DSRC no dead end, says Autotalks CTO
In the first place, the technology to be used for V2X is widely defined and standardized. After lengthy discussions, large parts of the industry agreed upon using DSRC (Dedicated Short-Range Communications). The technology is standardized as IEEE802.11p, and in a number of trials over the past years its feasibility and reliably has been proven. Recently however, Qualcomm piped up with its position that DSRC is a “dead end”. In an interview published in eeNews Europe’s sister publication EE Times, Qualcomm senior vice president of engineering, Durga Malladi, held the view that V2X should be cellular based because it is the more progressive and modern technology. DSRC in contrast, being defined almost ten years ago, is regarded as outdated.
This view triggered fierce contradiction. Onn Haran, Chief Technology Officer from chipmaker Autotalks (who claims market leadership in the area of V2X chipsets), defends the DSRC technology. “DSRC is by no means a dead end street”, Haran said in an interview with eeNews Europe. Quite the contrary, DSRC is about ready to be introduced to the market after major tier one suppliers like Denso and Delphi have successfully concluded their tests, Haran said. He also quoted a recent study from MarketsandMarkets that predicts high growth rates for DSRC equipment. His basic argument: While the DSRC (or IEEE802.11p) is a standardized technology, the idea of implementing V2X applications on cellular technologies is far from being ready to deploy because the standardization and not even the technology development is completed.
“DSRC is available, V2X LTE not”
“The basic problem is that it is difficult to compare something that does not yet exist to something that does exist. DSRC is available, in contrast to LTE-V2X or 5G”, he said. “Instead of using the technology available, some people prefer to reinvent the wheel”, Haran accused Qualcomm.
From Haran’s perspective, V2X and cellular networks are separate worlds with no overlap. “There is really no need to modify the existing LTE standard, no need to embed V2X functionality into LTE”.
But aren’t there that many traffic management solutions under development that source their data from vehicles will be based in the cloud, requiring cellular connectivity? Haran did not accept this argument, because DSRC also would support Vehicle-to-Infrastructure applications such as traffic light control or road work notification. “Yes, the concept of hybrid communications makes sense, but LTE-V2X will take ten years to materialize”, said.
Between LTE and DSRC there is no competition, because both worlds are handling different apps. However, LTE for automotive M2M communications has not even the safety certification necessary to run safety-relevant applications. “In contrast, DSRC is designed for functional safety”, Onn said, adding that “we have not announced it officially, but our next chipset will be designed to meet the requirements of ISO26262, the standard that defines the design rules for safety-relevant functions in the automotive environment.”
He also pointed out that customers who intend to build their V2X functionality on LTE consumer hardware might encounter reliability problems: “Cellphone chipsets are not designed to last for 15 years”, he said, referring to automotive semiconductors that have to meet these longevity requirements.
With regards to 5G developments (which certainly are several years away), Haran conceded that “LTE 5G is a natural evolution to provide faster wireless broadband data. We accept it gladly. But DSRC functionality to LTE 5G is an unnatural extension that will unnecessarily burden the cost of LTE 5G solutions for niche market yet complex use-case while IEEE802.11p is available for deployment.”
Related links:
Carmakers, telecommunications players join forces for 5G development
Why 802.11p beats LTE and 5G for V2x
Is LTE the better V2X technology?
Platooning project highlights V2X maturity
If you enjoyed this article, you will like the following ones: don't miss them by subscribing to :
