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...
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...
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'...
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.
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...
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...
ttrraaffiicc With platooning, one driver can now handle multiple trucks at once. This reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads.
With platooning, one driver can now handle multiple trucks at once. This reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads.
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.
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.
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.
ttrraaffiicchis reduces the number of drivers needed to move loads.
Russell
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
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!
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?
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.
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.
ttrraaffiiccThey are also able to achieve labour saving through platooning or full autonomy.
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 you say above?
What happems when over-the-rad trucking pays its fair share of highway maintenance and required expansion, and these items no longer come partly from generaal taxation?
Overmod. That is one technique I often use to get around a computer that thinks it knows more than I do. The other is to post just the beginning, and then use the edit button to add to it piece-by-piece. I eagerly await your reply.
Overmod I've tried to answer this eight times, and in between crApple incompetence and Kalmbach incompetence it keeps getting wiped out. Reasoned reply will have to wait, perhaps days, until I get on a system with actually functional keyboard input.
I've tried to answer this eight times, and in between crApple incompetence and Kalmbach incompetence it keeps getting wiped out. Reasoned reply will have to wait, perhaps days, until I get on a system with actually functional keyboard input.
If I have a long post I want to make, I'll craft it in a word processor, then do a cut and paste into the forum.
Gramp, I agree. Tree's posting makes sense only if there is a guarantee no problems develop during the "truck'training" experience. Those of you who are professional freight railroaders, can you answer the question:
What percentage of your trips are free of problems that require something to do that is not routine?
And over-the-road truckers, can you also answer the question?
Thanks in advance for helping with "Feasability Study."
What happens when unforeseen events become real? Say a major smash ties up the highway, and traffic is detoured, or like now when drivers say no I'm not driving to your site in Minneapolis. I'm dropping your trailer at the border. You can pick it up there?
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
Wal-Mart, Amazon, YRC, etc... Yep... They're going to put away an investment and let it go to waste.. I imagine since the intermodal party is over according to you.. That those containers on DS trains are MTY and being used for advertising...
Perhaps a part of the advantage is that steady speed and short headway, and the trucks talking to each other to maintain it.
That leaves the independent trucker as a wild card - as has been said, one truck passing another at a half mile an hour is a bit of a problem.
If virtually all trucks have the ability to talk to each other, would it not be possible for a truck to join a platoon at virtually any point? And to leave it as well?
Would all trucks (and drivers) have the ability to be the designated leader?
And we have that problem of the under-powered, loaded-to-the-limit truck who can't hold speed with the other trucks.
Overmod Murphy Siding ? If there's a human being in each cab, what have you saved? Why not let that person just drive the truck? I think you're missing the major points of platooning, perhaps by accepting ttrraaffiicc's trollogic a bit too credulously. Saving money is less of a point than reducing congestion and driver-related issues.
Murphy Siding ? If there's a human being in each cab, what have you saved? Why not let that person just drive the truck?
I think you're missing the major points of platooning, perhaps by accepting ttrraaffiicc's trollogic a bit too credulously. Saving money is less of a point than reducing congestion and driver-related issues.
Intermodal trailers were also spec'ed cheaply. They had multi-piece rims and tubed tires.
Observations from when I worked in conjunction with the intermodal ramp in the mid-late 70's - trailers that the railroads got to haul were too heavy to haul over the road. Sometimes they were too heavy for the hydraulic 5th wheels on the yard tractors to pick them up.
Many states have gone to portable scales. That way, the overweight trucks can't avoid them.
I find it curious that I see weigh station closed during periods of obsereved high truck traffic. I don't have statistics, just apersonal observation.
I don't remember seeing any, but that was 25 years ago.
Backshop I've driven across the entire state of Ohio on US30, back when it was all two lane.
Were their many weigh stations along that route?
The weigh station at Effner In along US 24 always seemed odd to me, but I guess a considerable volume of trucks must go that route .
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.