec.

Q: Are they Ka-Band MEO satellite available in Europe now?

A: KA-Band will be available in Europe for GNSS services in future (Galileo).



The closing summary was given by Eric Sampson who began by reminding delegates of the points made
by Christoph Huss the Keynote Speaker. He had noted that the automotive industry’s customers
wanted the safety, efficiency, mobility, environmental, and convenience gains that could be derived
from systems of networked cars. However practical delivery of products was difficult because although
the information to support them was mostly available it was not well organised, was held by a mix of
private and public sector owners and was not organised under consistent standards.

From the supplier viewpoint business models were difficult. It was not yet clear how to manage the
return on investment, what customers were willing to pay, who would handle the fee collection;
whether the initial market would be mainly the commercial driver or the private driver and whether a
“Killer Application” was required to make good business cases in which case what were the candidates ?
Mr Huss concluded by urging a pragmatic approach; rather than analyse the issues ad infinitum let us
cooperate in supporting pilot demonstrations and try to make the networked car really work.

Professor Sampson then reviewed the conclusions from the two Executive Round Tables. Table 1 had
assessed opportunities beginning with the potential big wins in road safety and network management.
Vehicle–vehicle interaction and enhanced driver support and assistance would lead to fewer accidents.
Vehicle–infrastructure linking would lead to better prediction and management of traffic flow and thus
reduced congestion, emissions and energy consumption. The enabling of new accident notification
processes could also improve rescue operations and reduce the impact of accidents. The networked
vehicle would also prompt a range of new products and services for automotive manufacturers and the
ITS industry.

The second Table had looked at ways to realise the potential and deal with the problems that needed to
be addressed. It was noted that technologies and standards were both developing quickly but there was
poor integration / convergence regarding standards for safety, convenience and navigation. Progress
was also slow in considering the Introduction of electric vehicles which require different approaches to
vehicle–infrastructure linking. There was also a feeling that the major international standards bodies
                                                 - 35 -

were in effect competing with each other, rather than collaborating, which was unwelcome with end

Taking account of the experts’ presentations in the technical sessions, Eric Sampson said that it was
clear that the networked vehicle could lead to many societal and commercial benefits ranging from
aaccident reduction and improved driving convenience and comfort to reduced transport impact on
climate change and a range of new products and services for automotive manufacturers and the ITS
industry more generally. However there were still many issues needing resolution before a wide range
of affordable, interoperable products could be brought to market.

In general the technologies were being addressed; we now needed more emphasis on the associated
business and commercial activities. From the presentations and discussions it was clear that in-vehicle
devices were being designed to different patterns or standards in Europe, the Americas, and Asia Pacific
which presented problems for automotive manufacturers who were looking to establish global
platforms. A good example was the vehicle telecommunications interface and the role of cell phones
and other nomadic devices. Should the interface be embedded, integrated or autonomous ? The
choices have different impact on business cases and different implications for interoperability.

Because technical studies tended to be carried out within an industry – automotive, telecommunications
etc – it was not clear to what extent system interoperability was needed. Similarly, what level of multi-
functionality would a user expect ? Would an e-Call unit have to deliver infotainment services, for
example ? Who 'owns' this issue: is it the vehicle manufacturers ? infrastructure owners / operators ?
specialist service providers ? Governments ? All of these ?

Professor Sampson reminded the audience of the keynote speaker’s comments on business cases.
Discussions over the two days suggested that there was very little work underway on business or
payment models which clearly differed significantly for safety, climate change and comfort/convenience
gains. How do we get them to converge ? Does it matter if we can't ? And similarly we seem not to be
doing enough on implementation strategies.

Three areas of consistent concern for many stakeholders are security, liability and privacy. It seemed
clear that the views of Users, Regulators and Manufacturers all differed but there was no European
forum, let alone an international one, where the various bodies could explore these problems jointly.
The safety implications of in-vehicle devices was a well-established area with some successful global
cooperation leading to enhanced understanding of driver distraction and overload; but there had been
much less work on driver underload, i.e., the fact that the more a vehicle is automated, the fewer the
visual or other stimuli to keep the driver alert, which was becoming a contentious Regulatory issue.

In conclusion, Eric Sampson said that we needed to build on past technical successes by widening the
debate to look at administrative and business issues and to do so with greater cross-sector
collaboration. For understandable reason the teams working on applications, connectivity and
standards and the different industry sectors tended to be somewhat narrow in outlook. Work tended to
be focused on either Asia-Pacific or the Americas or Europe; to be managed by either the public sector
or commercial; and to be seen as either an automotive or a telecomms industry activity. In other words
                                                - 36 -

there was little apparent lateral integration and cooperative working between the automotive
manufacturers, ITS service providers, telecom bodies and in particular network/infrastructure

It was far from clear what international body could bring the players together but solving problems of
legal liability, interoperability, business models, deployment strategies needed such a broad approach.
The actions of the ITU, ISO and IEC in initiating and sponsoring debate should be applauded; it was now
time to seek even wider engagement.