This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Driverless Trains

The March 2017 Issue of E&T carries several articles about driverless cars but why haven't we got driverless mainline trains?


The technical 'problem' should be far simpler to solve than for a road vehicle. The position on the 'road' can be predicted and determined easily with precision. There is essentially no collision problem to solve, that has been done with the existing signalling system.


There is no need for communication with the train, no need for additional infrastructure. All that is needed is to observe and act on the existing fixed signals.


Of course such a basic system can be improved upon to produce a 'super driver' capable of reacting to unplanned obstructions, greasy rails etc.


The human driver is perhaps the last link to be made 'fail-safe' in the railway safety regime. Our efforts to 'improve' the driver-train interface have probably added new problems. Regular signal spacings, standard aspects and driver alerts must surely increase the boredom and inattention factor. An example of this was the Shap Roll-back in August 2010 where a driver correctly observed adverse signals, came to a stop, then allowed the train to roll-back, acknowledging the retreating adverse signals on the way, until the train exceeded 50 mph. Presumably he was half asleep?


I suspect the real 'problem' is a social one, it will be a tragedy if we can't solve that one.

Parents
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Thanks for initiating this topic. It is timely and needed.  I have just come off the Confederation Line Project in Ottawa and we have a UTO capable Light Rail vehicle ( it actually runs without a driver in the yard).  But before you jump to conclusions, its primarily is a driver attended ATO vehicle with ATP.  The costs of full UTO operation were not something the client wanted within their tight budget. Clearly the vehicle is fully capable in the future and I would hope the client will go that route but there is already huge resistance.  My thought then turns to vehicle control systems: Perhaps to future proof the newer vehicles they should always be fitted with automatic systems and protection to allow the very real transition to what is undoubtedly the next step in rail evolution. If we are talking about autonomous vehicles, the best bang for the buck  would be the gaining of experience of automatic operation on what already is a a very mature safe system and which can reliably demostrate protection of the public. Ironically Ottawa is mentioning the support of development of autonomous vehicles but has ignored what potential lies within their new rail vehicles. My other thought is that the freight industry should also not be complacent. there are a number of haulage companies in North america developing autonomous trucks, this should also be a wake up call to the rail freight industry and hopefully shake up their potential complacency.  Imagine 24/7 trucks hauling goods.... hate to think at what that does to congestion.   


    That all said I am looking forward to seeing an autonomous streetcar/ Tram on the street very soon and why not?  As to autonomous cars/automoblies , so far performance is great in a valley in San Bernadino or Paulo Alto.  But put the cars on a Canadian road in the winter and factor in the calculation for worn tyres, communication delays and frictionless surfaces in your GEBR calculation, I am not sure the results will be all that good.  Please don't even get me started on computing decisions and ethics of these systems.


    Gareth
Reply
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Thanks for initiating this topic. It is timely and needed.  I have just come off the Confederation Line Project in Ottawa and we have a UTO capable Light Rail vehicle ( it actually runs without a driver in the yard).  But before you jump to conclusions, its primarily is a driver attended ATO vehicle with ATP.  The costs of full UTO operation were not something the client wanted within their tight budget. Clearly the vehicle is fully capable in the future and I would hope the client will go that route but there is already huge resistance.  My thought then turns to vehicle control systems: Perhaps to future proof the newer vehicles they should always be fitted with automatic systems and protection to allow the very real transition to what is undoubtedly the next step in rail evolution. If we are talking about autonomous vehicles, the best bang for the buck  would be the gaining of experience of automatic operation on what already is a a very mature safe system and which can reliably demostrate protection of the public. Ironically Ottawa is mentioning the support of development of autonomous vehicles but has ignored what potential lies within their new rail vehicles. My other thought is that the freight industry should also not be complacent. there are a number of haulage companies in North america developing autonomous trucks, this should also be a wake up call to the rail freight industry and hopefully shake up their potential complacency.  Imagine 24/7 trucks hauling goods.... hate to think at what that does to congestion.   


    That all said I am looking forward to seeing an autonomous streetcar/ Tram on the street very soon and why not?  As to autonomous cars/automoblies , so far performance is great in a valley in San Bernadino or Paulo Alto.  But put the cars on a Canadian road in the winter and factor in the calculation for worn tyres, communication delays and frictionless surfaces in your GEBR calculation, I am not sure the results will be all that good.  Please don't even get me started on computing decisions and ethics of these systems.


    Gareth
Children
No Data