CSX expects PTC to pave way for 1-person crews; autonomous operations

This is only the beginning in railroading and many other industries. The start of using robots has been going on for some years and the automation of more and more tasks in industry. The time is here. 

Dave

I wonder how many people have to be killed before they realize the fallacy of this point of view.

John McEnerney posted:

I wonder how many people have to be killed before they realize the fallacy of this point of view.

I will never ride in an autonomous auto.

I don't even like riding as a passenger when someone else is driving.

If I was coming up today I doubt I would have become a railfan. There is nothing much in today's railroad scene that turns me on. Today's passenger locomotives and cars are all butt-ugly in my eyes, Amtrak is a joke outside of the NEC and every freight train seems to be pulled by a look-alike GE brick in one of the 4 or 5 remaining Class 1 paint schemes.

The two railroads in my neck of the woods are CSX and NS. CSX is not a name, it's a stock symbol and basic black is fine for steam locomotives but black diesels are boring and bring back bad memories of Penn Central.

Aside from the UP, it appears that main line steam (765 on Metra being a rare and welcome exception) is pretty much a thing of the past.

I'm glad I got to see the variety that I did, when I did.

Shouldn't be a big surprise, this has been the trend with railroads for years. In the steam era, having helper engines meant having crews in each engine, in the diesel era you needed only 1 crew because of MU capability. In the original era of trains they need brakemen to put the brakes on, with the air brake the engineer did it. Railroads used to have people at trackside checking trains for hotboxes, these days that can be monitored from the can of a train via sensors and video cameras. A steam engine needed an engineer and fireman, that kind of transferred over to diesels, but a fireman was really just another body in the cab if what a friend of mine who had been one told me. Lot of subway systems run by computer and the engineer is only a backup. Airliners have had the capability to be flown by an automated system for many years now, but is not likely to be automated any time soon, though you could see a plane where a single pilot is a backup (they used to have 3 people in the cockpit, today it is 2...

My biggest question with PTC has and always will remain: how will they ensure it's secure? The government has always and continues to consider the railroads one of the most likely, most vulnerable, and most tempting targets for terrorists or unfriendly nations to attack. When Trump came to town a few week ago the railroad I work for got shut down and Secret Service Agents watched over my train for the duration of his stay as it had quite a lot of very nasty hazmat. If They are worried about boots on the ground using the railroads as weapons, I would love to know why they are not worried about a computer system one could hack from anywhere on the planet which could be used to weaponize the railroads, or simply shut them down and bring our economy to a halt. I've heard the "it's not possible to hack PTC" or "no way it could be used like that" but every computer system is hack-able, and I can think of a few ways one could use it to halt rail operations or weaponize a railroad. It's a very concerning thought to me. 

"I will never ride in an autonomous auto."

If you live long enough, you may have the choice of an autonomous auto or walking/bicycling.  Already we have almost all autos with automatic forward braking, and many with automatic reverse braking.  Lane keeping functions.  Ability to maintain distance from the car in front of you with automatic braking (via cruise control).  Pretty soon the electronics will stop you from tailgating.  Not far away from full autonomy.

The reason is quite simple.  Almost all auto accidents and train fatalities are due to human error.  Probably close to 100% as opposed to system failures.  We're talking tens of thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of serious injuries, hundreds of billions of wasted dollars.  You will be infinitely safer in an auto when no human interventions are needed, including your own, no matter how good a driver you are.

If you live long enough, you may have the choice of an autonomous auto or walking/bicycling.  Already we have almost all autos with automatic forward braking, and many with automatic reverse braking.  Lane keeping functions.  Ability to maintain distance from the car in front of you with automatic braking (via cruise control).  Pretty soon the electronics will stop you from tailgating.  Not far away from full autonomy.

On the other hand, while riding on the NYS Thruway yesterday afternoon our car, with all those features and more, lost track of a motorcycle that was in the left lane near us.
I am glad to have those features, but relying on them too heavily can be dangerous.

"I am glad to have those features, but relying on them too heavily can be dangerous."

Perhaps at present, but the most dangerous strategy is relying solely on the unreliable human being behind the wheel as technical fixes for that unreliability become available. We know that this leads to tens of thousands of deaths per year and terrible suffering of many. Every day on my short commute I see multiple acts of driving stupidity and lack of skill/understanding.  I look forward to living long enough to see these individual acts of incompetence and selfishness curtailed by technology.

Every day on my short commute I see multiple acts of driving stupidity and lack of skill/understanding.  I look forward to living long enough to see these individual acts of incompetence and selfishness curtailed by technology.

Agreed, and it's getting worse all the time.
I think today's cars have too many distractions. Dashboards with touch screens is a good example. Then there are cell phones and texting. Until the technology is ready, it would be great if law enforcement would crack down on distracted driving.

Technically, they could run unmanned trains today, but railroads, more so than most industries, are exposed to liability for safety of the public, which is not only a legal and financial issue, but also a political issue, as railroads are regulated by government agencies which, in turn, are authorized and directed by elected politicians.

Therefore, I do not personally believe that unmanned trains on other than private railroads are a likelihood.  Just my opinion.

Meant as a question, not a challenge.  Do remote controlled trains count as "unmanned?"  There's a UP operated yard near where I work that has signs all over it stating (paraphrasing from memory).  "Enter with caution.  Remote controlled trains operate in this area."

Having five years of experience as a freight conductor definitely does not make me an expert, but single person crews would make me extremely uncomfortable between the rails. We all know the expression, "like a freight train," it takes a crew to safely move all that tonnage.

"Autonomous auto," then put me out to pasture and shoot me between the eyes, I drive with manual transmissions, with the top down when available, one of the few pleasures left from the old days long past.

I am looking forward to self driving cars.  I believe that they will make the transportation experience better and safer for everyone.  

Amtrak already has one person engine crews.  It is just a matter of time before it happens to freight trains.  Railroads will continue to change along with the rest of the economy.  Hopefully, new jobs that we can't imagine right now will emerge to take the place of those that will be lost.

NH Joe

Landsteiner posted:

...Every day on my short commute I see multiple acts of driving stupidity and lack of skill/understanding.  I look forward to living long enough to see these individual acts of incompetence and selfishness curtailed by technology.

God forbid we should attempt to teach people the right way to do things. Naw...let the computer do it.

The dumbing down of America continues unabated...  

I experience too many computer failures every day to ever trust my life to one.

palallin posted:

I experience too many computer failures every day to ever trust my life to one.

All of us are already trusting computers computers with our lives nearly every day.  Whenever we get on an airplane, ride on a train, drive on a street with stop lights, have any kind of major surgery, call 911, turn on the power to our houses, or do almost anything in modern day living, computers are in control.  NH Joe

This is just asking for it.I do not see any good coming from a move like this.There is to much that could go wrong.

It's only a matter of time. They are testing tractor/trailers not having any drivers. Those test so far are going well. 

Dave

Landsteiner posted:

"I will never ride in an autonomous auto."

If you live long enough, you may have the choice of an autonomous auto or walking/bicycling.  Already we have almost all autos with automatic forward braking, and many with automatic reverse braking.  Lane keeping functions.  Ability to maintain distance from the car in front of you with automatic braking (via cruise control).  Pretty soon the electronics will stop you from tailgating.  Not far away from full autonomy.

The reason is quite simple.  Almost all auto accidents and train fatalities are due to human error.  Probably close to 100% as opposed to system failures.  We're talking tens of thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of serious injuries, hundreds of billions of wasted dollars.  You will be infinitely safer in an auto when no human interventions are needed, including your own, no matter how good a driver you are.

This is nothing but thinly disguised political diatribe, this person wants a utopian fantasy world to live in.
Posters like this are why I will no longer be participating or contributing  to this forum.
I have made a living for 35 years, driving various types of motor vehicles, I don't need to be insulted by the intellectually ignorant.
Good day.