Image credit: Supplied
When people see a driverless car, whether it be a racing car or a taxi, they often assume the technology is doing all the work. The machine is in control and humans are out of the picture.
The problem is not just one of perception. As autonomous vehicles become more common, the story we tell about them matters. If we view autonomy as something automatic or inevitable, we risk underestimating the human effort it still requires. That effort is not only technical. It is strategic, emotional and deeply collaborative.
I come to this space from a traditional motorsport background, with over 16 years working across some of the most competitive racing environments in the world. That perspective has shaped how I view this shift. In conventional racing, teams protect their data. Knowledge is rarely shared, competitive advantage is everything and the culture rewards secrecy, speed and control.
Autonomous development challenges that mindset. It depends on shared progress. Teams often help one another, even when they are direct competitors.
I have seen top developers sit with newer teams to troubleshoot software or recalibrate systems. They do it not out of charity, but because they understand that autonomy only succeeds when the whole field can perform. If only one car completes a race, that is not a victory. It is a failed experiment.
Every lap completed by a driverless car is the result of months of human effort. Engineers, coders and technicians work late into the night solving problems that have no manual. These systems are still prototypes, held together by relentless testing and collaboration. Nothing about this work is automatic.
That collaborative spirit does not make the work easier. If anything, it introduces new pressures. These teams are made up of specialists with different ideas about how to solve the same problem. Some want to push harder, while others argue for a safer approach. Reaching consensus under tight deadlines demands more than technical skill, it requires leadership, communication and trust.
Still, the progress is remarkable. I have seen autonomous cars complete sub-one-minute laps around the north track at Yas Marina Circuit on tyres that had already clocked more than 800 kilometres. In traditional racing, a set of tyres used aggressively might last 60 to 80 kilometres before falling off in performance. These autonomous systems adjust continuously, learning with every turn. They are not held back by instinct, fatigue or hesitation. But this is not about replacing drivers. Motorsport remains a sport, and human performance will always be central to its appeal. Autonomy offers something different.
The same tools that allow a driverless car to manage grip or react to changing track conditions can help human teams prepare better strategies, monitor tyre degradation or model risk with greater accuracy. Engineers working in autonomy today are building systems that could quietly make racing more efficient, more sustainable and more competitive. Events like the Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League (A2RL) are helping to test these possibilities in real-world conditions, under pressure and at speed.
None of this happens without people. Every decision an autonomous vehicle makes is shaped by human judgement, testing and design. These systems are not independent of us. They are built through human insight, creativity and care.
Removing the driver does not remove the human. It simply shifts their role, from operating the vehicle to developing the systems that guide it.
