We seem again to be at the intersection of roads and rails, and no not a level grade crossing. Also a bit of 'trolling' sprinkled over, I think if I could I would requote for emphasis a good bit of what Overmod has posted.My background, I started my career in ramp operations management for one of the top 5 IMCs (used to be top 3 but I think they've slid since I worked there) bouncing around on site at the various Class I partner facilities, and have since moved into a logistics group for a major shipper of commoditized goods (took a chair on the other side of the table basically) -- the core responsibility of the latter is designed the network to fill our customer's orders while negotiating and controlling costs with our carriers.
This all being said, I’d like to throw my hat in the ring to this conservation, hope to lend some insight into some of the various points mentioned. There seems to be a notion from the author of this thread, to whom I’ve address other points in other threads of a similar nature, that the trucking industry is has some sort of extreme cost advantage over rail/intermodal services or by some magic swing of a pendulum, will make obsolete rails by switching to a semi or fully autonomous state. My opinions on the ‘obsoleteism’ of rail are well documented again in other threads that simply put, it is too big and important a cog in the supply chain to simply be replaced by trucks (remembering again depending on car capacity you have 4-5 trucks for every single railcar out there so the physical ability to replace trains with trucks on a the flick of a switch is nearly impossible anyways…). Also the cost advantage of rail at the economies of scale are real, so don't doubt that for a minute if you've got a million tons of product to move in a year you need a reliable rail connection as part of your carrier mix and supply chain strategy.
For this piece I’d like to explore a bit more about the trucking side. Again, I worked for a jolly orange prominent IMC out there, well endowed in both the intermodal and trucking side of the equation. Something I thought interesting mentioned early on in this thread was a notion that ‘trucking costs are variable’. Nothing could be further from the truth. If you don’t know how much it costs you to pay your drivers, maintain your trucks, pay you SG&A for all the support, mechanic, operations, IT, CS, TMS’ and other odd&ends... Not to mention the budgeting that goes into all of the fleet improvements year over year then you have no business running a trucking company. The only variable cost is fuel, which is passed on mostly to the customer as a FSC and a separate line item measured weekly. Now we can say that yes, the cost structure or ‘liabilities’ are different between a railroad and a trucking outfit, but you should know in what core lanes you operate, what your cost per mile loaded, empty and bobtail are.
If you didn’t have a high fixed cost business, pricing would be nearly impossible. Think for example in your own home, you think that sure, my electric bill is variable because it depends on how much electricity I am using… but at the end of the day we establish operational patterns, and those create baselines we can measure. So you know how much per month your operating costs for your house should be, and you already know when it is high within 10 seconds of looking at it. That is usually due to a change or a behavioral issue that you can and usually address, so the logic is similar because if you didn’t know month to month how much it would cost to operate your home, you likely wouldn’t own one for very long (exceptions being people who have no concern over $$ )
Back to trucking, you have x amount of tractors, y amount of trailers (owned, leased or otherwise) so you should again know what your capacity is at any given time relative to the asset utilization of your fleets. And remember, pricing is a function of capacity. The model as of late, and this was true of my tenure, was that of the airlines -- sell 110% of your capacity. End of the day, you cancel, you push, you ‘prioritize’ with the customers and really they’re used to it anyways. The best that I still get is ‘I had several drivers call out today’... yes they do call out but day-to-day it's really not that many as they do really enjoy getting paid.
So again knowing how much it costs to operate your fleet (usually per mile), knowing how many load miles you need to run and the price point you can make it and operating at your capacity are all critical elements. Someone mentioned speed, why do trucking companies pick certain speeds? Fuel consumption and their philosophy around it. We had a fleet of trucks less than 3 years old average age governored at 60 at the time I worked there (its probably changed by now they place with this quite a bit just like how the RR’s constantly tinker with operations), one of the slowest there was. Some smaller fleets don’t have a governor at all, so the philosophy is at what speed can you provide the best service, but at the optimal fuel efficiency (trucks frequent mid-single digits to low double digits in MPG). Then of course, maintenance of the tractor factors into that too… again another cost.
Understand, or I should say lack of understanding (or caring/managing) these costs can be to your own peril. The last two years or so saw a tremendous number of trucking outfits go belly up… they weren’t well managed is the simple truth they didn’t have a good grasp on their operations. Even the traditional trucking models for some of these big box guys have changed in that time, because at the end of the day they were bleeding and needed to think outside of the box. Now you see the shift towards more contracts and committed volumes, one might even say take-or-pay type arrangements (wonder where trucking got that idea…?) and the dedicated programs for large customers have all been the latest to forecast consistent volumes and ‘eliminate the surprises’. I’ll actually throw a poll to the audience -- what do you all think is a good loaded ratio for intermodal/truck? And how many loads per truck per day (within HOS) is considered good for a local intermodal driver?
Historically speaking we’ve seen intermodal pricing lower than TL (in shorter lanes it can be a 5-10% advantage, but coast to coast or long haul you can reach upwards of 50%) and that has been for a variety of reasons but mostly the longer the haul the greater cost advantage to rail due to the efficiencies of the rail networks. Disruptors to that as of late is the widely known PSR movement that axed a lot of low density and other odds & ends services, which after hitting the proverbial ‘reset’ button, end up finding their way back into the market and service mix of the railroads as they move back towards beefing up their volumes. When TL pricing dips below intermodal pricing, which happened recently in 2019 (coulda been 18 but I think it was last year), then there is a problem in the market which is overcapacity. Too many trucks, not enough loads and it's a race to the bottom. What contributed to these lack-luster volumes the last few years…. A trade war maybe? Actual demand stagnant? You be the judge (and please don’t quote the DOW, the stock value of the top 30 companies in the US is really a poor measure of overall economic health, any real economist will tell you that).
Trend wise, modern truck drivers don't like the long haul as much as their historical counterparts, but rather enjoy the terminal life, where you can be home every night (or every other in extended regional fleets). Another thing to remember, not nearly every truck you see is loaded. In fact I posed the question above, but you’d be surprised how many empty trucks are out on the road. Repositioning moves or deadhead miles come at a cost (who has heard the joke about sailboat fuel?). Bobtails certainly come at a cost and should be avoided, because for everyone 1 bobtail move you create, you will likely inevitably create another one (all bobtail moves come in pairs for terminal based operations). Anyone ever hear the term ‘boxwork’ as a part of operations? That's a service cost to the customer, you want to move loads with them and you say you’ll have a pool of 3 containers/trailers at their yard which works great (empty in and load out remember) until your pool goes down to 2 with a commitment of 3 after a trailer is OOS, missing, or a driver skips assignment and bobtails in (thus not replenishing the pool). You’d have at least one driver a day doing just boxwork, getting chassis/trailers to a nearby repair shop, finding the one that has been idling for several days (usually for good reason), pulling the one that smells like cat litter and was rejected (I’ve had trailer rejects for a variety of things including ‘blood’).
Well, I think I’ve gone off the rails on my post. I’m not really sure if I established any points here or just rambled along about the insights into the trucking industry. Like the railroads, they are challenged as well. And to be honest one of the biggest challenges in the industry is keeping those drivers in the seat. I’m not sure what the turnover is for the railroads, but for some trucking outfits it's upwards of 50% for drivers. So the appeal of reducing headcount to the trucking companies is really something they’d like to explore…and push (the political piece being mentioned already, that’ll take some work for certain). Something that has always fascinated me is the difference in the trucking industry from the US to Canada. Legal road weights, HOS and the doubles/triples really create a different environment. It’s always fun too to mix and match as some border states adopt the Canadian standards and can leverage shipping a load from Vermont to Michigan via Canada at 100K Max/gross.
Anyways, maybe you learned something, maybe you didn’t, but I think my overall point is there is more to the story than reading an article, and if someone could have found a way to make the railroads obsolete by now they would have. We are in it for the long haul for both the trucks and the rails.
I don't think KLLM wants to put containers away anytime soon..
jeffhergert... will they be able to afford all the technology that's just around the corner?
There are really enough historical examples just from EMD's strategy in dieselization of freight (and GMC's strategy in dieselizing local and regional transit) to show what will be needed, and what will be valuable.
It is ridiculous to think that even deep-pockets organizations can swing the development capital to build out the necessary systems themselves, let alone be willing to 'pioneer' the first-generation systems and learn all the unanticipated 'gotchas' and risks and emergent scams -- only to see their competition happily buy the costed-down 'perfected' version once it's established. There is a wide range of tariff argument alone involving this sort of thing (think Reagan with memory chips in the 1980s). The sort of tacit assumption is that the technology will get to adequate pervasiveness somehow, but absent the precise discussions of how this will work effectively with the men who manage money in this benighted economy, you should be highly suspicious of how it will practically evolve, and where key parts of the 'right' paradigms get left ignored or suborned.
...and make no mistake, there are many areas in ttrraaffiicc's future-so-bright idea where 'good enough' compromise is NOT going to let the paradigm thrive. It distresses me that he seems either unwilling or unable to realize this.
jeffhergertMost of the trucks I see on I-80 are not from the large truck load carriers. Sure, they are out there, but most seem to be smaller outfits. So will they be able to afford all the technology that's just around the corner? To me, it almost seems like the way the trucking industry works will have to change to really be able to use it to the advantages some people see. Just like when someone comes up with a new plan to save the railroad industry, but requires a major upheaval from the way things currently work. Jeff
To me, it almost seems like the way the trucking industry works will have to change to really be able to use it to the advantages some people see. Just like when someone comes up with a new plan to save the railroad industry, but requires a major upheaval from the way things currently work.
Jeff
PST - Precision Scheduled Trucking - get rid of the one trailer shippers and consignees - 10 a day or we don't want the business
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Meanwhile, I've been waiting for ttrraaffiicc to mention one particular great nominal advantage to either autonomous or semi-automated road-train operation -- the fact that even long-triple systems can be done without specially strengthened or lifting-optimized trailers of the kinds really needed for practical van intermodal that is faster than tired old circus loading with specialty yard tractors. Many places I saw intermodal tried with various kinds of sideloading, the trailers would sooner rather than later start to shred, sometimes in a spectacularly short number of transfers. There are few ways to build transfer equipment cost-effectively at all, let alone reliably, that will lift a potentially poorly-loaded trailer entirely by the bogie and the kingpin and place it precisely onto what may be an undecked kangaroo skeleton car in a reasonable time, in typical yard conditions, in what may be increasingly poorer weather conditions as 'global warming' pumps more dihydrogen monoxide into the "climate". Handling the same trailer entirely on its road wheels is a cinch by comparison, and much of the fancy zero-turn yard operation can be achieved with not-particularly-difficult adaptive brake and pony drive (let's say 312V electric for poor ttrraaffiicc to compare) applied to the pup-style bogies used for making up the road trains. I would note that the economics that were used for CP Expressway involved multiple trailers sent for one tractor, the schedule being arranged in parallel with one tractor making the parallel road trip. The tractor would then sequentially last-mile the trailers, then hook onto one of the return loads and go meet a corresponding number of laned trailers as appropriate -- return bobtail, if no load were returned, but having done the essential last-mile service that only a truck provides efficiently, at minimum time, cost, and overall complexity. When you have safe multiples wth distributed 'assist' drive, much of that economy becomes available to the 'pure truck' system -- and at least some of the trouble involved in formal platooning doesn't happen for the hard-coupled road train. That is an operating model that might have long-term advantages that narrow the range railroads have for comparable convenience and costing in intermodal. (It is not a killer app, of course, or the sort of 'disruptive game-changer insert buzzwords in desired order' that make for bold new theory trolling. But it does represent something that was proven to work well until relatively recently, and that the railroads are unlikely to go to the trouble of implementing... )
Most of the trucks I see on I-80 are not from the large truck load carriers. Sure, they are out there, but most seem to be smaller outfits. So will they be able to afford all the technology that's just around the corner?
BackshopSo who's going to enforce all of this? Remember, all these trucking companies are in competition with each other. Who's going to tell one company driver to slow down so that their competitor can pass them faster. In the real world, which is the one I live and work in, it's not going to happen.
Note that to put real teeth in playing with peoples' livelihoods that way, you need the spectre of easy scab replacement. With a driver shortage you don't have that. With autodocking, you start to be able to do Malbone-wreck-style hiring of kids out of 'driver mills'; when you get the threat of autonomous following or full level 5 operation, it gets to where full-on abuse and bureaucratic Mickey Mouse of the sort our government and 'Deep State' systems have so come to love can be imposed on whole segments of soon-to-be-borderline-poor folks who thought they were valued and essential personnel.
Thank heaven for people like Shadow's employer who will resist any temptation to have his people manipulated like that 'because it's expedient' (and perhaps supported by those screwing adequate revenue out of trucking after the high-capital paradigm shift who know where to apply the grease).
Something I think is an interesting use of ttrraaffiicc's paradigm is the promise of 'autonomous trucks' on platoonable lanes with inadequate reliable traffic to merit even greyhounds-style lightweight, rapid, effective TOFC rail support ... but with human pilots at either end, "called" as rail crews ought to be and Ubered to key boarding points. A bit like the ultimate 'work from home' with guaranteed cumulative volume, without the waste of full crews running full distance in every cab, but taking advantage of pools of people with the equivalent of The Knowledge in local or regional terminal guidance and last-mile skills. If I were ttrraaffiicc, that's the sort of thing I'd stress about the revolutionary but always-a-bit-too-imperfect technology he's so enthusiastic for.
Overmod BaltACD 1 MPH passing difference is like the speed of light on I-81 today. It is more on the order of 1/4 MPH difference in speed. And all of it the result of uncontrolled drivers who are tolerated 'getting away with it'. In a commanded system it would be understood who would speed up at best rate, and who would slow down as appropriate, to complete a given pass within the (yet to be formalized but I almost can't wait for it to be) limits on extended passing time. The fused GIS/GPS predictive cruise, incidentally, will easily restrict actual passing to downgrades and abort passing as upgrades approach. I expect there will be timers running to show non-platooned drivers when to pull out to pass, and how long they have to do it, but that's less germane to a discussion of a platoon programmed to the accurate speed limit that comes upon some driver going just under due to speedo error or stupidity, or who persists in dragging upgrade and then pulling out to pass while overspeeding going down -- that behavior ought to be prosecuted, and in a world of high-resolution guidance cameras streaming via V2V/DSRC to a cloud accessible to DOT enforcement, I suspect and strongly hope it swiftly will be... with appropriate points on a CDL and penalties to the line or owner.
BaltACD 1 MPH passing difference is like the speed of light on I-81 today. It is more on the order of 1/4 MPH difference in speed.
And all of it the result of uncontrolled drivers who are tolerated 'getting away with it'.
In a commanded system it would be understood who would speed up at best rate, and who would slow down as appropriate, to complete a given pass within the (yet to be formalized but I almost can't wait for it to be) limits on extended passing time.
The fused GIS/GPS predictive cruise, incidentally, will easily restrict actual passing to downgrades and abort passing as upgrades approach. I expect there will be timers running to show non-platooned drivers when to pull out to pass, and how long they have to do it, but that's less germane to a discussion of a platoon programmed to the accurate speed limit that comes upon some driver going just under due to speedo error or stupidity, or who persists in dragging upgrade and then pulling out to pass while overspeeding going down -- that behavior ought to be prosecuted, and in a world of high-resolution guidance cameras streaming via V2V/DSRC to a cloud accessible to DOT enforcement, I suspect and strongly hope it swiftly will be... with appropriate points on a CDL and penalties to the line or owner.
Right in there with the Perpetual Motion Machine and the reinvention of humanity! In the face of a pandemic we can't even get people to wear masks.
So who's going to enforce all of this? Remember, all these trucking companies are in competition with each other. Who's going to tell one company driver to slow down so that their competitor can pass them faster. In the real world, which is the one I live and work in, it's not going to happen.
BaltACD1 MPH passing difference is like the speed of light on I-81 today. It is more on the order of 1/4 MPH difference in speed.
BackshopI'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?
(1) Speed is fixed by relevant speed limit, with the (previously-mentioned but evidently not well enough) understanding that any vehicle 'qualifying' for platooning of this kind on a given route segment would be maintained and loaded either to hold that speed or an agreed 'lower' minimum for defined grades or where there are dedicated lanes for controlled -- and constant, and predictable -- speeds.
(2) There is no necessary defined acceleration rate. As you apparently do not know, trucks with smaller engines can achieve a transiently higher rate of acceleration, even within relatively tight engine powerband (or pollution-generation-related) limits, using nominally lower gears or splits in the transmission and final drive. To the extent that acceleration and grade accommodation cannot be accommodated by a 'negotiated' map (controlling throttle and transmission probably well below the 'full acceleration capacity' of a given tractor) yes, the rate of acceleration would be determined in part with respect to the slower acceleration. But I expect, and I think you should too, that the actual rate of acceleration recovery up to the aforementioned speed limit (or 'traffic pattern' if that is slower) will always be relatively achievable, albeit with somewhat less transient economy for a minute or so...
How turning ratio factors into a system using feedback in spatially-derived metrics, or predictably using maps that implicitly include precalibration of steering angle and nose swing, is something best left to pissing contests among Swift drivers. The amount of variable swing at the back of a van depending on slide position is far greater, but is accommodated even in the Peloton system without difficulty.
There would be difficulty in an associated respect with something I don't see Peloton mention: hypothetical rapid evasive following of the 'next' couple of trucks behind one that has to dodge some obstacle. (The following trucks all do negotiated-effort antilock braking and, if necessary, emergency route following, so the idiot idea that 15 trucks go into the wreck like lemmings is not really more than a poor straw attempt at an argument, but we can assume that at least one or two of the platooning trucks would have to turn out with only seconds' warning and, for the sake of discussion, without any predictive sensor-fusion-derived 'warning' from the connected environment. The following driver (or autonomous pilot) has only whatever related view of front and sides is piped in via V2V and DSRC, so may need to respond only to virtual centroid path tracking and trailer-rear path to avoid either of the 'collisions' of concern while feathering the tractor and trailer brakes appropriately for directional stability. I cannot imagine that the steering-angle correction demanded here is so radically different at typical speed-limit as to constitute an absolute incapability; the duration of both the 'ramp' into and out of peak steering angle will be relatively small, and (as noted if you were listening) the effective steering ratio as well as steering kingpin angle will be in the control maps for the platooning system -- in a properly-designed system the steering angle will be modulated in servo, with reasonably fast feedback to determine skidding or other difficulties.
Now, of course the "excuse" here is that the system will safely follow at least what the best human driver faced with this situation would do. You can answer, quite rightly, that no professional driver would be following closely enough for best draft in the first place, and add (comparably rightly) that even with predictive synthetic vision giving ideal longer-term 'smart avoidance' there may not be enough time to avoid some kind of problem. These are correct, and if there is one thing about platooning I think is most certain, it is that lawyers will blame it for accidents whether or not they would have been objectively 'unavoidable' by reasonably skilled drivers in normal traffic. (And I think you can assume that companies like Peloton will be unsuccessful in asserting statutory immunity of some kind when, not if, those suits start to be filed -- as with the Roadmaster bankruptcy all the overpriced exercise bikes in America won't fill the deep pockets fast enough...)
Incidentally the idea that platoons stay 'connected' going into service facilities, or that trucks can't exit or enter running platoons easily with effective 'self-healing' of the running coordination, are at best ill-informed. Even the early automatic-highway designs weren't that naive.
I don't think ttrraaffiicc works for Peleton; they at least seem to have worked out their tech model and economics rationally, and to know how to discuss what their technology can and can't do at present.
tree68 Murphy Siding Your platoon speed would be dictated by the slowest unit in the group. I would opine that this is a serious problem. Unless you want extended passes while one fifteen truck platoon passes another at a differential of a MPH or two, you're faced with all platoons running at the same speed as the slowest platoon. Now you're into transit time and HOS issues.
Murphy Siding Your platoon speed would be dictated by the slowest unit in the group.
I would opine that this is a serious problem. Unless you want extended passes while one fifteen truck platoon passes another at a differential of a MPH or two, you're faced with all platoons running at the same speed as the slowest platoon.
Now you're into transit time and HOS issues.
1 MPH passing difference is like the speed of light on I-81 today. It is more on the order of 1/4 MPH difference in speed.
Murphy SidingYour platoon speed would be dictated by the slowest unit in the group.
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...
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
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/
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
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?
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
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?
Overmod ...wartime ship practices...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Point_disaster
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...)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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..
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.
Johnny
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.<
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?
Provides jobs for truck lobbysits and their minions that post to railroad forums?
For some reason, whenever I see this OP's screen name I think of the Walleye song. At least the opening words of it.
PsychotHow is it beneficial to the public to take loads off the railroads and put them on the highways in that form?
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
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?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.