Taxi Driver Online

London rollout of robotaxis delayed amid lack of guidance for firms to follow

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... uber-wayve

The rollout of robotaxis on the streets of London is unlikely to happen this year, as regulatory and technical hurdles push back the ambitious schedule set out by the UK government.

Only weeks ago Uber and London-based Wayve were granted the first minicab licences in the capital to allow them to offer self-driving taxi rides to paying customers – but with a human safety driver in place, for now – and said they would start trips “later this summer” before a full public launch.

In 2025, Heidi Alexander, the transport secretary, accelerated the proposed timeline for commercial trials of fully driverless taxi services by a year, announcing that they would start in the spring of this year.

However, progress has slowed in recent months and Transport for London (TfL) has still not published the guidance that companies wanting to offer services must follow to win its approval.

Last month, Christina Calderato, TfL’s director of strategy, told the London assembly’s transport committee that the transit authority would not be in a position to start accepting applications “for some time”.

She said: “I do not think we are in a rush to get [the guidelines] out. There is a huge amount of work going on behind the scenes.”

Uber and Wayve have said that more than 100,000 Londoners were on their waiting list for self-driving taxis.

They are racing against Google-owned Waymo and its Chinese equivalent, Baidu’s Apollo Go, to launch self-driving taxi services in London. Robotaxis are now available to hire in more than 20 cities across the US, China and the Middle East.

Earlier this month Zagreb became the first European city to offer autonomous rides to the general public, through Uber, but the service still has a human driver for “onboard monitoring”.

On Tuesday, Waymo announced that it plans to launch commercial operations in Munich, Germany, late next year.

Ben Loewenstein, Waymo’s head of policy and government affairs for the UK and Europe, told the Financial Times that the company was currently “working through the safety approval process” with the transport department and was waiting on TfL’s guidance to gain consent.

He added that Waymo was working towards launching a fully autonomous service “by the end of this year” but would not say whether the company would be able to offer paid rides to the general public in that timeframe.

TfL has granted 15 private hire vehicle licences to Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles equipped with Wayve’s artificial intelligence driving software, as well as surround cameras and radar.

A TfL-licensed private hire driver will sit in the driver’s seat during trips to intervene if necessary, although the software is expected to control the car.

Uber and Wayve plan to launch small-scale commercial pilots with a driver behind the wheel soon.

For its fully driverless launch Wayve plans to switch to a new Nissan Leaf vehicle that is still in production and is due to launch later this year.

Alex Kendall, Wayve’s chief executive, said the company never claimed it would have a fully driverless operation this year.

“I don’t want to put a timeline on it because we want to make sure we pass through [the regulatory process],” he told the FT. “This work is continuing at pace. London is a significant step up in complexity compared to Phoenix or San Francisco.”

Baidu only began testing vehicles in London at the end of last month and has said it plans to launch public rides next year.

Operating taxis without a driver requires approval via a new process, known as an automated passenger services permit, with the government’s Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency. So far, no vehicles have been approved by the DVSA.

TfL was contacted for comment.

_________________
IDFIMH

technical issues...


... they've realised they don't work

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

They work, albeit with a pilot; they just aren't safe.

_________________
IDFIMH

Launch of fully driverless taxis in London is delayed – here’s why

https://www.independent.co.uk/bulletin/ ... 40976.html

• The introduction of fully driverless taxis in London is facing delays beyond initial 2026 targets due to regulatory hurdles.

• Transport for London confirmed that no operators have yet completed vehicle registrations or submitted permit applications to the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency.

• The Department for Transport indicated that the full regulatory framework to introduce self-driving cars is currently being developed for 2027.

• Transport for London stated that its operational guidance will be published shortly, though no specific release date has been confirmed.
Uber and vehicle partner Wayve plan an interim small-scale pilot offering self-driving taxi rides with a human safety driver behind the wheel.

_________________
IDFIMH

I think the fella makes some good points.

Driverless Uber taxis a 'gimmick' that is doomed to failure, cabbie boss claims

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/d ... n-37623738

Uber’s self-driving taxis that have hit UK roads for the first time will vanish within a few years because Brits will soon tire of the 'gimmick', a leading cabbies organisation has said.

Steve McNamara, the general secretary of the Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association, says London's roads are just too clogged for the Waymo robot cars to operate effectively because of a safety design that sees the vehicles remain stationary at junctions, often for minutes at a time.

A batch of the taxi-hailing app's fleet started taking paying customers in the capital for the first time last Thursday - even though a human will still sit behind the wheel until the green light is given for them to operate totally autonomously.

The futuristic cars use AI to analyse data about what is happening, meaning the artificial intelligence packed kit can make decisions in real time. But while fears are growing for the taxi trade, the boss of the association claimed that the new vehicle's deadheading - travelling between serving passengers - is cause for concern.

Mr McNamara told the Mirror that the LTDA, the voice of London's black cab drivers for more than fifty years, is not overly worried by today's arrival, despite the AI driver officially entering service.

He said: "It's hype and it's spin, it's clever marketing but that's all it is. It’s a novelty, a gimmick at best. Driverless cars are the solution that we don’t need. Who actually requires one? It'll be a bit of fun for some then that's it.

"They're not even driverless [yet] and may not be for a long time. When you get in one, the safety operator is told not to speak to you. They want to give you a dystopian experience.

"This is not about driverless cabs, it’s about the software they are creating that they want to go on to sell to other countries after testing it in this environment."

Pin-pointing the problems Uber and other firms face, he went on: "There's a number of big issues. New York tried them and they're now banned - not because of safety, but because of deadheading. They'll do the same here. You can't just have empty cars cruising the street for hours on end.

"When a cabbie hasn't got a fare, they are usually at a rank or parked up or at home in bed. London will not tolerate thousands of cars just moving for no reason. What do they do with no fares? Aimlessly run? And that's just one of the issues.

"Another problem they can't get around are the road junctions. These cars are cautious by nature. They cannot move from a junction if another car is anywhere near - it'll be there until Christmas on our roads! We are currently the fifth most congested city on the planet, and we have big ambitions to be number one. London is just too busy for this idea to work."

Mr McNamara added that, longer term, Brits simply won't buy into cabs with no driver unless they are making a big saving.

He said: "There’s no money in it. The car is three times the price to start with, they aren't employing drivers so who maintains them? Where are they stored?

"It is all about the mighty dollar and the money they do make going back to America I’m afraid. The Mayor [Sadiq Khan] is watching it very closely, he is no fool. Senior people at TFL are also watching it like hawks - even though we’ve never agreed on anything, we seem to agree on this.

"But the bottom line is that once the hype stops, who will need one? Last week, one of our drivers found three iPhones in his cab and drove around all day with them. Who would get that person's property back to them?

"Who will help people with their suitcases? Or elderly people, or those with bad backs? It's like the cycle lanes - it works for the fit, the rest can sod off. We're supposed to be an inclusive society"

Waymo, part of tech giant Google, claims its technology dramatically cuts traffic accidents and even prevents pedestrian and cyclist injuries.

But many campaigners are not convinced and the firm were forced to pause its self-driving car service in five areas earlier this year after a software issue saw some vehicles get stuck down flooded roads.

David McMullen, GMB union's Senior Organiser, has urged caution over the arrival and isn't so certain the threat to jobs is minimal.

"With hundreds of thousands of people employed to drive every day, we need to be really careful with the roll out of driverless cars unless we are prepared to see unprecedented levels of social and economic disruption," he said in a statement.

"GMB has called on TFL and the Government to urgently take responsibility for developing a plan that protects drivers and holds operators accountable for the disruption that these services will ultimately cause.

"Until a plan is put in place to manage this transition and support drivers, it is premature to move to 'driverless' services. It’s vital that we consider the implications of this before it’s too late.”

_________________
IDFIMH

Is this the 'deadheading' thing? Why can't the cars just park up between jobs until another is allocated? You know, like bog standard PHVs?


Fair point - but maybe that's the thing - if it all does take off then the Uber punters etc will lap them up, while we'll be left with the mega-suitcases and hospital runs etc

Reminds me of stuff locally, where there are subsidised buses running here, there, and everywhere compared to back in the day

So often the only people getting taxis from the station are those with three tons of suitcases

Or people arrive on the new airport coach at the bus station and you have to take their three ton of suitcases a few hundred yards as opposed to a run from the airport

Anyway, more broadly I can see why the trade is sceptical and say it's gimmicky. But, of course, the problem is that all the shortcomings will probably be ironed out in time, or at least alleviated. I mean, who'd have guessed twenty years ago that it would even get to this stage?

And the powers-that-be won't be at all bothered about the loss of jobs in the trade - good riddance, a lot of them will say

There is nowhere to park in London, which clearly also applies to manned PHVs, but those men can see traffic wardens and move when they approach.

_________________
IDFIMH

There's an article online about the inside story of why it won't be happening. And which looks potentially interesting. But it's got a very tight paywall

So here's some stuff I've cobbled together using Google AI:




While original national press leaks blamed the delays entirely on Transport for London's (TfL) bureaucratic refusal to issue safety guidelines, the piece reveals a far more volatile and layered political situation:

TfL Internal Friction: Intense bureaucratic and administrative fighting behind closed doors regarding how—and if—autonomous vehicles can safely integrate into London's complex transit infrastructure.

The Limits of Autonomous Tech: The technical realities and immense edge-case hurdles of cutting-edge AI navigating London's historic, chaotic street layouts.

City Hall Power Struggles: Political friction involving the Green Party pushing back against autonomous vehicles at City Hall, fighting to protect traditional black cab drivers and prioritizing mass transit/cycling infrastructure over tech-firm vehicle deployments.


1. The Power Tussle: Westminster vs. City Hall

A core source of friction is a turf war over devolved powers.

The Government's Push: Under the Automated Vehicles Act 2024, the Department for Transport (DfT) and the national Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) were positioned as the ultimate licensing authorities for driverless permits. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander aggressively accelerated the commercial trial timeline, targeting a launch for early 2026.

TfL's Resistance: Local London politicians and TfL transport planners argue that Westminster is stepping on London's devolved powers. The London Assembly Transport Committee has publicly revolted, demanding that central government hand full oversight and local licensing veto power back to TfL.

2. "We Are Not in a Rush" — The Guideline Embargo

The primary roadblock stopping companies like Wayve and Waymo from deploying fully driverless fleets is that TfL has flatly refused to publish its local operating guidelines. Without these local safety and integration frameworks, operators cannot secure final consent.

TfL's Director of Strategy, Christina Calderato, made the internal stance clear to the London Assembly when she stated that the authority would not be ready to accept driverless applications "for some time," adding bluntly: "I do not think we are in a rush to get [the guidelines] out."


3. The "Vision Zero" Safety Mandate

Behind closed doors, a major philosophical battle is being fought over risk tolerance.

The Tech Standard: Autonomous vehicle operators argue that their AI models already meet or exceed the safety metrics of average human drivers.

TfL's Standard: TfL operates under Vision Zero, a strict mayoral mandate to completely eliminate all deaths and serious injuries on London's transport network by 2041.

TfL Commissioner Andy Lord explicitly warned that the authority will not hesitate to refuse licences for "unproven" robotaxi services. Internal planners argue that an AI that is "statistically safer than a human" is still unacceptable if a software glitch causes a high-profile, fatal bottleneck on a congested London road.


4. Integration vs. Gridlock

Internal fighting also centers on how driverless cars physically fit into London's broader transit strategy.

The Congestion Threat: Planners within TfL are terrified of gridlock. While tech firms pitch robotaxis as a solution to car ownership, TfL transit purists view them as a threat to mass transit patronage (buses and the Underground). There is deep internal pushback against letting private tech firms flood central London with empty, cruising vehicles that worsen traffic.

The Compromise: A faction within TfL is pushing to limit AVs exclusively to outer London "transit deserts" to ferry passengers to existing rail and bus hubs—modeled after Oslo's transit system—rather than letting them operate freely in Zone 1.

The Current Compromise: The "Triple-Lock" Handbrake

Because of this intense internal friction, TfL successfully forced a strict compromise. Tech firms like Uber and Wayve have been granted private hire vehicle licences to operate in London, but only under a strict "triple-lock" framework: a qualified human safety driver must remain behind the wheel and retains full legal responsibility for the vehicle at all times

This bit is mainly about the technological, infrastructure and software limitations

(Had to go for a wee rest after the first post above - one of those things I wish I hadn't started

It's not as easy to get on here in a neat and tidy format as it looks )



London’s dense, irregular, and chaotic street layout creates a "chaos premium" that severely tests the bounds of current autonomous vehicle (AV) software and hardware. While robotaxis have successfully scaled grid-based American cities like Phoenix, adapting cutting-edge AI to London has exposed fundamental technological limitations.


1. Software Hurdles: The "London Chaos Premium"

Autonomous vehicle software relies heavily on pattern recognition and predictability. London’s environment breaks standard driving algorithms in several distinct ways:

Predicting Unstructured Human Behaviour: Compared to San Francisco, London has 11 to 20 times more cyclists, erratic e-bikers, and pedestrians on the street. Because jaywalking is legal and common in the UK, software must constantly calculate the intent of pedestrians who step off curbs arbitrarily, a massive contrast to the orderly, grid-based US environments.

The "Assertiveness" Paradox: Software programmed for extreme safety struggles with London's pushy driving culture. During trials by British AI firm Wayve and Uber, robotaxis faced gridlock because the AI was too cautious. In London, drivers must aggressively seize tight gaps at junctions or roundabouts; standard AV software defaults to staying stationary, often trapping the car at busy intersections for minutes.

Edge-Case Overload: London features roughly 20 times more active roadworks than comparable US trial cities. Temporary lane closures, confusing traffic cones, hand-signalling construction workers, and double-parked delivery vans force the AI into constant "edge-case" scenarios where it does not know what to do, requiring remote human "teleoperation" to intervene.

2. Infrastructure Hurdles: Medieval Geometry & The Grid Collapse

Even the most advanced hardware suites—utilising 3D LiDAR mapping, RADAR, and high-definition cameras—face physical infrastructure roadblocks unique to London:

Medieval Road Geometry: London’s layout is a sprawling network of narrow lanes, blind corners, and irregular roundabouts dating back centuries, rather than a predictable formulaic grid. This restricts the "line of sight" for on-car sensors, giving the central computer less time to process oncoming obstacles or sudden merges.

The Physical Charging Bottleneck: Fleet autonomy requires seamless, automated infrastructure. While London has a high concentration of EV charge points, the vast majority require a human to manually plug in the cable. Until robotic charging hubs or staffed depots are built at scale, a truly "driverless" commercial fleet cannot independently sustain its own power cycle.

Unpredictable Weather Localisation: Rain, heavy fog, and glare from wet London asphalt distort sensor data. Autonomous vehicles require near-perfect localization accuracy to navigate narrow lanes. When harsh British weather degrades camera and LiDAR feedback, the software's confidence drop forces the vehicle to rely heavily on the human safety driver.

Because of these combined software and physical bottlenecks, current commercial operations by players like Waymo and Wayve remain tightly gated. Vehicles are legally mandated to keep a licensed human driver behind the wheel to step in when London’s chaotic streets overwhelm the machine.

This last bit is about the politics, and is surprisingly brief. And reverts back to the paywalled article I mentioned at the outset:



At City Hall, the Green Party’s leverage has turned corporate autonomous vehicle rollouts into a central battleground regarding London's transport infrastructure priorities. Green Assembly members have utilized regulatory scrutiny to challenge the prioritization of private corporate tech initiatives over sustainable public transport and active travel networks. For further insights, read the full investigation at The Londoner.

So I can understand the Greens and TfL not being keen on it all, since it's all about corporate behemoths and won't help the promotion of public transport and 'active travel' etc.

But not so sure about this, which seem to be saying that the Labour Government and DfT are keen on it all

I mean, does Andy Bus-fares know?

I assumed he'd be broadly consistent with the Greens' position.

But, of course, Andy's a bit of a paradox himself - a champion of cheap public transport, while supposedly promoting the interests of the local taxi trade v Wolverhampton while he was Mayor of Manchester.

But in both those regards, you'd think a Burnham-led government would be dead against it all, since it's detrimental to both public transport and the taxi industry


(Although I'd guess that Google AI take is based on stuff knocking around pre-Burnham rather than the precise current position.)

andy the scruff will be too bogged down in budget spending battles to even look at any transport issues .

This is basically an Uber vs TFL battle number 100 and something

it will drag on for months if not years and eventually uber will grind them down and get it's way. I await the first death because as experience elsewhere has proven having a "pilot" doesn't make them safe

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Blimey, guv'ner, you will be getting a job on Taxipoint if you carry on like that.

_________________
IDFIMH

Given that the new PM keeps banging on about devolved this and devolved that, you have to wonder how those words go together with the DfT poking their hooters in in respect of these vehicles.

_________________
IDFIMH

I don't blame her or TfL for not rushing, or, more to the point, not being ready to put their names on the bottom of any approved guidelines.

Be in no doubt, and I'm not a doomonger; whoever puts their name on the guidelines is going to be in big trouble with the courts when the good folks of London start to get seriously injured or killed.

_________________
IDFIMH