First of all,everybody is right in their opinions.BUT it still takes a litteral act of congress to let something like this happen.It could be mulled over for years in each state.As far as planes and trains.Planes have rule over the air.The obsticals I mentioned aren’t a factor for planes.Maybe a terrorist or another plane or a large bird,even a missile.But trains have too many variables that can mess up things.Can anyone remember what happened to the Wisconsin Central when they tried remote trains over a distance?The train got angle cocked,the pin pulled,and a block of cars rolled something like 30 miles,backwards over numuerous public and private crossings.Is the W.C. still trying unmanned crews?
It may be coming but not for awhile.
Let consider some of the problems. One can program the profile of the railroad, down to a fraction of an inch, if you wish, and then program throttle and brake setting for a train dispatched to run over the route. Minor problem. Every train is different. If there is a locomotive engineer out there that can tell me that all power and brake settings over a given route are identical for every train-move over, there is a programer on the way.
It is my view that it will take a fairly advance AI (Artificial Intellengence) package to do the job for freight trains. Fixed consist passenger trains running on single purpose track through protected rights of way are another matter. If you don’t see the difference between automated control requirements between freight and passenger trains, appearantly you don’t look a trains very often.
Jay
con; the computer system is fail safe so it will shut down all trains dead when in doubt or when it rains. The bugs in this system is gonna cost. So there will be an employee on every automated train to be able to overide and troubleshoot or when neccessary change a nuckle or make a joint. Job title will change.
But only after all branch lines and spurs are abandoned and the rail network is lean enough to invest in this huge expense per mile. The railroad will cherry pick the traffic it wants to handle and throw the rest on the public highways. Hi valued goods will go by rail and low value junk will go by truck with not enough money to maintain trucks or pay drivers fair. Kind of reverse of today.
As far as grade-crossing safety is concerned, I do agree that there is probably little difference between what an engineer and a properly constructed computer system could do, but getting a jury to buy that explanation in hearing a multi-million dollar lawsuit in the wake of a post-crewless train grade crossing incident is much more challenging. The bottom line there, I think, is the legal and financial liability for the railroad [B)]… not that the outcome of the incident would be any different.
Within 20 years you will see one man operators as the norm backed up by video monitor back at the office. Another 20 years will see unmanned operation with video control back at the office. Another 20 years and it will all be done by computers, and the boys back at the office will be flipping burgers.
Attention to the underlined:
Eastman Kodak, General Motors, SBC - 2002 … It;s not just about employment or unemployment. The truth to the matter is railroads would love to make crewless locomotives work. After that, it’s time for some serious cuts amongst those employed, beginning with the most senior and working on down. Cut their legs out from under them! … despite 25 or 30 years of loyalty [:(!] I am watching it happen right now at Kodak Park. People around me with nearly 30 years in the company are being let go JUST before they’re eligible for retirement. Isn’t that a kicker?
If it isn’t bad enough our manufacturing jobs are being outsourced to China, Mexico, India, Taiwan, there are talks right here amongst the rest in America wanting computers/robotics to take over the rest. What’s left afterwards for anyone? Is it then “Every man 'fend for himself?” I cannot forsee anything positive long-term with computers, cameras, or whatever, substituting for humans in a whole host of jobs, including railroading.
I think it was in Trains where I read that the BM&LP was designed to be automated. They still planned to have one “observer” on board in case the automation failed.
For some reason the automation didn’t work out and they run with an onboard crew of 2. This too, may have changed since it’s been a few(?) years back when I read this.
Jeff
i see it progressing a little faster then that…with the curent rate of technoloigal advancements…i forsee it atleast being tested in 20 years… the technololgy is being devoloped as we speak…
i dont want it to go down anymore then the next guy that is an engineer…but at some point it is going to happen… i remember the old guys at work telling me the stories of the guys that said they will never get ride of the caboose… its needed…its not safe…well…here it is 2005 and they are GONE…replaces by TECHNOLOGY… so anything IS possable!!!
csx engineer
[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by drfizzix
As far as grade-crossing safety is concerned, I do agree that there is probably little difference between what an engineer and a properly constructed computer system could do, but getting a jury to buy that explanation in hearing a multi-million dollar lawsuit in the wake of a post-crewless train grade crossing incident is much more challenging. The bottom line there, I think, is the legal and financial liability for the railroad [B)]… not that the outcome of the incident w
Trains without engineers? Who is going to do all the calculations an modeling? 
Not gone happen as long as little darlings keep putting stuff on rail, as long as public does not resprect trains at crossings and around mainlines.
The Engineer is a nice blame object for railroads, if computers ran the trains the railroads would need to take 100% of all blame, Management likes the extra layer in the blame game.
The Muskingum never really operated on a regular basis without the crew. The automated system just didn’t work out as planned and while I’m not certain if the crew member actually controlled the train or rode the engine as a safety person, they were staffed. Ironically when the line was being dedicated at a ceremony they were pulling some borrowed passenger cars and wanted to operate manually, overriding the automation. They were having all kinds of problems that day as the automation didn’t want to be overriden.
Unless something has changed in the past couple of months they are still on the property and when they finally do leave they will be in whatever size chunks are left after the cutting torches finish. The rail connection to the mining area is severely washed out and getting it in shape for a move on rail would cost way more than the scrap value of the engines.
I think they were indeed variants of the E44 but am not certain.
Perhaps some member from Japan may have a more difinitve answer but I seem to recall that the Bullet Trains are also controlled from a central point over the line and the operator only monitors on the road and manually positions in and out of the stations.
Just yesterday there was an article in the paper that the Nuremberg U3 commuter train line will be running without engineers as of Fall 2006. Tests have been successful, and the Ministry of Transportation has given their approval, the district of Central Franconia will be subsidizing the line with an investment of 39.25 million Euros. The real news is that they will share the ROW through downtown Nuremberg with manned trains!
As for the difference between freight and passenger operations, of course there is a world of difference. But just let them perfect the technology on passenger service, and I believe we may see the first unmanned freight trains in just 10 years.
Concerning the ramifications of grade crossing accidents, I believe that the Class I railroads in America will be happy to spend money for a crossing-free ROW, if that means saving both labor and legal costs. It happened here in Germany, it’ll happen in America!
I do think that the Nuremberg transit authority hopes to save on labor costs, as an average engineer’s gross income is about $70,000.00 p.a. If you can replace 50 engineers with, say 10 technicians, that is a great savings. But I also believe that the project is about prestige. The Germans were the first to commercially market a feasible mag-lev system (Shanghai), they were upset that the French had such a head start in the HSR market, and they want to stay on the cutting edge!
Several subway passenger systems are already operated this way with one onboard “monitor”. In the port of antwerp robot trucks transport containers from the ships. Its not if but when.
I’ll have to agree with my good friend and soon to be retired TRRA engineer Ray Busch. The technology isn’t advanced enough to make this possible. That’s why it’s only being used in yards, steel mills and quarries.
When people say that this line here and that RR there are already crewless or automated, you have to compare apples to apples.
A 5 or 10 car commuter/bullet train operating on a dedicated right-of-way cannot be compared to an 8000ft long freight train operating over dark territory.
It’s going to happen eventually, it’s not a matter of if but when, but it’s not going to happen over night, it’s going to happen slowly over years, perhaps over decades.
Massive job loss isn’t likely, more likely is the loss of jobs to attrition over the years.
The real question is how long will the RR retirement plans be able to stay in the green with the constant loss of running trade jobs.
how are you going to control them when the trains are out of range? tell me that!!!
The big sticking point once the technical issues are resolved with automated ground vehicles of all types (road as well as rail) is definitely the liability issues. The lawyers will have a field day anytime a “robo-vehicle” has an accident which results in injuries or fatalities. Still, they are probably inevitable as the century progresses.
As far as a unmanned train being “out of range” with satellite based communications this doesn’t happen, though when you lose the link(due to weather,malfunctions, ect) it can be a bad day…