[dcb]

Appeals to popularity are not synonymous with reason imho. A minor knock when shifting into first (hell, put a synchro on first if you must) does not detract from the abuse taking ability or durability or smoothness of the other gears, or the reduced complexity or cost if done on the same scale. The point of this is not an exercise in despair about already being trapped into over-complicated solutions, it is to think about the possibilities. So you get a minor clunk going into first.

Couple magnets on the tranny side of the clutch to slow it down (or even as Bob hinted, control the speed of that half of the clutch precisely) and you get your nvm "concerns" back, but the are not showstoppers to me, plenty of vehicles have a clunk or two in their operation, i.e. trains, etc, don't know why folks should lose sleep over that. I'm not here to make excuses for people. If you bottom line it, it would be less expensive en mass. And since you only have one clutch, I don't know that dual clutch is "easier" to automate.

I have to wonder if the dog box longevity is a concern in low power applications, I know they use them in high power apps because they can handle the abuse better, and that of course has a direct effect on longevity if you hammer on the dogs. I'm not talking about that.

And recall we are talking about automating shifting, so with a few speed/position sensors it should be conceivable to robotically snick it into each gear if the driver can't.

So, do these fail when folks are not constantly putting 500hp through them? Does an occasional tap going into first need to be remedied?

Driving a dog box everyday and for countless miles, I know this is doable, and regularly driving a busted Dual mass flywheel TDI, I know what a pain synchros are to fast clutchless shifting first hand. Not only would the auto dog box have less parts, but it would need to move the parts it has less as well.