The access problem has a simple solution. The Class 1's will take all the money they saved "redeploying" conductors to cut access roads along 100% of their ROW. ;-)
CW
If the train is going to be run by a human, they are going to be on it. A person running the train can't do a darn thing from their home computer when something goes wrong. You can't drop the computer or any other breaker on the back wall from home.
I think the case for autonomous trucks is way over blown. I think the actual usefullness is limited. I would look for more automation in a helping mode rather than a solo mode. Besides, I would think you would want someone on board if for nothing else to protect the load from being stolen. Either by someone hacking into the system or disabling the vehicle to where it would stop out in the middle of nowhere.
I also think that you won't see completely automated trains with no one on board. Even if automation runs the thing all or most of the time, I think there will be someon on board to take over or go find out why the air went. I do believe the name of the position will change and pay will be less than the current rate.
The concept of a utility conductor is OK until you try to figure out how big a territory they need to cover. Some days, say one for every 50 miles, one conductor is too much - nothing to do. The next day 3 or 4 trains all have problems that need attention. Management will opt to only see the good days when the u-man has nothing to do and assign territories on that basis. Remember that Hunter Harrison, who started the class ones down the PSR road was against the idea of one person crews.
UP is currently collecting and retaining data on human caused break in twos. They are not retaining the data for times when the automation breaks the train. Some other new practices seems to make it appear that they are trying to make a case for automation. That they will use the data to show that they need automation in place of humans.
Yet they are currently hiring new conductors.
Jeff
Great point about freight theft from OTR trucks, I can see that becoming a big problem in the future for high-value goods.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
jeffhergert If the train is going to be run by a human, they are going to be on it. A person running the train can't do a darn thing from their home computer when something goes wrong. You can't drop the computer or any other breaker on the back wall from home. I think the case for autonomous trucks is way over blown. I think the actual usefullness is limited. I would look for more automation in a helping mode rather than a solo mode. Besides, I would think you would want someone on board if for nothing else to protect the load from being stolen. Either by someone hacking into the system or disabling the vehicle to where it would stop out in the middle of nowhere. I also think that you won't see completely automated trains with no one on board. Even if automation runs the thing all or most of the time, I think there will be someon on board to take over or go find out why the air went. I do believe the name of the position will change and pay will be less than the current rate. The concept of a utility conductor is OK until you try to figure out how big a territory they need to cover. Some days, say one for every 50 miles, one conductor is too much - nothing to do. The next day 3 or 4 trains all have problems that need attention. Management will opt to only see the good days when the u-man has nothing to do and assign territories on that basis. Remember that Hunter Harrison, who started the class ones down the PSR road was against the idea of one person crews. UP is currently collecting and retaining data on human caused break in twos. They are not retaining the data for times when the automation breaks the train. Some other new practices seems to make it appear that they are trying to make a case for automation. That they will use the data to show that they need automation in place of humans. Yet they are currently hiring new conductors. Jeff
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Stealing from autonomous OTR trucks seems like it could be similar in scope to the theft from intermodal trains paused in questionable areas of some cities.
My son had a train a few weeks back where first, someone attempted to board and enter the cab. The dispatcher was notified and contacted the police. When they responded and checked the train, they caught another individual back in the train, supposedly breaking into a container. Multiple officers responded then, as apparently they believed this was some sort of organized gang activity.
As it relates to the topic of this thread; this is one incident where it was likely a good thing two people were in the cab and in a position to at least raise the alarm.
SD70Dude Great point about freight theft from OTR trucks, I can see that becoming a big problem in the future for high-value goods.
Edit: Sorry. While I was posting the following, someone beat me to it.
An autonomous train has nowhere to go except on the tracks to locations controlled by the railroad.
Autonomous trucks, on the other hand, could be at the mercy of hackers. I could imagine criminals taking control of the truck, disabling its tracking mechanisms, and guiding it to a warehouse to be unloaded.
While some would say that's impossible, it seems that hackers from around the world are doing some things we were told were impossible.
York1 John
I asked my doctor if I gave up delicious food and all alcohol, would I live longer? He said, "No, but it will seem longer."
Juniata Man Stealing from autonomous OTR trucks seems like it could be similar in scope to the theft from intermodal trains paused in questionable areas of some cities. My son had a train a few weeks back where first, someone attempted to board and enter the cab. The dispatcher was notified and contacted the police. When they responded and checked the train, they caught another individual back in the train, supposedly breaking into a container. Multiple officers responded then, as apparently they believed this was some sort of organized gang activity. As it relates to the topic of this thread; this is one incident where it was likely a good thing two people were in the cab and in a position to at least raise the alarm. CW SD70Dude Great point about freight theft from OTR trucks, I can see that becoming a big problem in the future for high-value goods.
One thing about autonomous devices is that they are loaded with video cameras that may be a deterrent to criminals.
I doubt cameras are a deterrent. Most cities of any size (and businesses, for that matter) are loaded with security cameras these days and it seems to have little to no affect on crime.
rdamon Juniata Man Stealing from autonomous OTR trucks seems like it could be similar in scope to the theft from intermodal trains paused in questionable areas of some cities. My son had a train a few weeks back where first, someone attempted to board and enter the cab. The dispatcher was notified and contacted the police. When they responded and checked the train, they caught another individual back in the train, supposedly breaking into a container. Multiple officers responded then, as apparently they believed this was some sort of organized gang activity. As it relates to the topic of this thread; this is one incident where it was likely a good thing two people were in the cab and in a position to at least raise the alarm. CW SD70Dude Great point about freight theft from OTR trucks, I can see that becoming a big problem in the future for high-value goods. One thing about autonomous devices is that they are loaded with video cameras that may be a deterrent to criminals.
In some cases I suspect cameras are an attractant for criminals. Their escapade is captured on media and will 'live on' well after the escapade.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
charlie hebdoAny predictions on when single crew cabs on the Big 6? Autonomous trains on mainlines of Big6? Big 6 => Big 2-4?
After seeing reactions whenever there is a crash of an autonomous car on a highway, I've got to believe it will be a long time before the public will accept autonomous trains. Even though we have train - car or truck crashes at crossings now, I think that the first time there is an autonomous train - car crash, there will be a huge negative public reaction.
On the matter of a single crew locomotive, I can see that happening within a few years.
Of course, I'm no expert. On anything.
York1 charlie hebdo Any predictions on when single crew cabs on the Big 6? Autonomous trains on mainlines of Big6? Big 6 => Big 2-4? After seeing reactions whenever there is a crash of an autonomous car on a highway, I've got to believe it will be a long time before the public will accept autonomous trains. Even though we have train - car or truck crashes at crossings now, I think that the first time there is an autonomous train - car crash, there will be a huge negative public reaction. On the matter of a single crew locomotive, I can see that happening within a few years. Of course, I'm no expert. On anything.
charlie hebdo Any predictions on when single crew cabs on the Big 6? Autonomous trains on mainlines of Big6? Big 6 => Big 2-4?
Thanks. I think few on here are qualified to speak as experts on these three questions.
My WAG:
The change will start happening within 20 years. The railroads are already trying, though I doubt they will be successful in the next round of contract negotiations.
Canada will be at least a few years later than the U.S, due to the lingering memories of the Lac-Megantic disaster.
How often does a train crew notice something amiss on or around the tracks that a driverless train would not?
Doesn't Amtrak run with just an engineer in the cab? Would having had two people in the cab possibly have prevented the 2015 Philadelphia train derailment?
ClassA Doesn't Amtrak run with just an engineer in the cab? Would having had two people in the cab possibly have prevented the 2015 Philadelphia train derailment?
There were several long threads on that at the time.
We see stuff all the time that an AI on the train probably wouldn't pick up. We'll see how all the new automated inspection portals ('super scanners') work out.
This is off-topic, but it reminded me ...
New technology changes the way we do things, even if we don't want to believe it or accept it.
In the 1990s, some were predicting that within a few years, we would become a cashless country. I did not believe it, and I pointed out to others my expert opinion.
Now, I very seldom carry cash. We have one fast food place near us that is considering not accepting cash.
How long before autonomous cars, trucks, or trains are accepted as normal?
Never mind.
SD70Dude My WAG: The change will start happening within 20 years. The railroads are already trying, though I doubt they will be successful in the next round of contract negotiations. Canada will be at least a few years later than the U.S, due to the lingering memories of the Lac-Megantic disaster.
They've been talking about it for at least the previous 20 years. I expect it to happen, but I think I'll only see the beginning of some trains, probably intermodals, being single person before I retire in about 10 +/- years.
The question boils down to politics. I doubt that railroads and labor will come to any agreement in the short term. Therefore, if the railroads want to push it they will have to go all the way through the process to get a Presidential Emergency Board to force the issue. I don't think they would do it with Democrats holding the White House.
They had an opprotunity during the last administration and were leery of going to a PEB. The chance was early on and with the focus on workers and jobs the RRs weren't sure what the outcome would've been. I think it was a lost opprotunity on their part, not that it upsets me that they didn't act.
York1In the 1990s, some were predicting that within a few years, we would become a cashless country.
The late, great Chicago journalist Mike Royko didn't think so, and he explained why in three pithy little words.
"Off the books."
Think about it.
It very well might have. Water under the bridge, considering the massive threads we had on that particular subject no point in going into it further.
York1Of course, I'm no expert. On anything.
Me neither, but I've worked with enough electronic technology over a thirty year period to learn to never trust it 100%. I've seen too much.
I don't care what the tech-heads say, they love their toys too much.
Euclid SD60MAC9500 Euclid So U.P. plans on one ground roving conductor in charge of several autonomous trains with no human engineers. This will abruptly end the era of monster trains and their broken knuckles, which will be good news to the roving conductors. This will be the ultimate solution to the war between labor and management over crew size. It will also be the ultimate solution to the crew fatigue problem by allowing the roving conductors to rove closer to home, so they can sleep at home every night. It will also usher in the era of short, fast, and frequent trains with their agility and flexibility to live up to the true implication of Precision Scheduled Railroading. Finally all the pieces fall into place. No it won't. Trains size will not be reduced under automonous operation. Even with a "crewless" train you'll want to keep economies of scale in your favor to remain in competition.. The only economy of scale for monster trains is moving more cars per crew cost. Otherwise, monster trains cost more to operate due to more mechanical problems and delays. So, if you reduce or eliminate the crew, economic advantage of monster trains drops. If it drops low enough to not be able to offset the added cost of breakdowns and delays of monster trains, there will likely be no economic advantage to running them. Then too, the railroads will be in sharp competition with trucking with its fundamentally quicker delivery. If railroads want to take business from trucking, they will have to speed up their service. Monster trains slow down service.
SD60MAC9500 Euclid So U.P. plans on one ground roving conductor in charge of several autonomous trains with no human engineers. This will abruptly end the era of monster trains and their broken knuckles, which will be good news to the roving conductors. This will be the ultimate solution to the war between labor and management over crew size. It will also be the ultimate solution to the crew fatigue problem by allowing the roving conductors to rove closer to home, so they can sleep at home every night. It will also usher in the era of short, fast, and frequent trains with their agility and flexibility to live up to the true implication of Precision Scheduled Railroading. Finally all the pieces fall into place. No it won't. Trains size will not be reduced under automonous operation. Even with a "crewless" train you'll want to keep economies of scale in your favor to remain in competition..
Euclid So U.P. plans on one ground roving conductor in charge of several autonomous trains with no human engineers. This will abruptly end the era of monster trains and their broken knuckles, which will be good news to the roving conductors. This will be the ultimate solution to the war between labor and management over crew size. It will also be the ultimate solution to the crew fatigue problem by allowing the roving conductors to rove closer to home, so they can sleep at home every night. It will also usher in the era of short, fast, and frequent trains with their agility and flexibility to live up to the true implication of Precision Scheduled Railroading. Finally all the pieces fall into place.
So U.P. plans on one ground roving conductor in charge of several autonomous trains with no human engineers. This will abruptly end the era of monster trains and their broken knuckles, which will be good news to the roving conductors. This will be the ultimate solution to the war between labor and management over crew size. It will also be the ultimate solution to the crew fatigue problem by allowing the roving conductors to rove closer to home, so they can sleep at home every night. It will also usher in the era of short, fast, and frequent trains with their agility and flexibility to live up to the true implication of Precision Scheduled Railroading. Finally all the pieces fall into place.
No it won't. Trains size will not be reduced under automonous operation. Even with a "crewless" train you'll want to keep economies of scale in your favor to remain in competition..
The only economy of scale for monster trains is moving more cars per crew cost. Otherwise, monster trains cost more to operate due to more mechanical problems and delays. So, if you reduce or eliminate the crew, economic advantage of monster trains drops. If it drops low enough to not be able to offset the added cost of breakdowns and delays of monster trains, there will likely be no economic advantage to running them. Then too, the railroads will be in sharp competition with trucking with its fundamentally quicker delivery. If railroads want to take business from trucking, they will have to speed up their service. Monster trains slow down service.
PSR style freights were not created to just cut crew cost. PSR cutting train starts created the side effect of cutting crew cost. You are not looking past the human element.. Some of the key features of PSR, RoW rationalization, and in theory increased capacity which has happened for the most part. Equimpent cost do not go away just because you eliminate a crew. Capacity cost do not go away just because you no longer have a crew. Car utilization cost does not go away just because you do not have a crew.. PSR has it's hiccups and will continue to have them as the focus on OR remains.. For now..
Flintlock76 York1 In the 1990s, some were predicting that within a few years, we would become a cashless country. The late, great Chicago journalist Mike Royko didn't think so, and he explained why in three pithy little words. "Off the books." Think about it.
York1 In the 1990s, some were predicting that within a few years, we would become a cashless country.
SD60MAC9500 Euclid SD60MAC9500 Euclid So U.P. plans on one ground roving conductor in charge of several autonomous trains with no human engineers. This will abruptly end the era of monster trains and their broken knuckles, which will be good news to the roving conductors. This will be the ultimate solution to the war between labor and management over crew size. It will also be the ultimate solution to the crew fatigue problem by allowing the roving conductors to rove closer to home, so they can sleep at home every night. It will also usher in the era of short, fast, and frequent trains with their agility and flexibility to live up to the true implication of Precision Scheduled Railroading. Finally all the pieces fall into place. No it won't. Trains size will not be reduced under automonous operation. Even with a "crewless" train you'll want to keep economies of scale in your favor to remain in competition.. The only economy of scale for monster trains is moving more cars per crew cost. Otherwise, monster trains cost more to operate due to more mechanical problems and delays. So, if you reduce or eliminate the crew, economic advantage of monster trains drops. If it drops low enough to not be able to offset the added cost of breakdowns and delays of monster trains, there will likely be no economic advantage to running them. Then too, the railroads will be in sharp competition with trucking with its fundamentally quicker delivery. If railroads want to take business from trucking, they will have to speed up their service. Monster trains slow down service. PSR style freights were not created to just cut crew cost. PSR cutting train starts created the side effect of cutting crew cost. You are not looking past the human element.. Some of the key features of PSR, RoW rationalization, and in theory increased capacity which has happened for the most part. Equimpent cost do not go away just because you eliminate a crew. Capacity cost do not go away just because you no longer have a crew. Car utilization cost does not go away just because you do not have a crew.. PSR has it's hiccups and will continue to have them as the focus on OR remains.. For now..
I do agree that there are more costs to railroading than just crew costs. But I don't see how a great increase in train size lowers those costs. It might if they were monster unit trains. You mention car utilization. How do monster trains lower the cost of car utilization? How do they lower the cost of capcity, as you say?
I agree with Jeff H. about autonomous trains and trucks. I'm pretty sure this won't be a significant thing soon, or maybe ever. In certain situations, like that Australian mining railroad, it makes sense. But I don't expect to see it in common use in my lifetime. (And based on genes and general health, I will probably get another 15 years or so.)
Still in training.
There was a final prediction question concerning how many major railroad companies will survive after mergers and acquisitions. My guess is UP, BNSF and one of the Canadian lines.
Proponents are advancing the causes of autonomous operation of the following:
Private passenger cars on public roads.
Private commercial trucks on public roads.
Private freight trains on private railroads.
I expect #3 to be in widespread development and testing starting as soon as 2025. Both U.P and C.N. have stated this goal of using autonomous trains, meaning the elimination of on-board engineers operating the controls. Most of the response in autonomous control is programmed as various inputs. Part of the inputs are from onboard and wayside sensors, and other parts are from human operators working in ground based offices, rather than on-board the locomotive.
I expect development and implementation of #1 and #2 to lag way behind #3. In this quest for autonomous operation, the railroads are way ahead of the road vehicles. With their PTC, and self-guiding system of flanged wheels running on rails, the railroads are already at 75% of way to the goal.
Road vehicles need to be steered with constant tracking adjustments. They interact with each other by using human judgement to keep them on the road. They rely on human judgement to prevent them from colliding with each other by adhering to operational rules and rudimentary traffic control signals. For autonomous driving, they need a vast amount of sensors to know where they are located and what potential traffic conflicts are possible at each instant. Sensing and controlling all of these variables is a fantastic technological challenge. If this smart driving vision is ever accomplished, it will probably end up requiring a national transition to “smart roads” as well as autonomous vehicles.
As this private vehicle, autonomous vision moves forward, it will likely evolve into a public system of cars, trucks, and roadways all being like a giant public mass transit system for passengers and freight. But all of that is at least a century away, if it ever happens at all. Meanwhile look for the very practical and reasonable goal of autonomous freight trains to materialize starting no later than 2030.
How many PRR & Amtrak passengers must have thought, as I once did, that this was the Juanita River alongside the tracks, until either a sign or common sense indicated otherwise?
EuclidI expect #3 to be in widespread development and testing starting as soon as 2025. Both U.P and C.N. have stated this goal of using autonomous trains, meaning the elimination of on-board engineers operating the controls. Most of the response in autonomous control is programmed as various inputs. Part of the inputs are from onboard and wayside sensors, and other parts are from human operators working in ground based offices, rather than on-board the locomotive.
I believe it is inevitable, too. All the tech necessary tomake it work might not exist today, but inevitably, it will. Better crossing protection. enhanced awareness, stuff like that.
Since crew labor costs would no longer be an issue, it wouldn't surprise me if they slowed all trains down to about 25 mph, added a few strategically placed sidings, and run the trains with perfectly synchronized meets, where no train actually stops until it reaches it's destination.
In fact, the first one to perfect such a system might win the derby, and become a nationwide logistics company, where the conventional railroads as we know them today would become REITs, leasing their plant to the holder of the intellectual property that makes it all work.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.