Insights on the regulatory activity for V2X with CTO Autotalks

Executive summary

Safety regulation is a major driver for the V2X market given its influence in the technology medium, so that

all vehicles speak the “same language”, and the associated infrastructure. With ITS-G5 (DSRC in the US)

deployment and crucial supporting infrastructure being in their infancy, but substantial investment already

scheduled for the coming years, today is a critical time for the harmonisation of V2X solutions across

carmakers and leading geographies in order to take advantage of their safety benefits.

We had the pleasure of interviewing Onn Haran, a global V2X expert and CTO and

co-founder of Autotalks, about the development of regulation in this market and

the debate between the recommended V2X medium. We would also like to thank

Mr Amir Ben Artzi, Head of High Tech and International PR at Meirovitch Public

Relations for making this interview possible.

For a technical overview of 802.11p vs LTE-V2V in terms of performance, cost,

services and maturity read a whitepaper that was co-authored by Mr. Haran here.

Key findings:

Contents 1. V2X deployment status raises concerns over the lack of harmonization 2

2. Learn how regulatory guidance for V2X will evolve in major markets 3

3. Weighting in the debate between DSRC / ITS-G5 and C-V2X 6

4. Understand which V2X-supported features will come to market first 8

5. Winners from the installation of V2X sensors & infrastructure 8

Regulation, cost and investment to determine which V2X medium will win

•Not realistic to have both technologies in the car in terms of cost and spectrum efficiency;

•Voluntary deployment has started but ITS-G5 / DSRC vs Cellular camps could delay standardisation

Lack of harmonisation of V2X regulation among major car markets

•NHTSA’s NPRM for FMVSS 150 provides clear regulatory guidance for DSRC being the recommendedtechnology for V2V communications for Light Vehicles from Sep'20;

•European deployment based on voluntary fitment today whereas substantial investment in ITS-G5infrastructure is in progress in Central Europe;

•Europe’s net neutrality principle allows both competing technologies, even as a "hybrid system", butinvestment in ITS-G5 infrastructure and VW’s strategy will likely shift the scale towards ITS-G5 (DSRC inthe US);

•China invests in 5G and will set V2V standards circa 2018; Toyota plays major role in Japan;

V2X features to mitigate accidents in intersection and left-turn urban scenarios

•First-day applications with strong potential: “Left-Turn Assist”, “Intersection Movement Assistance”,Incoming Motorcycle Alert” and “Platooning” for Commercial vehicles

2 |

Insights on regulatory activity on V2X with CTO Autotalks

V2X deployment status raises concerns over the lack of harmonization

Auto2x: Deployment of ITS-G5 infrastructure at 5.9 GHz has already started in several cities and in-

between cities in Europe. Moreover, leading carmakers have already started deployment of 802.1p-

based DSRC for safety applications in the U.S and Japan.

But there also seems to be an alternative approach with C-V2X which raises concerns over the lack

of standardisation. What do you think about this and will it further delay V2X installation?

Onn Haran: This market cannot tolerate the lack of

harmonisation. It’s clear to regulators that’s why they have been

so involved in this market. To give an example, there was a

meeting in the beginning of September with DG Connect, European

Commission’s digital policy department, and there was this very

clear voice that they cannot approve the situation where one

vehicle is entering the intersection and another is not hearing it

because it’s using a different communication technology.

As a matter of fact, DG Move has just opened a new 12-week consultation to address this. It will probably

be followed by a Directive which will define the standard that should be used if the vehicle is connected.

Another option is to have a soft message recommending a technology.

But given the market situation, I think it is the responsibility of the regulator to solve this confusion. I have

had many meetings in Brussels and, if I’m reading the situation correctly, I really don’t see a scenario where

the regulators will allow having two not compatible networks.

In the DG Connect meeting in September during the conversation about DSRC versus C-V2X, the proposed

compromise was that every C-V2X car must have DSRC as well, because all cars should have DSRC to be

able to talk with each other. Of course the C-V2X camp didn’t agree to that because they know that if cars

with C-V2X would have to include DSRC as well, C-V2X is just unnecessary cost and nobody will use it.

USDOT’s research predicts

that just two V2X applications,

Intersection Movement Assist

and Left Turn Assist, could

reduce crashes, injuries, and

fatalities an average of 50%

3 |

auto2xtech.com | © 2017 Auto2x

auto2xtech.com | © 2017 Auto2x

This is the thinking of DG Connect, which is a neutral body with the responsibility to make sure that

communication in Europe is free and accessible to everyone. Interoperability and the need to connect all

vehicles are also very important.

Table 1: V2V-V2I offerings by carmakers in 2017

OEM Summary of activity

Audi (4G LTE

V2I)

In Dec’16, Audi became the first carmaker to deploy V2I-based Traffic Light Information (TLI) in select 2017 Audi A4, Q7 and Allroads in Las Vegas. The car receives real-time signal information from the advanced traffic management system that monitors traffic lights via the on-board 4G LTE data connection. Audi's TLI needs subscription to Audi Connect Premium and it's only available in some cities - Nevada for now due to the favourable AD framework.

BMW Audi, BMW and Daimler partner with tech firms to drive 5G into cars

Cadillac (DSRC V2V)

2017 Cadillac CTS sedans to have standard V2V safety tech in the US. The new CTS will be equipped with NXP’s DSRC solution and GPS to transmit and receive as many as 1000 messages per second from other vehicles as far as 300 metres (1000 feet) away. The Cohda Wireless V2X software stack comprises 10 DSRC V2X applications including Intersection Collision Warning, Hazardous Location Warning and Emergency Vehicle Warning.

Hyundai – KIA

In Aug’17, Hyundai, Kia set up V2X communication system on a 14-kilometer stretch of road with seven intersections in Hwaseong, south of Seoul in Korea to test self-driving vehicle technology.

Mercedes – Benz

(Cellular V2I)

2017 Mercedes-Benz E-Class, which is already in dealerships, will use Car-to-X Communications from spring 2016. The Mercedes-Benz solution relies on sending vehicle data to the Cloud, analysing the data in real-time and sending it back to neighbouring vehicles within a certain area. According to Mercedes-Benz the Car-to-X technology will enable the development of the next generation ADAS as well as the concept of driverless car. Some of this technology will be seen in the GLC. Mercedes-Benz actually says the system can be retrofitted to already existing vehicles

Toyota (DSRC 11p)

Toyota has stated that by the end of 2015, 3 of its models in Japan will feature ITS Connect, a safety system which will receive and share data transmitted by external infrastructure and other vehicles via Japan's standardised ITS frequency.

VW (ITS-G5 V2V)

As from 2019, Volkswagen will enable vehicles to communicate with each other by fitting its models with IEEE 802.11p-based pWLAN as part of the standard equipment. Within the limits of the system, the new technology is capable of identifying potential traffic hazards. Examples would include a car making an emergency stop or the on-board sensors detecting black ice.

Learn how regulatory guidance for V2X will evolve in major markets

Auto2x: On the one hand, a mandate (e.g. the NPRM for FMVSS 150) could promote the installation

of technology but it could also mean additional cost for carmakers. What are your thoughts on how

regulatory guidance for V2X is evolving in major car markets and what technologies are they

recommending?

NHTSA’s NPRM for FMVSS 150 provides clear regulatory guidance over DSRC being

the recommended technology for V2V

Onn Haran: If you look at the US, there is a very clear definition of the standard, the 802.11p. It also says

that alternative technology could be allowed but it must be compatible with this standard. In fact the

regulator is very strict in the U.S- they don’t allow anything else. Furthermore, the FCC regulation in the U.S

only allows 802.11p channels. And as far as I know, there is no attempt even to change that.

So overall in the U.S the regulatory clarity is very high. Some other parties have approached NHTSA for an

alternative technology but NHTSA has rejected them saying that they are not willing to consider any other

technology because any change would delay the market by a decade.

Source: Various sources, Auto2x analysis 2017

4 |

Insights on regulatory activity on V2X with CTO Autotalks

The regulation is progressing and continues according

to the published timeline. But things could change if

NHTSA is asked for extension because installing the

technology into vehicles is a very complicated issue

from a project management view -it implies that the

lifecycles of the vehicles will align with the

opportunity to install the technology. All OEMs have

either RFQ open or RFQ just waiting to be opened in

order to support the installation in the US.

Apart from NHTSA’s activities for the mandate, we see infrastructure activity in the U.S. For example, there

is the connected vehicle CV Pilots in New York city, Wyoming and Tampa, Florida. Columbus, Ohio has won

the Smart City challenge. Infrastructure provides an immediate value for drivers. There is no need to wait

for the creation of the V2V network.

Europe’s net neutrality principle allows competing technologies but investment in

ITS-G5 and VW’s strategy will likely shift the scale towards this technology

In Europe the situation is different because there is no clear mandate that says you have to use ITS-G5

technology. It’s a matter of decision and until now I think there has not been clarity in the market. Most of

that is intentional because ITS-G5 is the incumbent technology but it is in the interest of the C-V2X to create

this confusion so that people might think that a shift toward C-V2X can occur and delay deployment of

DSRC. Among OEMs the understanding that ITS-G5 is here to stay becomes more and more common and

that they should kick-off the next stage with the RFQs.

ITS-G5 (DSRC 802.11p) is an incumbent technology

in Europe and it has been selected for installation

in the infrastructure. The infrastructure installation

is in advanced purchasing phase –Just last month

there was an RFQ released from the Austrian road

operator while many other member states are

going to follow. You can see that in the C-Roads

platform website.

Overall the budget is estimated at 500 million

Euros, in the C-Roads platform is around 100m

Euros but this is not the only platform of DSRC

installation in Europe. Once there will be

installation on public roads in Europe, and those

come from public money, then it is clear that the

government would want to maximise the benefits

resulted from investment of public money- not take

public money and throw it away.

Then, the announcement by VW, which is the largest

carmaker by sales’ volume in Europe, to install DSRC

in all vehicles sets facts on the roads.

If you look at the Mercedes, their vehicles already

feature a lot of sensors which are expensive. The cars

that don’t have these sensors are the commodity ones,

Dec’16 saw the NHTSA issuing a Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to

create FMVSS 150 to require light vehicles

(passenger cars and light trucks) to have

Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) communication

capability from 01/09/2020 and to specify

minimum performance requirements for

V2V devices and messages

In Dec’16, the EU reinforced its

commitment to ITS as one of the chief

solutions for safer, greener and more

efficient road transport by announcing

seven C-ROADS projects in Austria,

Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany,

France, Netherlands, Slovenia and UK

5 |

auto2xtech.com | © 2017 Auto2x

auto2xtech.com | © 2017 Auto2x

such as VW. VW is announcing fitment of DSRC because the incremental value of DSRC for them is much

higher.

You can look at it as affordable safety, reducing the current need for 8 cameras and 4 radars. I think that

the target of this technology is not the premium segment, contrary to other technologies in the automotive

space that enter first from the premium segment and then go down to the mass market.

By having those two factors, there is no way back, because once there is infrastructure installation and

fitment of the technology in cars, every future installation must be backward compatible with that.

Auto2x: Why do you think regulatory guidance from Europe is more flexible allowing even “hybrid

system” using radio frequency 5,9 GHz (ITS G5) and current (LTE) or new (LTE-V, 5G) technologies?

Onn Haran: In Europe the act of net neutrality is very strong. It’s very difficult for the regulator to select

one technology over another because this is something deeply embedded inside the European culture. The

regulator isn’t supposed to stop innovation.

The regulator does not want to say that technology A is better than technology B and it doesn’t have any

tools to support such a statement. But in the relevant Directive it is clear that net neutrality is not something

that can be misused. Safety is more important than net neutrality. Net neutrality is key parameter but safety

has precedence over it.

China has been slow to provide regulatory guidance but will soon clear up the

direction over the recommended technology

Auto2x: What about China where

there are clear links between its

C-ITS standards & 3GPP LTE-

V2X?

Onn Haran: China is a centralised

market and companies are

following the guidance of the

government. There is some

assumption in the market that the

government says they need to use

C-V2X because this is a technology

which originates in China whereas

DSRC originates in the U.S.

For me, this is something that I find difficult to understand because

C-V2X is not a Chinese technology it is an American technology,

with Qualcomm always playing a major part in 3GPP. DSRC

actually is a technology that pays no royalties, as opposed to C-V2X.

We still need to find out about this market because the logic is not

clear to us.

It could be resulted from misunderstanding that C-V2X is part of 5G. C-V2X isn’t cellular. It is a direct link

between devices. C-V2X has no relation to 5G. 5G and DSRC can form hybrid communication. There

shouldn’t be a direct line between the Chinese investment in 5G and C-V2X.

Sep’17 saw the release of the

1st standard designed for the

V2X application layer in

China, by GM, Tsinghua

University and Chang’an Auto

6 |

Insights on regulatory activity on V2X with CTO Autotalks

At this time there are several cars in China using DSRC. It’s also good that the spectrum is being released

(candidate spectrum is 5.9 GHz), which is the most important thing.

Auto2x: What about Volvo who was against a DSRC mandate for V2X systems in the EU?

Onn Haran: Actually Volvo Trucks is supporting DSRC because trucks have a very clear business case for

platooning. About Volvo Cars, it’s not that they believe less in connectivity, they understand correctly that

the immediate value of the V2V will take time to achieve.

For a company like Volvo, when they invest x dollars in the car they want to show to the driver an immediate

value. It is difficult to justify from a business perspective that a customer pays now $10-20 but will see the

benefit in 5 years. That’s a hard sell unless doing what VW is saying, giving DSRC for free.

There are two carmakers who strongly oppose DSRC and those are BMW and Audi. In BMW’s case, I think

that their objection comes from the philosophy that already there is a modem in the vehicle. All cars have

eCall modem and some have telematics units. But the problem with this thinking is that C-V2X is not part

of that modem. eCall is not remotely relevant for C-V2X whereas the telematics unit does not include C-V2X.

If I understand the Qualcomm C-V2X chipset announcement correctly, it is supposed to be a different chip

and therefore an added cost on top of the telematics unit. Even integration wouldn’t save much money

because the telematics unit has certain performance. Other radio capabilities are needed to support C-V2X

in addition to the existing cellular modem. And the complexity of the C-V2X is high. Therefore, I think that

the argument that C-V2X will be cheaper does not hold in reality.

Weighting in the debate between DSRC / ITS-G5 and C-V2X

Auto2x: ACEA’s December 2016 paper argues that LTE-V2V in

the 3.4-3.8 GHz band and ITS-G5 in the 5.9 GHz can be redundant

technologies for serving connected automated vehicles.

What do think about the complementary nature of IEEE 802.11p

DSRC vs 3GPP’s C-V2X? Can they coexist in modern cars or are

they redundant technologies?

Redundancy, maturity and cost affect the choice of technology for V2X applications

Onn Haran: I think coexisting is not really realistic because these technologies will cause interference to

each other. If they are both in the same vehicle - or even in the same network- there will be a situation C-

V2X transmission will interfere will DSRC and vice versa. So I don’t think that someone would risk lives by

allowing network interference.

I think that’s why we see this fight between DSRC and C-V2X. The outcome of this fight will determine the

future. I think there is no way back. Once the market begins with DSRC, the ability of the C-V2X to be

installed and provide the same services will be close to zero because why would anyone use it?

As for redundancy, we don’t see a need because essentially the performance is similar.

Another issue is cost. If one system is doing the job why would you need to pay more to have another one

that’s doing the exact same job?

The European Commission

says that the Benefit Cost

Ratio for C-ITS deployed in

an interoperable way across

Europe will grow from 3 to 1

in 2018-30 to 6 to 1 by 2030

7 |

auto2xtech.com | © 2017 Auto2x

auto2xtech.com | © 2017 Auto2x

Auto2x: Given that the cost of a radar can be in the hundreds of dollars could you share any

information about how much DSRC could cost?

Onn Haran: There was an estimation of what it would cost for the

carmaker in the NPRM, around $150-300 including installation cost, and

for the customer $500 but I think that’s inflated. From what we see in the

market, it will never be above $100- actually it’s less, around $50-100

ballpark cost for a carmaker depending on the carmaker architecture. So

much cheaper than a radar.

Spectrum efficiency

There are also aspects such as spectrum efficiency. There is a very limited number of channels for safety.

Today it’s 30MHz and it will probably be extended to 50MHz. If one channel is allocated for DSRC, that’s

10MHz, and another channel for C-V2X, that’s another 10MHz, then it only leaves 10MHz for all other future

applications. It is not enough. A channel is blocked for no reason because the C-V2X channel is not giving

any value on top of the DSRC channel, it’s just repeating the same messages with same data but using a

different air-interface.

Timing of C-V2X solutions

Auto2x: Speaking about the maturity of the two technologies, can you share your thoughts on a

timeline for the C-V2X solutions coming to market?

Onn Haran: Qualcomm has now announced the availability of its first silicon for the second half of next

year and we know too well that first silicon requires more time for refinements and qualification before

production readiness. Then this competing technology was never tested in large scale field tests. For

example, for DSRC, such a large field test takes around 2 years. In addition to that, the automotive cycle of

development takes around 3 years. This is why we believe that 2023-24 is the consensus in the market,

even though it is very optimistic given the longer automotive and field test cycles.

2023-24 is what people who really understand automotive timeline are saying. It is a joke to talk about

installations in 2020, because nobody can have a tested technology by then. I really hope that people are

not seriously planning to have C-V2X on the road by then without testing because that will mean risk.

Security by design in V2X solutions

Auto2x: Recent demonstrations of insufficient cyber security levels have raised concerns in the

industry and the public. How do you see the security levels in DSRC-based V2V and V2I solutions?

Onn Haran: We consider security a key property because it’s clear that people are going to be concerned

once a new link is opened to the vehicle that hackers might try to attack it. Security is something that has

been addressed well in the standard, and no one has found any issues with it

Autotalks, has invested a lot into a

layered security solution, with

security-by-design process to make

it as secure as possible and I feel

very confident with security and

our ability to support it.

“Once the market begins

with DSRC, the ability of

the C-V2X to be

installed will be close to

zero”

Onn Haran, CTO

Autotalks

8 |

Insights on regulatory activity on V2X with CTO Autotalks

There are concerns about vehicle security because CAN bus was developed 30 years ago and doesn’t include

any security. Some vehicles on the road today can be hacked and carmakers are trying to add security to

those CAN bus networks. Security in V2X is a completely different situation. A V2X system is modern and it

was designed according to the strict security standards and knowledge in the market.

Understand which V2X-supported features will come to market first

Auto2x: Which features do you see being supported by V2X communication technologies in the

passenger car market, e.g. left-turn assist?

Onn Haran: In the US the focus is on two applications, Left-turn Assistance and Intersection Movement

Assistance, because they extend over the line-of sight limitation of on-board sensors. USDOT’s research

predicts that just these 2 V2X applications could reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities an average of 20%

of vehicle to vehicle crashes.

In Europe, there was an analysis that calculated the business model

for DSRC installation which shows that the application with the

highest ROI is Incoming Motorcycle Alert because the fatalities in

motorcycles have been fairly constant over the last 20 years while

there is a decline in the fatalities in vehicles. Motorcycles are really

hard to spot, even cameras and radars don’t detect them well. On top

of that, in one-third of the accidents the driver couldn’t even see the

motorcycle because it was obstructed.

For that reason, we invest in motorcycle solutions. We did a demo with Bosch. Recently, an announcement

was issued about a demo between BMW Motorrad, Honda and Yamaha in the Connected Motorcycle

Consortium (CMC). I think there is a motivation both for motorcyclists to buy life-saving equipment and for

drivers to buy this equipment in order to save the motorcyclists.

Auto2x: You’ve mentioned platooning in the Commercial vehicle market. Do you see any differences

in the way regulation applies to this market comparing?

Onn Haran: In the U.S., the mandate only applies to new Light Vehicles. A future mandate to cover the

commercial vehicle market is also possible later on.

Winners from the installation of V2X sensors & infrastructure

Auto2x: Who will benefit from the installation of DSRC apart from the DSRC manufacturers?

Onn Haran: Of course DSRC manufacturers who have invested a lot of money will benefit from the

installation. We have invested a lot of money over the last 10 years to be in this situation. It’s not a market

that has just now emerged. Other companies that will benefit are the infrastructure vendors. But the public

earns more money because it saves time by optimizing waiting time at traffic. It’s a win-win situation, for

the industry and society.

But of course the biggest gain is not even monetary. People will have safer roads. Accidents would be

avoided. In the future the ability to coordinate will allow more fluid traffic on the road. Also when

autonomous vehicles will come, the value of the communication will even grow because it will enable the

coordination between autonomous vehicles and other vehicles.

Auto2x: Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts.

According to the European Commission, Day 1 C-ITS services list in 2019 will

include hazardous location notification, such as

roadwork warnings and weather conditions, and

signage applications

9 |

auto2xtech.com | © 2017 Auto2x

auto2xtech.com | © 2017 Auto2x

Glossary

Term Description

C-ITS

Cooperative ITS: Intelligent transportation systems supported by communication technologies to enable the cooperation of vehicles, roadside equipment and pedestrians. Also refers to the European IEEE 802.11p-based set of standards for road safety and traffic efficiency developed by CEN and ETSI.

C-V2X Cellular-V2X direct communication between units (also referred to as LTE-V2X) based on 3GPP (3rd Generation Partnership Project) Release 14.

DSRC Dedicated Short-Range Communications: Set of standards relying on IEEE 802.11p and the WAVE protocols developed by IEEE and SAE.

V2X

Vehicle-to-Everything: Any communication involving a vehicle as a source or destination of a message. Depending on the nature of the other communication endpoint, several special cases exist: Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V), Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) (road infrastructure, which may or may not be co-located with cellular infrastructure), Vehicle-to-Network (V2N) (e.g., a backend or the Internet), Vehicle-to-Pedestrian (V2P), etc.

Disclaimer

All facts and figures are believed to be accurate at the time of publication; Auto2x accepts no responsibility

for inaccuracies due to future developments in the market or incorrect information provided by Auto2x’s

sources. Auto2x is unable to accept any legal liability for any consequential loss or damage, however caused,

arising as a result of any actions taken on the basis of the information provided in this report.

What our report delivers

Our report Regulatory guide to Autonomous Driving, Automotive Cyber

Security & V2X focuses on regulation covering Conditionally (Level 3)

& Completely-Unsupervised driving (Level 4-5), which are in the epicentre of

regulatory developments because they will allow hands-off the steering wheel,

eyes-off and eventually brain-off.

Our analysis also provides a regulatory guide for some other rising issues

relevant to Automated Driving, namely securing Automated and Connected

Cars, V2X (V2V-V2I) communications and the impact on motor insurance.

Understand the differences between the way Autonomous Driving regulation works in Europe, the

U.S.A and China and how this affects the introduction of SAE Level 3 systems;

Learn what deployment strategies carmakers will use to introduce higher autonomy based on the

current regulatory and legal framework in major car markets;

Benchmark key geographies based on the opportunities regulation presents for testing and

deployment of SAE L3-5;

Read about the challenges that deployment of Level 3 Traffic Jam Pilot systems faces in Europe and

how the amendment of UN Regulation No.79 is progressing;

Get an update on the status of regulation, standards and initiatives for Automotive Cyber Security;

See how V2V regulatory activity is progressing relative to market deployment.

For sample pages and full Table of Contents, please contact us info@auto2xtech.com.

Auto2x Ltd International House, 24 Holborn Viaduct, City of London, London EC1A 2BN, UK

(+44) (0)20 3286 4562, info@auto2xtech.com

auto2xtech.com