ttrraaffiicc In the current situation, rail has an advantage in operational efficiency over trucking. Opposing this are a great deal of fixed costs related to overhead and infrastructure. The sum of this is that rail intermodal is able to sneak out a slight cost advantage over trucking. Now this is enough to carve out a share of freight, but not enough to challenge the dominance of road in almost any lane. The problem comes when trucking companies are able to reduce their operational costs. This is coming and fast. Some methods are switching to significantly more cost effective alternate power sources like hydrogen fuel cells or batteries. They are also able to achieve labour saving through platooning or full autonomy. The problem comes from the fact that unlike railroads, trucking costs are variable and mostly on the operations side. Things like platooning and alternative fuels have the ability to fundamentally alter the operational costs and efficiencies of trucks, but railroads have few, if any similar options given that most of their costs come from infrastructure. This presents huge problems for railroads because intermodal, a significant source of traffic for them, is particularly vulnerable to truck competition and with these changes coming, it is possible the costs of trucking will fall below intermodal, making the entire concept pointless. Of course, that is what makes the many companies were/are buying 53' containers seem foolish. Also found this: https://www.freightwaves.com/news/autonomous-trucking-company-plusai-wins-451-firestarter-award Worth a read.
In the current situation, rail has an advantage in operational efficiency over trucking. Opposing this are a great deal of fixed costs related to overhead and infrastructure. The sum of this is that rail intermodal is able to sneak out a slight cost advantage over trucking. Now this is enough to carve out a share of freight, but not enough to challenge the dominance of road in almost any lane. The problem comes when trucking companies are able to reduce their operational costs. This is coming and fast. Some methods are switching to significantly more cost effective alternate power sources like hydrogen fuel cells or batteries. They are also able to achieve labour saving through platooning or full autonomy. The problem comes from the fact that unlike railroads, trucking costs are variable and mostly on the operations side. Things like platooning and alternative fuels have the ability to fundamentally alter the operational costs and efficiencies of trucks, but railroads have few, if any similar options given that most of their costs come from infrastructure. This presents huge problems for railroads because intermodal, a significant source of traffic for them, is particularly vulnerable to truck competition and with these changes coming, it is possible the costs of trucking will fall below intermodal, making the entire concept pointless. Of course, that is what makes the many companies were/are buying 53' containers seem foolish.
Also found this: https://www.freightwaves.com/news/autonomous-trucking-company-plusai-wins-451-firestarter-award
Worth a read.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
daveklepperWhat happens when over-the-road trucking pays its fair share of highway maintenance and required expansion, and these items no longer come partly from general taxation?
That's easy; they surcharge the customer. If there is no reasonable cost-effective alternative ... and in the great majority of moves including most intermodal there will be a truck somewhere in both origin and destination drayage ... expect the infrastructure "compensation" to be effectively passed along. (Perhaps this is as it should be.)
The political likelihood of soaking 'the trucking industry' for its "fair share" of infrastructure cost is an entirely different issue, and the ways this can be manipulated can be clearly followed in, say, Australia (where the railroads are in many respects relatively weedy and weak, and trucking magnates well-heeled and not averse to a good brawl). Look for the small lines and O/Os to get it in the neck, while large companies that have better marginsl overhead-cost management and more clever lawyers on staff or on retainer will game to their best advantage.
PLATOONING BENEFIT QUESTION:
I can see why full autonomy would reduce labor cost because it eliminates the driver. I assume that ultimately, platooning would also not have any drivers, but may have them now for testing.
So, the cost is lowered by the elimination of drivers. So given that, what is the benefit of platooning compared to automatic trucks not platooning? How does platooning save labor, as claimed by the original poster?
With platooning, one driver can now handle multiple trucks at once. This reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads.
ttrraaffiiccWith platooning, one driver can now handle multiple trucks at once. This reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads.
Dream on !
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
ttrraaffiicc With platooning, one driver can now handle multiple trucks at once. This reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads.
ttrraaffiicchis reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads.
Russell
csxns ttrraaffiicc his reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads. Can they all back into the dock at the same time and with one driver?
ttrraaffiicc his reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads.
Can they all back into the dock at the same time and with one driver?
Once inside controlled space I would bet they could dock themselves with no driver. Even a Buick can park itself now.
Not quite.. You'll have mostly unproductive drivers in the following cabs.. Until trucks become fully autonomous (decades away) savings on platooning will be marginal, if any. Now on the flipside.. Platooning will makes sense if they plan on having nationwide drop and hook spots like we have on turnpikes here back in the midwest/east for; UPS, FedEx to drop pups for a local driver to come and pick up. I.e. An e-platoon pulls into a D/H spot. Drops off two rigs. Local drivers come pick em up then deliver locally.. The E-platoon after confirmation of drop, gets back on the interstate to final drop destinations. Same in reverse. To build a e-Platoon local rigs come to the D/H area, they all "comm" up, and after confirmation the lead rig (still manned) moves the platoon out onto the interstate.
If so, there are no drivers needed. So if you wanted to run a platoon of multiple trucks, wouldn't they all be driverless? They might have to be connected in terms of the automatic control. But why would one driver in the first truck be necessary, as you mention above? The whole platoon could be completely driverless.
So then in the larger picture, the second question is this: What is the point of running the trucks in a platoon? The main, cost saving objective is to eliminate the cost of human drivers by using automatic drivers. Why not just let the individual self-driving trucks travel around independently? Why connect them together to make several trucks act like one truck, as in platooning? You save the manpower cost either way. And the independently operating trucks would be way less complicated, and way less risky. They would not pose issues in allowing drivers to pass them, or prevent drivers from crossing their lane as would be the case with a platoon.
The only reason I have heard for the need of platooning is that it reduces traffic congestion by condensing the size of a group of trucks by operating them as one. I can see how that would theoretically be possible, but a truck platoon is also bound to routinely challenge other drivers, thus causing those drivers to slow down in many cases. That kind of disruption will add congestion.
It seems to me that platooning is nothing but a sales pitch made to appeal to the public sector who owns and regulates the roadways and the vehicles. The pitch would be to increase the capacity of their roads. Maybe this is to offset the notion that a massive increase in automatic trucks will cause traffic congestion.
SD60MAC9500 Platooning will makes sense if they plan on having nationwide drop and hook spots like we have on turnpikes here back in the midwest/east for; UPS, FedEx to drop pups for a local driver to come and pick up.
Backshop If you want to platoon them, then you have to hold loads going to the same general destination from the same general origin. That really cuts down on the speed of delivery. In fact, it sounds like a railroad...
This is why I brought up the possibility of joining a "platoon" on the fly. Essentially, you have a road train, chiefly taking advantage of the fuel economy of running close headways through intercommunications between the trucks.
If someone needs to drop out of line, they can do so, be it for rest, fuel, or to change to another route. There could be options for dropping out, and for joining a platoon.
Just sayin'...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Backshop SD60MAC9500 Platooning will makes sense if they plan on having nationwide drop and hook spots like we have on turnpikes here back in the midwest/east for; UPS, FedEx to drop pups for a local driver to come and pick up. Like I said in an earlier post, there are very few companies who have the volume in one lane to make use of that, and you just mentioned about half of them. Platooning is the opposite of what makes trucking better than railroading. Trucks aren't held to just a few roads. If you want to platoon them, then you have to hold loads going to the same general destination from the same general origin. That really cuts down on the speed of delivery. In fact, it sounds like a railroad...
Like I said in an earlier post, there are very few companies who have the volume in one lane to make use of that, and you just mentioned about half of them. Platooning is the opposite of what makes trucking better than railroading. Trucks aren't held to just a few roads. If you want to platoon them, then you have to hold loads going to the same general destination from the same general origin. That really cuts down on the speed of delivery. In fact, it sounds like a railroad...
That was essentially the gist of my reply in order for platooning to make sense trucks would have to act like a railroad. You are correct that platooning is just as you said the opposite of what makes trucking better than a railroad
tree68 This is why I brought up the possibility of joining a "platoon" on the fly. Essentially, you have a road train, chiefly taking advantage of the fuel economy of running close headways through intercommunications between the trucks. If someone needs to drop out of line, they can do so, be it for rest, fuel, or to change to another route. There could be options for dropping out, and for joining a platoon. Just sayin'...
If you have drivers in each rig that doesn't bring down cost, and actually makes platooning ineffective for cost savings as touted. It might make fuel economy increase, but I even doubt that. As turbulence at the rear of a vehicle is greater than the front of a vehicle. Not to mention when a tire blows out, or a HBE(Hard Braking Event)occurs there goes your trailing rigs in the platoon scattered over the road from jackknifing. If trucking companies were allowed to run; Triple pups, Double 53's, and B-trains nationwide. That's more effective and cost efficient than platooning.
I must be a Luddite, because the thought of long strings of autonomous trucks plying our interstate highways scares the bejesus out of me. How is it beneficial to the public to take loads off the railroads and put them on the highways in that form?
PsychotHow is it beneficial to the public to take loads off the railroads and put them on the highways in that form?
Provides jobs for truck lobbysits and their minions that post to railroad forums?
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
SD60MAC9500 To build a e-Platoon local rigs come to the D/H area, they all "comm" up, and after confirmation the lead rig (still manned) moves the platoon out onto the interstate.
zugmann Psychot How is it beneficial to the public to take loads off the railroads and put them on the highways in that form? Provides jobs for truck lobbysits and their minions that post to railroad forums?
Psychot How is it beneficial to the public to take loads off the railroads and put them on the highways in that form?
For some reason, whenever I see this OP's screen name I think of the Walleye song. At least the opening words of it.
Jeff
Murphy Siding ttrraaffiicc https://www.fleetowner.com/technology/autonomous-vehicles/article/21134374/one-driver-two-trucks-paving-the-way-to-public-automation-acceptance Here come the truck platoons! By increasing asset utilization and decreasing fuel consumption and labour costs, platooning is going to be a boon for the trucking industry, but a massive threat to the rail industry. If customers only save 15% compared to trucks with domestic intermodal but they have to deal with the bad customer service of railroads and long transit times, what are they going to do when platooning drops trucking's cost to be at parity or below intermodal? Seems pretty obvious. Railroads don't exactly have a lot of room on pricing either since domestic intermodal is low margin business. It is quite a shame too. A lot of companies invested in new fleets of domestic 53s over the last year or so, especially reefers. Oh well, better luck next time, that is if there is a next time. #intermodalisoverparty "...You didn't even read the article, did you? It talks about a test run of sorts- 68 trucks moved last year, without any safety problems! It's not a platoon, it's a test of two trucks, one following the other. You're still just dreaming about a big pie in the big sky at this point..." "The driver in the second truck only has to steer". You still have two drivers for two trucks- no labor savings, no fuel savings. It looks to be technology in it's infancy. It looks like this is a ways from being a real threat to railroads in any big way. And the 15% figure? You seem to have simply pulled that out of the air. I'm starting to think that you're a no more than a PR man for the truck platooning developer.
ttrraaffiicc https://www.fleetowner.com/technology/autonomous-vehicles/article/21134374/one-driver-two-trucks-paving-the-way-to-public-automation-acceptance Here come the truck platoons! By increasing asset utilization and decreasing fuel consumption and labour costs, platooning is going to be a boon for the trucking industry, but a massive threat to the rail industry. If customers only save 15% compared to trucks with domestic intermodal but they have to deal with the bad customer service of railroads and long transit times, what are they going to do when platooning drops trucking's cost to be at parity or below intermodal? Seems pretty obvious. Railroads don't exactly have a lot of room on pricing either since domestic intermodal is low margin business. It is quite a shame too. A lot of companies invested in new fleets of domestic 53s over the last year or so, especially reefers. Oh well, better luck next time, that is if there is a next time. #intermodalisoverparty
https://www.fleetowner.com/technology/autonomous-vehicles/article/21134374/one-driver-two-trucks-paving-the-way-to-public-automation-acceptance
Here come the truck platoons! By increasing asset utilization and decreasing fuel consumption and labour costs, platooning is going to be a boon for the trucking industry, but a massive threat to the rail industry. If customers only save 15% compared to trucks with domestic intermodal but they have to deal with the bad customer service of railroads and long transit times, what are they going to do when platooning drops trucking's cost to be at parity or below intermodal? Seems pretty obvious. Railroads don't exactly have a lot of room on pricing either since domestic intermodal is low margin business. It is quite a shame too. A lot of companies invested in new fleets of domestic 53s over the last year or so, especially reefers. Oh well, better luck next time, that is if there is a next time.
#intermodalisoverparty
"...You didn't even read the article, did you? It talks about a test run of sorts- 68 trucks moved last year, without any safety problems! It's not a platoon, it's a test of two trucks, one following the other. You're still just dreaming about a big pie in the big sky at this point..." "The driver in the second truck only has to steer". You still have two drivers for two trucks- no labor savings, no fuel savings. It looks to be technology in it's infancy. It looks like this is a ways from being a real threat to railroads in any big way. And the 15% figure? You seem to have simply pulled that out of the air. I'm starting to think that you're a no more than a PR man for the truck platooning developer.
And the Murphy Siding wrote the following: "...Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, June 22, 2020 9:47 AM
Overmod- Since OP never seems too interested in answering questions, maybe you can provide some insight. How do you picture things like this work: A platoon of 2 or more trucks is heading down the interstate between Omaha and Des Moines. That corridor is solid trucks changing lanes taking miles to pass other trucks. How do trucks #2 through #100 do this withour a set of eyes in the cab? How does the platoon handle icy road conditions, or other conditions that would require action form someone in the driver's seat?.."
Murphy S. I think you pretty well laid it out in your first post. !
I thnk what we have in our new posting friend; is simply another, in a line of Contrarian, Bloviating, Rabel-rousing, Pot-stirrers.
Usually referred to as Forum Trolls.<
It is not necessary that all trucks in a platoon belong to the same company--several years back, as we were on our way to Memphis from central Arkansas, we were on the old highway, and I saw, on I40, a line of trucks belonging to different companies running closely together as each driver was taking advantage of the system.
Johnny
So we already have platooning when it is practical and when enough drivers wish to use its advantages. All that is needed is for drivers to contact each other and plan to work together. No new technology is needed. And I think railroad technology, including using high-powered computer programming to make scheduled railroading more customer-responsive, and customer-responsive railroading more efficient, can keep pace and allow intermodal and other railroad services to remain competitive.
Murphy Siding SD60MAC9500 To build a e-Platoon local rigs come to the D/H area, they all "comm" up, and after confirmation the lead rig (still manned) moves the platoon out onto the interstate. I know it's just details of something that hasn't even been worked out yet, but how do you suppose a platoon of trucks gets on the interstate?
I know it's just details of something that hasn't even been worked out yet, but how do you suppose a platoon of trucks gets on the interstate?
That's a good question as merging traffic yields to through traffic. I imagine it would be the same as how one currently merges from an on ramp. Though some sort of warning indicator of a LCV(Long Combination Vehicle)merging onto traffic would need to be installed at a minimum of a mile from the D/H on ramp. Then again we don't know what the limit is on how many rigs can be in a platoon. I'm guessing 4 rigs(4x68')would be the max based on total combination length. Smaller lengths could be up to 6. My guess is as good as yours..
Deggesty It is not necessary that all trucks in a platoon belong to the same company--several years back, as we were on our way to Memphis from central Arkansas, we were on the old highway, and I saw, on I40, a line of trucks belonging to different companies running closely together as each driver was taking advantage of the system.
While I hate feeding the trolls, read this. Seems not everyone is on board with 'platooning'.
https://www.trucks.com/2019/02/26/value-truck-platooning-questioned-support-wanes/
Having been the officer in charge of a Army motor convoy including several types of vehicles from Fort Bragg to Fort Benning and return during my military service, I can see the value of Platooning for the Army, especially in combat areas where it can reduce exposure to hostile fire. The technology to compensate for different vehicle types and loads should be possible to design and implement for this application.
jeffhergert While I hate feeding the trolls, read this. Seems not everyone is on board with 'platooning'. https://www.trucks.com/2019/02/26/value-truck-platooning-questioned-support-wanes/ Jeff
Another kink in the planning is trucks with different size engines having dissimilar acceleration rates and the fact that different trucklines have their engines governed to different maxiumum speeds, some as low as 62mph.
BackshopAnother kink in the planning is trucks with different size engines having dissimilar acceleration rates and the fact that different trucklines have their engines governed to different maximum speeds, some as low as 62mph.
I read the Daimler-Chrysler decision more in the sense that 'we couldn't make it work with proprietary technology and Peleton threatened us over patents, so we dropped it in favor of autonomous utilities'. Which is about what I'd expect from them, just like CareVac earlier this year.
For a little context into the current methodologies and beliefs of those researching practical autonomous operation, see this link:
https://www.trucks.com/2020/06/22/autonomous-vehicle-risks-urmson/
from the same source Jeff quoted, about a month ago.
For some reason many people are trying to make what us basically a distributed, self-healing system act like a brittle deterministic one. With some frankly wack assumptions about what platooning does or does not do.
It is not safe, never was safe, and arguably can never be safe for one truck to draft another without some functional short-latency V2V, whether dependent on federal DSRC or not. The same is also true for practical benefits of small-vehicle drafting, which are very real and observable firsthand (I have an amusing story regarding a 5.0L-engined Lincoln in the Mojave Desert) although this is of little interest to truckers and truck owners other than to decry it for insurance reasons. Naturally devices to shape and control the aerodynamic behavior behind trailers are an important component of ramp-up to platooning, with the promise that the naive somewhat feel-good aero mandated by California will actually come to be standardized and the BS and snake oil separated from proper vortex formation and shedding.
Inherent in platooning as 'properly understood' is that each vehicle be autonomous in 'anomalous' conditions (there's going to be a Tom Lehrer-esque song in this sooner rather than later!) such as those already mentioned -- including most types of mechanical failures, external weather conditions including predictable 'microweather', and intentional efforts at various kinds of DoS. There is no 'hard' criterion (outside the defined ~300m defined range of unrepeated DSRC "V2x" communications) that mandates virtual-platoon following or station equilibria, and some of the logic of convoying ... both the wartime ship practices and the instant-cliche trucking equivalent in the 'CB-craze' years ... can be used in systems paradigms. (Unless someone moron decides to try to patent essential safety and then be dog-in-the-manger to anyone who won't join his modern equivalent of ALAM...)
Overmod ...wartime ship practices...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Point_disaster
Overmod Backshop Another kink in the planning is trucks with different size engines having dissimilar acceleration rates and the fact that different trucklines have their engines governed to different maximum speeds, some as low as 62mph. This is far less a real issue for 'platooning' enabled by DSRC than is the aforementioned transmission control or predictive cruise
Backshop Another kink in the planning is trucks with different size engines having dissimilar acceleration rates and the fact that different trucklines have their engines governed to different maximum speeds, some as low as 62mph.
This is far less a real issue for 'platooning' enabled by DSRC than is the aforementioned transmission control or predictive cruise
Backshop Overmod Backshop Another kink in the planning is trucks with different size engines having dissimilar acceleration rates and the fact that different trucklines have their engines governed to different maximum speeds, some as low as 62mph. This is far less a real issue for 'platooning' enabled by DSRC than is the aforementioned transmission control or predictive cruise I'm not so sure about that. How are you going to determine what speed to operate at? How will you determine acceleration? How about different turning radii due to different wheelbase. I have some real world experience in OTR trucking, do you?
I'm not so sure about that. How are you going to determine what speed to operate at? How will you determine acceleration? How about different turning radii due to different wheelbase. I have some real world experience in OTR trucking, do you?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.