Your chance to be a lawyer.....

[Mookie]

[}:)] We have had much talk about remotes. Ok - worse case scenerio for some of us - they do come to pass on OTR trains. Houston, we have a problem - maybe with a broken rail or sun kink. We have a derailment.

Scenario: I am the final person you need to convince there was a difference between an actual person and a remote running this train. What would an engineer see/do/feel/think as opposed to a remote that would make it a better deal to have a person running the engine instead of a signal.

Just give me your reasons and thinking behind them, to convince me one way or the other. I love technology, but as Mookie Q Citizen, I am a little wary of rushing in where angels fear to tread.

I am looking for sound reasoning and would expect no less from this group.

Jen

[Mookie]

[}:)] We have had much talk about remotes. Ok - worse case scenerio for some of us - they do come to pass on OTR trains. Houston, we have a problem - maybe with a broken rail or sun kink. We have a derailment.

Scenario: I am the final person you need to convince there was a difference between an actual person and a remote running this train. What would an engineer see/do/feel/think as opposed to a remote that would make it a better deal to have a person running the engine instead of a signal.

Just give me your reasons and thinking behind them, to convince me one way or the other. I love technology, but as Mookie Q Citizen, I am a little wary of rushing in where angels fear to tread.

I am looking for sound reasoning and would expect no less from this group.

Jen

[JoeKoh]

Over the road? No mookie sorry.There are to many what ifs out there.What if a storm for example fries a relay signal tower.You add hazmat to the train and your just asking for trouble.
stay safe
joe

[JoeKoh]

Over the road? No mookie sorry.There are to many what ifs out there.What if a storm for example fries a relay signal tower.You add hazmat to the train and your just asking for trouble.
stay safe
joe

[Anonymous]

Who would want to see remotes on OTR trains eliminating more good jobs?I love technology myself but you must admit it is a paycheck eater in all industries today.

[Anonymous]

Who would want to see remotes on OTR trains eliminating more good jobs?I love technology myself but you must admit it is a paycheck eater in all industries today.

[wabash1]

The engineer would be able to handle the train thru the rough area of track through proper braking and nowing where his train is. the make up of the train. in other words if a engineer sees a bad spot he can slow it down and he knows his make up of his train so that when the heaviest cars cross over this section of track the tran speed is down. a remote would only know track speed and unless a signal was restricting its move it would do everything to stay at track speed.

[wabash1]

The engineer would be able to handle the train thru the rough area of track through proper braking and nowing where his train is. the make up of the train. in other words if a engineer sees a bad spot he can slow it down and he knows his make up of his train so that when the heaviest cars cross over this section of track the tran speed is down. a remote would only know track speed and unless a signal was restricting its move it would do everything to stay at track speed.

[Anonymous]

Mookie-

First off, I think we are a LONG ways from unmanned trains over the road. Even if you have a RCL train over the road, there would be an Engineer or RCO in the cab except when the train is performing local switching. The FRA won't stand for anything else.

I can foresee a time when a single person runs a road train, probably with some assistance from others in some shape or form. This would mean there would be an employee at the controls. I can't say what kind of employee the way things are going right now.

If you haven't already, take a look at what has started to happen at some short lines. The Indiana Railroad now runs some road trains and local switch jobs with remotes and a single Engineer, no conductor or trainman onboard. IRR has put in a new "state of the art" Dispatching system that allows the dispatcher to know where the locomotive is at all times within a couple of feet through GPS technology. The DS also can control certain locomotive functions (horn, bell, lights) while the Engineer is not in the cab. This in threory allows the DS to cover backup moves even across public crossings. Am I comfortable with this, heck no, but it may well be the wave of the future.

Because trains are large and unable to stop in a short distance any means of control has inherent risk whether it be the reaction time of a human Engineer or the response of an RCO. The difference is the RCO may not be able to see as much as the Engineer in the cab. Of course, I can envision circumstances where it could also go the other way as well.

There is no easy answer to this issue. I enjoy my right hand seat and hope to keep it for the length of my career, but who knows about the next generation.

LC

[Anonymous]

Mookie-

First off, I think we are a LONG ways from unmanned trains over the road. Even if you have a RCL train over the road, there would be an Engineer or RCO in the cab except when the train is performing local switching. The FRA won't stand for anything else.

I can foresee a time when a single person runs a road train, probably with some assistance from others in some shape or form. This would mean there would be an employee at the controls. I can't say what kind of employee the way things are going right now.

If you haven't already, take a look at what has started to happen at some short lines. The Indiana Railroad now runs some road trains and local switch jobs with remotes and a single Engineer, no conductor or trainman onboard. IRR has put in a new "state of the art" Dispatching system that allows the dispatcher to know where the locomotive is at all times within a couple of feet through GPS technology. The DS also can control certain locomotive functions (horn, bell, lights) while the Engineer is not in the cab. This in threory allows the DS to cover backup moves even across public crossings. Am I comfortable with this, heck no, but it may well be the wave of the future.

Because trains are large and unable to stop in a short distance any means of control has inherent risk whether it be the reaction time of a human Engineer or the response of an RCO. The difference is the RCO may not be able to see as much as the Engineer in the cab. Of course, I can envision circumstances where it could also go the other way as well.

There is no easy answer to this issue. I enjoy my right hand seat and hope to keep it for the length of my career, but who knows about the next generation.

LC

[Anonymous]

Didn't the Wisconsin Central get permission to run with just an engineer for a maximum time of 2hrs.??

[Anonymous]

Didn't the Wisconsin Central get permission to run with just an engineer for a maximum time of 2hrs.??

[Anonymous]

First of all LC or limited clear is right, I believe Remote locomotives are a long way off...

Take that number of years and multiply by 2, Canada is even further away from having un manned trains riding along the track.

If i read the comments above right, someone was concerened about one of the towers that controls these trains blowing over... I imagine the trains would immediately apply brakes if they would have lost signal from the main tower.. or i could be Toatly wrong

What would happen to that device... now i cna't rememebr what the heck it's called in english.. okay this is what it does.. It replaced the deads man pedal.. the display is 4 squares.. if you havn't touched a control or applied brakes within a resonable amount of time the squares will start moving back and forth.. fatser until a loud BEEEEEP noice kicks in, getting higher pitched as it goes a long..
what woyuld happen to that device? it would be eliminated obviously.. but wouldn't that cause havoc?

[Anonymous]

First of all LC or limited clear is right, I believe Remote locomotives are a long way off...

Take that number of years and multiply by 2, Canada is even further away from having un manned trains riding along the track.

If i read the comments above right, someone was concerened about one of the towers that controls these trains blowing over... I imagine the trains would immediately apply brakes if they would have lost signal from the main tower.. or i could be Toatly wrong

What would happen to that device... now i cna't rememebr what the heck it's called in english.. okay this is what it does.. It replaced the deads man pedal.. the display is 4 squares.. if you havn't touched a control or applied brakes within a resonable amount of time the squares will start moving back and forth.. fatser until a loud BEEEEEP noice kicks in, getting higher pitched as it goes a long..
what woyuld happen to that device? it would be eliminated obviously.. but wouldn't that cause havoc?

[Anonymous]

WR-

The device is called a crew alertor. It can take several forms including the one you mentioned. Others can be a flashing light or a loud whistle.

LC

[Anonymous]

WR-

The device is called a crew alertor. It can take several forms including the one you mentioned. Others can be a flashing light or a loud whistle.

LC

[Mookie]

Kevin and all - If you are running by remote, rather than human - if the tower fell over, the trains would stop. If there was no crew, there would be no reason for a crew alerter.

I know it may be not in my lifetime, but just like a man on the moon - it did happen.
So I am sure it probably will.

In that case, we have come up with the engineer/train person at that time would use his human instincts to possibly see a problem. Could a remote do that?

Can they build a remote to ever completely take the place of the human in running an engine and taking a train across country? Flying a plane load of people? Are there too many human factors involved to make it impossible, or will it because the next rocket to Mars?

Jen

[Mookie]

Kevin and all - If you are running by remote, rather than human - if the tower fell over, the trains would stop. If there was no crew, there would be no reason for a crew alerter.

I know it may be not in my lifetime, but just like a man on the moon - it did happen.
So I am sure it probably will.

In that case, we have come up with the engineer/train person at that time would use his human instincts to possibly see a problem. Could a remote do that?

Can they build a remote to ever completely take the place of the human in running an engine and taking a train across country? Flying a plane load of people? Are there too many human factors involved to make it impossible, or will it because the next rocket to Mars?

Jen

[Anonymous]

Mookie-

I think you are confusing two different things. A remote is just that, a remote control device. Someone still has to be in control of what ever is being controlled. In this case a locomotive is being controlled from somewhere other than the cab. At best, a train can be controlled from a remote location. Perhaps some day control could be handled in certain limited circumstances from a central location. One example might be a hump engine controlled from the yard tower. I doubt this would happen on road jobs absent a completely fenced and grade separated right of way. There is simply too much grade crossing and trespasser liability out there for me to see a remote controlled road train or any sort of "robot" train controlling itself without a human crew member.

LC

[Anonymous]

Mookie-

I think you are confusing two different things. A remote is just that, a remote control device. Someone still has to be in control of what ever is being controlled. In this case a locomotive is being controlled from somewhere other than the cab. At best, a train can be controlled from a remote location. Perhaps some day control could be handled in certain limited circumstances from a central location. One example might be a hump engine controlled from the yard tower. I doubt this would happen on road jobs absent a completely fenced and grade separated right of way. There is simply too much grade crossing and trespasser liability out there for me to see a remote controlled road train or any sort of "robot" train controlling itself without a human crew member.

LC

[wabash1]

What i believe Jen is refering to is that with gps systems you can take a train say in St. louis and program it for L.A. and it would take off. it has a computor and has been mapped with all it needs to know with terrain crossings signals and mile post. when it starts it knows its speed. it blow its horn and keeps going only knows it going to la.

This is very possible as the research car on the ns already does this mapping. the signal system tells the engineer what to do if he fails to the computor kicks in and gives a penalty brake applacation. the differance is that a engineer whould see the tresspasser or the car stuck on the tracks . if gps is operating this engine it is considered remote control. only by computor. as i stated before the big diferance is a engineer can get the speed down and train handle through rough area the remote only knows track speed and go.

[wabash1]

What i believe Jen is refering to is that with gps systems you can take a train say in St. louis and program it for L.A. and it would take off. it has a computor and has been mapped with all it needs to know with terrain crossings signals and mile post. when it starts it knows its speed. it blow its horn and keeps going only knows it going to la.

This is very possible as the research car on the ns already does this mapping. the signal system tells the engineer what to do if he fails to the computor kicks in and gives a penalty brake applacation. the differance is that a engineer whould see the tresspasser or the car stuck on the tracks . if gps is operating this engine it is considered remote control. only by computor. as i stated before the big diferance is a engineer can get the speed down and train handle through rough area the remote only knows track speed and go.

[ironhorseman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

Can they build a remote to ever completely take the place of the human in running an engine and taking a train across country? Flying a plane load of people? Are there too many human factors involved to make it impossible, or will it because the next rocket to Mars?

I don't know if this topic is more about legal issues than about science fiction. It looks like we're dabbling in the Popluar Mechanics realm.

It was pointed out that a remote is controlled by someone anywhere than from the vehicle. I think what's more important, and what's more practical, is the idea of the machines being more robotic and more self reliant.

Case in point: Discovery Channel used to have two shows back in the 1990s called The Next Step and Beyond 2000, each invovled all sorts of cutting edge technology from small gadgets to large machines and changes in daily routine. One episode of one of the shows (it's been so long I can't remember which) showed a full size passenger airplane flying itself. However, there was always a pilot, co-pilot, and navigator in the cockpit. They explained how a flight plan can be preprogrammed into a computer and the plane could take-off, fly, make elevation and course adjustments, and land itself. The video showed a plane landing itself with pilot's hands off the controls. However, the pilot said he always kept his hands ready to take control "just in case." He displayed all the nervousness of letting the plane fly itself as a person does the first time he lets go of the handlebars while riding a bicycle.

Another example showed how a automobile can drive itself successfully down a road day or night. Infrared camaras view the scene ahead and a computer follows the course of the road. It can see all the turns and hills and knows exactly how much to turn the steering wheel and when. It's been several years since I saw it so I don't remember if it was able to take in account of differnt types of weather, speed limit, etc. But it was able to stop when it's path was suddenly and unexpectedly obstructed.

In regards to railroading, I believe it's entirely possible to have a train drive itself over the road, probably not perfectly, if not now but soon in the near future. This isn't brand new technology so I wouldn't be surprised if it's been tested somewhere already. Now, to sound like a lawyer, I would strongly caution against running these locomotives unmanned. Like others before me have already pointed out, a train can be programmed for track speeds and such, but would it recognize an emergency when it encountered it? And why would it be necessary to have unmanned locos? The president of the railroad might say humans can make errors. An engineer might say the railroad doesn't want to pay wages. I ask, why put an expensive machine in that is capable of making errors? Nothing is infallible.

This has all the makings of a classic science fiction movie. Trains and trucks and airplanes all become self reliant only to go crazy and kill us all. Oh, wait, it was already done in such movies as Maximum Overdrive and 2001: A Space Odessy.

I'd say leave the remote trains to the amusment parks, but if they're gonna do it on the Class 1 railroads I'd say leave the conductor and engineer in there. If they don't then who's gonna uncouple a cut of cars if they need to be set out, picked up, or if one gets a hotbox?

What it will eventually come down to is the railroads will be employing a man and a dog for each engine. The man will there to make sure the controls work right and the dog will be there to bite the man if he touches anything.

[ironhorseman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

Can they build a remote to ever completely take the place of the human in running an engine and taking a train across country? Flying a plane load of people? Are there too many human factors involved to make it impossible, or will it because the next rocket to Mars?

I don't know if this topic is more about legal issues than about science fiction. It looks like we're dabbling in the Popluar Mechanics realm.

It was pointed out that a remote is controlled by someone anywhere than from the vehicle. I think what's more important, and what's more practical, is the idea of the machines being more robotic and more self reliant.

Case in point: Discovery Channel used to have two shows back in the 1990s called The Next Step and Beyond 2000, each invovled all sorts of cutting edge technology from small gadgets to large machines and changes in daily routine. One episode of one of the shows (it's been so long I can't remember which) showed a full size passenger airplane flying itself. However, there was always a pilot, co-pilot, and navigator in the cockpit. They explained how a flight plan can be preprogrammed into a computer and the plane could take-off, fly, make elevation and course adjustments, and land itself. The video showed a plane landing itself with pilot's hands off the controls. However, the pilot said he always kept his hands ready to take control "just in case." He displayed all the nervousness of letting the plane fly itself as a person does the first time he lets go of the handlebars while riding a bicycle.

Another example showed how a automobile can drive itself successfully down a road day or night. Infrared camaras view the scene ahead and a computer follows the course of the road. It can see all the turns and hills and knows exactly how much to turn the steering wheel and when. It's been several years since I saw it so I don't remember if it was able to take in account of differnt types of weather, speed limit, etc. But it was able to stop when it's path was suddenly and unexpectedly obstructed.

In regards to railroading, I believe it's entirely possible to have a train drive itself over the road, probably not perfectly, if not now but soon in the near future. This isn't brand new technology so I wouldn't be surprised if it's been tested somewhere already. Now, to sound like a lawyer, I would strongly caution against running these locomotives unmanned. Like others before me have already pointed out, a train can be programmed for track speeds and such, but would it recognize an emergency when it encountered it? And why would it be necessary to have unmanned locos? The president of the railroad might say humans can make errors. An engineer might say the railroad doesn't want to pay wages. I ask, why put an expensive machine in that is capable of making errors? Nothing is infallible.

This has all the makings of a classic science fiction movie. Trains and trucks and airplanes all become self reliant only to go crazy and kill us all. Oh, wait, it was already done in such movies as Maximum Overdrive and 2001: A Space Odessy.

I'd say leave the remote trains to the amusment parks, but if they're gonna do it on the Class 1 railroads I'd say leave the conductor and engineer in there. If they don't then who's gonna uncouple a cut of cars if they need to be set out, picked up, or if one gets a hotbox?

What it will eventually come down to is the railroads will be employing a man and a dog for each engine. The man will there to make sure the controls work right and the dog will be there to bite the man if he touches anything.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by drailed1999

Didn't the Wisconsin Central get permission to run with just an engineer for a maximum time of 2hrs.??

I believe that was the rock job. Hauling rock from a quarry in Southern Wis. to Mundlien and Grayslake Ill. (Vulcan Material and a ready mix firm). I know they were doing it on a trial basis. I do not know if it got full approval.
TIM A

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by drailed1999

Didn't the Wisconsin Central get permission to run with just an engineer for a maximum time of 2hrs.??

I believe that was the rock job. Hauling rock from a quarry in Southern Wis. to Mundlien and Grayslake Ill. (Vulcan Material and a ready mix firm). I know they were doing it on a trial basis. I do not know if it got full approval.
TIM A

[Anonymous]

With special arrangements, it could be done now. The Washington, DC Metro subway is operated by computer. There are no road crossings, and the right of way is completely fenced in. An attendant rides the lead car to observe the route ahead, but his main job is to be sure the passengers have cleared the doors before they're closed. He's got manual overrides, but mostly he just sits there. The same could be accomplished with a freight railroad, but fencing in 2000 miles of railroad and eliminating all road crossings is a tall order. But still, the technology is there now. Remember, the Digital Age is now upon us. Your computer can be set up to run a complex model railroad with no human hands (if the trackwork is worthy!) It wouldn't be too difficult to automate a freight railroad as far as the electronics go; the problem is making it not a problem to its neighbors.

[Anonymous]

With special arrangements, it could be done now. The Washington, DC Metro subway is operated by computer. There are no road crossings, and the right of way is completely fenced in. An attendant rides the lead car to observe the route ahead, but his main job is to be sure the passengers have cleared the doors before they're closed. He's got manual overrides, but mostly he just sits there. The same could be accomplished with a freight railroad, but fencing in 2000 miles of railroad and eliminating all road crossings is a tall order. But still, the technology is there now. Remember, the Digital Age is now upon us. Your computer can be set up to run a complex model railroad with no human hands (if the trackwork is worthy!) It wouldn't be too difficult to automate a freight railroad as far as the electronics go; the problem is making it not a problem to its neighbors.

[Anonymous]

And please, call me ANYTHING but a lawyer!

[Anonymous]

And please, call me ANYTHING but a lawyer!