Skip to main content

Thought I'd share this interesting article (cut and pasted by me to avoid the WSJ logon):

SYDNEY—Mining giant Rio Tinto calls it the world’s largest robot: mile-long driverless trains traversing the sparsely populated Australian Outback on roughly 1,000 miles of track. American railroad companies, seeking to boost network efficiencies, call it the future.

U.S. rail-freight operators say greater automation will make their networks safer and more productive. They point to railroads owned by Anglo-Australian miner Rio Tinto as a blueprint for the 140,000-mile private U.S. network that moves vast quantities of everything from cars to corn.

A decade in the making, Rio Tinto’s driverless train system, called Auto Haul™, now manages roughly 200 locomotives that move iron ore from inland mines to coastal ports in Western Australia. The trains are operated hundreds of miles away, in an office block in Perth.

Rio Tinto’s network, which began formally operating in driverless mode late last month, is the first fully autonomous, long-haul freight railroad. Rail-company executives from countries including the U.S. and Canada have visited to see the technology in action, said Ivan Vella, Rio Tinto’s head of iron-ore rail services.

American companies say automating tasks once handled by crew will create fluid networks more akin to a model train set. Around 5 million tons of goods are moved daily on the U.S. network, which freight operators share with passenger trains, generating more than $70 billion in revenue annually.

Drivers have variable skills, so a generous distance is kept between trains. In doing so, companies sacrifice valuable rail capacity. Also, the different ways that drivers run locomotives lead to inconsistent wear-and-tear and fuel use, while human error accounts for more than one-third of accidents, according to the Association of American Railroads, an industry trade group.

Last November, miner BHP Group Ltd. was forced to derail a 268-wagon runaway train in Australia’s Pilbara region, the origin of half the world’s iron-ore exports. The train rolled away after its driver disembarked to inspect a wagon and failed to secure the brake.

Labor unions and some lawmakers worry about risks to public safety, cyber threats and job cuts from increased automation. Rail-freight companies have typically offered some of the nation’s best-paid jobs, with an average annual salary of more than $125,000, said the AAR, which represents most major railroads. The country’s biggest Class I railroads employed roughly 147,000 people in 2017.

“Americans want a rail network and a transportation system that serves the people, not one that simply makes money for stockholders by eliminating good jobs and quality rail service,” Railroad Workers United, a coalition of unions, said in a statement submitted last year to the Federal Railroad Administration, which was seeking comments on the future of automation in the industry. RWU opposes crews of fewer than two people.

Reaching a consensus among companies, unions and regulators on how many drivers, if any, should remain on board will likely take a long time, said CSX Corp. Chief Executive James Foote.

U.S. rail-freight operators, whose trains are typically staffed by a conductor and engineer, say the goal isn’t to do away with drivers immediately. They contend there are many steps to reach the sort of driverless network Rio Tinto has created, although a shift toward more one-person crews is anticipated as new technologies are implemented.

“The lack of certainty makes investments in technology and innovation cautious endeavors that result in small gains, not leaps forward,” the AAR said in a filing to the Federal Railroad Administration last month.

Today, efforts to advance automation are being held back by regulations that haven’t kept pace with technological change, executives say. They fear falling behind as vehicle makers develop self-driving cars and autonomous trucks.

The Transportation Department released guidelines on autonomous vehicles in October but didn’t address autonomous trains in detail.

Existing regulations typically dictate that tasks such as track inspections be conducted by people. Operators say this could be done better using an automated system.

The AAR has urged transport officials to grant waivers on what it says are outdated rules and allow railroads and manufacturers to create voluntary standards for safety technology, where possible. The Federal Railroad Administration was unable to comment because of the continuing government shutdown.

The 200-year-old industry has spent most of the past decade developing positive train control technology, designed to automatically stop a train to prevent collisions. That system, which uses GPS information and track data, has created a platform to operate trains more independently.

“The Rio Tinto example clearly shows the technology is here,” said John Scheib, chief legal officer at Norfolk Southern Corp. “It shows that our regulator needs to move more quickly to open the doors to such technologies,” he said.

Rio Tinto’s trains complete an average return journey of 500 miles in 40 hours. Previously, the miner had to shuttle nearly 100 drivers around these scrubby outlands to switch train drivers three times for each journey. That totaled almost a million miles a year and the changeovers added more than an hour to each return train trip.

Today, a train controller at its Perth operations center sets the route, then computers both at the center and on-board take over to make decisions. Before the system was set up, the miner faced repeated setbacks. The project ran three years late and to almost double the original budget.

“What Auto Haul does,” though, “is drive it better than the best driver, every time,” Mr. Vella said.

Of course, there are many people in Australia “who love driving trains [and] they are disappointed they don’t get to drive trains anymore,” he said. “We are trying to give them alternatives.”

Write to Rhiannon Hoyle at rhiannon.hoyle@wsj.com

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I don't buy it. The railroads can say whatever they want, and point to Australian success hauling inert ore through the middle of nowhere. US railroads are a different animal and will always require human attention. Total automation isn't all it's cracked up to be. As long as there are railroads in this country, there will be humans on board, even if they only monitor the train's actions.

mlavender480 posted:

Oh, they’ll try it, guaranteed.  Whether it succeeds remains to be seen.  The Australian outback is a lot different than a congested terminal district or a busy multi-track main line like the NS Pittsburgh Line or the BNSF transcon, so there will be different challenges.  Still... they’ll try it.

Do you really think the railroads are going to get this past a Congress that gave them PTC?

I take anything the WSJ says with a grain of salt because of who owns it.

I am very fiscally conservative, but I do think at some point in the not too distant future Artificial Intelligence is going to necessitate a drastic change in society's economic structure.  I think AI, possibly in my lifetime (I am 48), will eliminate many jobs, and engineers and truck drivers will be at the front end of this, and enrich companies and cause the need for some kind of basic living wage for all.  Not sure I want to see this happen, but I think that's where it's going, and it probably won't happen without some great pain beforehand.

Last edited by pennsy484

I could see something like this being tested on the Joint Line in WY, outside of winter.  Trains are unit coal trains.  The trains going to each mine has its set number of cars and locomotives.   

But on lines with a mixure of trains and cars, I do not thinkk it is anywhere near prime time yet.

The problem comes if there are wrecks with deaths and/or injuries.  Will the payout to victims in the courtroom outway the cost of equipment or savings?

This reminds me of the question from JURASSIC PARK:  We were so concerned about whether we COULD do something that we forgot to ask if we SHOULD.

Last edited by Dominic Mazoch

We've HAD automated railroads since the early 1970's, the BM&LP. 

And both BART and the DC Metro are automated, with the "engineer" acting as an attendant when in automatic train operation mode.  Which is the normal method of operation. 

Not an argument for or against, just an example of the fact that the basic technological issues of starting, running and stopping trains have been solved 40 years ago. 

What to do when all of our jobs are replaced by automation is the government's problem since the biggest losers will be those whose livelihood depend on taxes. 

Last edited by Rule292
Big_Boy_4005 posted:
mlavender480 posted:

Oh, they’ll try it, guaranteed.  Whether it succeeds remains to be seen.  The Australian outback is a lot different than a congested terminal district or a busy multi-track main line like the NS Pittsburgh Line or the BNSF transcon, so there will be different challenges.  Still... they’ll try it.

Do you really think the railroads are going to get this past a Congress that gave them PTC?

Eventually, yes.

mlavender480 posted:
Big_Boy_4005 posted:
mlavender480 posted:

Oh, they’ll try it, guaranteed.  Whether it succeeds remains to be seen.  The Australian outback is a lot different than a congested terminal district or a busy multi-track main line like the NS Pittsburgh Line or the BNSF transcon, so there will be different challenges.  Still... they’ll try it.

Do you really think the railroads are going to get this past a Congress that gave them PTC?

Eventually, yes.

The locomotive controls can certainly be automated but we don't currently have a robotic pin puller. 

Tough to admit the truth but automation developed and built by the hands of man can do things better than the hands of man.    I don't own an automatic transmission vehicle (out of 4 that I do own), but automatics can do anything I do and even better. 

Only time will tell how the robotic "seeing" technology for things such a lane changing and following distance work out.    Once we get past the initial "dumbing down of the driver arguments" ya gotta admit they are like having a second set of eyes.

Not sure how that correlates to railroading, since it's certainly light years less difficult to design and program ATO for a 4 car Metro subway train to travel the grade from Arlington under the Potomac to Foggy Bottom than it is to design hardware and write software to get mineral trains over the old Saluda Mountain grade.

IIRC the old ATO programming for WMATA (which was modeled from BARTD IIRC) was written in FORTRAN.

 

Last edited by Rule292
Big_Boy_4005 posted:

I don't buy it. The railroads can say whatever they want, and point to Australian success hauling inert ore through the middle of nowhere. US railroads are a different animal and will always require human attention. Total automation isn't all it's cracked up to be. As long as there are railroads in this country, there will be humans on board, even if they only monitor the train's actions.

Darn right!!What might be right for them does not make it right for us.Besides australian rail roads are different.They have miles and miles of nothing.In the fact they do not go through cities and towns nor do they deal with crossing.I hope the unions fight with every thing got to keep this madness away from here!!

mlavender480 posted:

Oh, they’ll try it, guaranteed.  Whether it succeeds remains to be seen.  The Australian outback is a lot different than a congested terminal district or a busy multi-track main line like the NS Pittsburgh Line or the BNSF transcon, so there will be different challenges.  Still... they’ll try it.

Bam there it is.If they have a derailment out there no big deal.But its a different book all together here in this country.With so many towns and cities the railroads go through.And then there the railroad crossings.Can not build a bridge over every railroad.No its a bad idea to even consider bring that over to this country.I wonder are they willing to risk a large pay out if something goes wrong.And they take out a fair sized town with people hurt or whorse.

Rule292 posted:

We've HAD automated railroads since the early 1970's, the BM&LP. 

And both BART and the DC Metro are automated, with the "engineer" acting as an attendant when in automatic train operation mode.  Which is the normal method of operation. 

Not an argument for or against, just an example of the fact that the basic technological issues of starting, running and stopping trains have been solved 40 years ago. 

What to do when all of our jobs are replaced by automation is the government's problem since the biggest losers will be those whose livelihood depend on taxes. 

That's when humans become obsolete. The machines don't need us anymore.

Last edited by Big_Boy_4005

It's coming, it will dramatically increase efficiency, and it will be as safe or safer than current operations. Do I like it? No. There will be some job offset as people will be needed to install, maintain, and operate the control systems, it won't be one for one. 

The world is changing whether we like it or not, just like steam engines, cabooses, and land line phones. How many of us even have land line phones any more? In 10 years almost no one will. 

And machines, as of yet, do not understand FAILURE IS NOT AN OPTION.

These are airplane situations.  Simulators said that DC10 should have crashed way before that airport in IA.  Or the Airbus in the Hudson should have broken up on impact.

But I can guess there have been rail situations where a human saved the day, and the simulator would have said NO WAY.

There are some parts of human thinking which cannot be reduced to a GOSUB program.  Machines ad of yet, canno experience pucker time.  Machines as of yet do not have the fear of death emotion.

Last edited by Dominic Mazoch
Rule292 posted:

We've HAD automated railroads since the early 1970's, the BM&LP. 

And both BART and the DC Metro are automated, with the "engineer" acting as an attendant when in automatic train operation mode.  Which is the normal method of operation. 

As is the Vancouver rapid transit line.  THAT doesn't even have an attendant!   

As for Australia, well, I recall that runaway train from a month or two back... 

Mitch 

Add Reply

Post

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×