I deal with digital mapping and related data, so that's the kind of stuff that springs to mind. The digital map providers already have live traffic data feeds, and they're working on live updating map data as well. So using such technology to keep in-car navigation data up-to-date (as compared to using cellphone technology, the way OnStar systems do) is probably a desired thing, especially since this kind of data requires more bandwidth than most other applications.

Certainly there would be some usefulness in downloading digital car maintenance and diagnostic information periodically to a central storage and analysis site, so a driver can perform Quicken-like analyses on the various diagnostic aspects of a vehicle. It can be used to monitor gas mileage. There are already similar aftermarket technologies which parents can use to monitor their kids' driving habits, and this would make it trivial. But there's a serious privacy downside to such things, as such information can be legally used against you (to prove, for instance, that yes, you *did* drive 50 miles that night, which happens to be the round-trip distance to your ex-wife's house).

Through an internet-enabled computer, it might allow automatically-uploaded upgrades to a car's firmware, much the way Windows allows automated updates. That's both promising and a bit unnerving (what if someone launches a DOS or trojan attack on your car?).

Brad said, "Networking with the car next to you on the road seems like a cool idea but I'm having trouble dreaming up applications."

If an 802.11-equipped car sent a signal if its driver braked hard, or if its airbags went off, cars in range might chime a warning light, which the driver could choose to act on or ignore. If you are in thick tule fog in I-5 and your warning light goes off, you brake...

Has somebody launched efforts for 802.11 handoff? Power control on this scale? Network selection would also need some work.

But surely, if the applications are compelling the little technical hurdles can be overcome.

So far, there's been enough debate over Voice (telephony) over 802.11; I'd think that checking the map & hotel availability (online) while parked at a truckstop would be enough to move this forward.

Of course what I really want is internet connectivity. In a moving vehicle 802.11 probably isn't it. Why would I want that? Like many people I commute 2 hours a day. With a connection to the internet I could do voice browsing, have my mail read to me, send voice messages and so on. Now we could get voice browsing through our cell phones back to either our home computer systems or to more centralized servers. That would be quite acceptable as long as the access is not chopped up too badly into various commercially packaged pieces. The same cell phone could be used for other things like syncing up our music collection and so on assuming the cell technology is sufficient.

Yeah, I wouldn't mind going cross country with a camper like that.. Not only would I be able to experiance a good out doors life, but the world is at my fingertips also.

Hi, Brad!
The driving accident is among the most common ways that people get hurt and die. Increasing driving safety is a very good idea. (Unless you think society still needs this Darwinian pressure!) A google of: automatic driving control convoy turns up stuff like : "Convoy driving through ad-hoc coalition formation" and "Vehicle to Vehicle Communication Outage and its Impact on Convoy Driving." Clearly, there's significant research in this area. 802.11 would make a usable secondary, and perhaps primary communication method. If all 802.11 is based on collisions and back-off (and I'm not sure it is), a wireless token-based protocol like TDMA or a wireless version of Token Ring should be used instead for a RTOS application like this.)
I just read the second paper mentioned above, and would say it doesn't give this layperson great confidence in these ICAR systems, as the conclusion "Thus the [maintain current acceleration] strategy is better for maintaining convoy stability." is IMO reached prematurely, and the vehicle spacings simulated: 9, 12, 15, 20, 25 and 30 are too few to capture the effect of highly non-linear interference shown in the table.