Skip to main content

Lawmakers must ensure we don’t end up with communications breakdown

5G – or not 5G? That, with apologies to Hamlet, is the question. It’s a vital one for the future of ITS development, particularly in the area of connected and autonomous vehicles (C/AVs). Just a few years ago, there was only one solution in terms of communications protocols for delivering vehicle connectivity – logically, it would have to be based on dedicated short-range communication. Now, road operators and vehicle manufacturers have choices. We examine some of these in ‘The numbers game’ (p28). Su
May 10, 2019 Read time: 3 mins
5G – or not 5G? That, with apologies to Hamlet, is the question. It’s a vital one for the future of ITS development, particularly in the area of connected and autonomous vehicles (C/AVs).


Just a few years ago, there was only one solution in terms of communications protocols for delivering vehicle connectivity – logically, it would have to be based on dedicated short-range communication. Now, road operators and vehicle manufacturers have choices. We examine some of these in ‘The numbers game’ (p28).

Supporters of ITS-G5 rightly point out that we still have a fair bit of time to wait before 5G will be available. But this is a long process and closing off options now makes no sense. 5G will arrive at some point – but, of course, so will other technologies.

It is an issue which is causing furrowed brows in Brussels, as European lawmakers are considering the issue of cooperative ITS right now (p15). The C-ITS Delegated Act might be best thought of as the start of a major debate over where the ITS industry – and C/AVs in particular – are headed in Europe. This secondary legislation aims to set out a framework to ensure that C-ITS services – which are already being deployed – work coherently with one another now, and in the future.

This latter point is vital to promote certainty when it comes to investment. The Act aims to hammer home the idea that technologies are interoperable and that backward-compatibility means that they are future-proofed. Crucially, the Act requires development to be technology-neutral. Some vehicle manufacturers are currently hedging their bets between ITS-G5 and 5G. From a commercial point of view, that seems eminently sensible. But there’s nothing to stop deployment of both, whatever some of the players might be saying.

There is disagreement around specifics of the Act, but there is also significant common ground. No technologies are going to be frozen out and making sure everything works together is the only way forward.

One industry insider told ITS International: “It has got a little tribal recently.” Well, that needs to stop. We’re on the same team. Saving lives will be the ultimate end, something with which we can all get on board.

Related Content

  • ITS industry needs more effort to get to the future
    January 19, 2012
    Eric Sampson, visiting professor at Newcastle University and City University London and ambassador for ITS-UK, provides a retrospective on the last couple of decades and takes a look at what the ITS industry still needs to do to get to where it needs to be
  • Smart cities: first, define your strategy
    April 27, 2020
    How smart are we really being about smart mobility? Martin Howell of Worldline UK and Ireland reckons we could do better – but to do so you have to start asking the right questions…
  • The cloud - the future of in-car telematics?
    February 28, 2013
    Fiat Chrysler product concept and infotainment director Pierpaolo Tona told the conference that the big car manufacturers need to organise their telematics approach around three key pillars – and the first one of those is people. “OEMs need to understand consumers and their needs better than they understand them themselves,” he commented. The second pillar, suggested Tona, is technology. “Technology is never for the sake of it. Choose the right technology with the right performance to fulfil every consumer’
  • Dynamic Message Signs : Don’t replace, refurbish and upgrade
    August 12, 2015
    Refurbishing old dynamic message signs can save money and increase technical capabilities as David Crawford discovers. Evidence is growing on both sides of the Atlantic of the scope for retrofitting old or technically out-of-date dynamic message signs (DMS) with new electronic equipment, to save on the costs of installing full-scale replacements. In the last four months of 2014, a number of US states progressed programmes that achieved savings of more than US$1.75 million (€1.56million).