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?
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.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
How often does a train crew notice something amiss on or around the tracks that a driverless train would not?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
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.
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?
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.
Thanks. I think few on here are qualified to speak as experts on these three questions.
charlie hebdoAny predictions on when single crew cabs on the Big 6? Autonomous trains on mainlines of Big6? Big 6 => Big 2-4?
York1 John
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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
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
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. ;-)
greyhounds BaltACD Remember, there are locations on most all territories where the only access is by rail. Or are the Rapid Response Conductors going to be hitched to a drone and sent to those inaccessable areas? Well, I'd guess they would have a hy-rail vehicle.
BaltACD Remember, there are locations on most all territories where the only access is by rail. Or are the Rapid Response Conductors going to be hitched to a drone and sent to those inaccessable areas?
Well, I'd guess they would have a hy-rail vehicle.
Ah yes. Hi-rail to a 15K foot train that has gotten a knuckle in the middle of the train on single track between sidings that are 20 miles or more apart.
Zug - QNSL hires helicopters to fly you out if it really hits the fan. Why fly the chopper yourself when you can have a chauffeur too!?
greyhoundsWell, I'd guess they would have a hy-rail vehicle.
I'm holding out for my own helicopter.
PTI is the sky! I can go twice as high! take a look; it's in the rulebook!
(my apologies to Mr. Burton).
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
Overmod greyhounds Why does the engineer have to be on the train? He/she could be remote. Just log on from home at say, 7:00 AM. Do whatever needs to be done until 3:00 PM and then pass off the work to the next shift. It is not quite that simple, and some of the very simplest things that have to be provided or assured are among the most expensive. Nonetheless it's the 'vision' I have supported since the '80s and continue to support. PM me for details if it interests you. Incidentally that vision also specifically includes a trained conductor as 'the single man' crew on each separate train. And as the rapid-response 'first responder' in an emergent situation with any full-autonomous level 4 or better train, in the absence of dedicated response (which cheap PSR financier management will nearly always deprecate).
greyhounds Why does the engineer have to be on the train? He/she could be remote. Just log on from home at say, 7:00 AM. Do whatever needs to be done until 3:00 PM and then pass off the work to the next shift.
It is not quite that simple, and some of the very simplest things that have to be provided or assured are among the most expensive. Nonetheless it's the 'vision' I have supported since the '80s and continue to support. PM me for details if it interests you.
Incidentally that vision also specifically includes a trained conductor as 'the single man' crew on each separate train. And as the rapid-response 'first responder' in an emergent situation with any full-autonomous level 4 or better train, in the absence of dedicated response (which cheap PSR financier management will nearly always deprecate).
Rapid Response is the joke of the 21st Century. One man, multiple locations at the same time. Remember, there are locations on most all territories where the only access is by rail. Or are the Rapid Response Conductors going to be hitched to a drone and sent to those inaccessable areas?
greyhoundsWhy does the engineer have to be on the train? He/she could be remote. Just log on from home at say, 7:00 AM. Do whatever needs to be done until 3:00 PM and then pass off the work to the next shift.
charlie hebdo I will only say this. If I were a 32 year old engineer, I would not plan on another 30+ years in that line of work.
I will only say this. If I were a 32 year old engineer, I would not plan on another 30+ years in that line of work.
True for any profession anymore.
I had to pull on hip waders to get through the BS about improving the quality of the job for the employee.
The only people who will see an improved work environment are the C Suite folks with stock options.
I will go to my grave believing one man crews and (for the benefit of our trucking fan boy on here) autonomous trucks are a lousy idea and detract from safe operations.
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.
Trip Op still needs a lot of support from its meatbag 'training wheels', I can't see it running all by itself anytime soon.
zugmann Why wouldn't we just do that with trucks?
It could happen.
charlie hebdoYou all realize this is not just some visionary plan from OM or some other guy who can look to the future. These notions are plans from our largest railroad. Good for customers, good for the railroads; early retirement for operating crews.
Or just feely-good stuff to please stockhodlers that will not be implemented in our lifetimes.
greyhoundsWhy does the engineer have to be on the train? He/she could be remote.
Why wouldn't we just do that with trucks?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.