4 ms·

Trains seem like pretty low hanging fruit, since they don't have to deal with nearly as much problems as vehicles on the road. Yet train automation still hasn't

Trains seem like pretty low hanging fruit, since they don't have to deal with nearly as much problems as vehicles on the road. Yet train automation still hasn't put train operators out of work. I doubt that self-driving cars/trucks, which lag far behind self-driving trains, are going to cause much unemployment anytime soon.

meddlepal 10y ago
At least in the US, the FRA is a regulatory nightmare though and extremely red tape heavy. The lack of progress in train automation is partly caused by the heavy-handed rules the agency rights which push implementation costs through the roof. It'll be interesting to see if the DOT reacts similarly in time to vehicle automation.
- parsnips 10y ago
  This. I worked in the PTC space in the early 2k's. The person that the FRA send to be their regulatory representative to our program did not trust transistors over electromechanical switches, because you couldn't see how the transistors were failing. As you can imagine, our progress was slow.
iofj 10y ago
For trains, where 1 person directs 200+ cars, the reward just isn't great enough. For trucks, where one person directs 1 truckload, it's 200+ times as rewarding. Plus, almost every country in the world has stopped building infrastructure to allow trains to go where you'd want them to go. So trains are only useful for huge manufacturing firms and things like harbors. Goods trains don't even go to most airports anymore.
- randomsearch 10y ago
  Bit of an aside, but I've often heard it argued that trains make more sense for passenger traffic. The reasoning is that you can shift a lot of people into one central station, and they then deliver themselves over the last stage of a journey through ambulation.
  - mdrzn 10y ago
    Interesting! Have you read anything recently about that? Any link?
  - akgerber 10y ago
    That entirely depends on land use. If downtown Palo Alto near the station were full of skyscrapers, as its land value would justify, the Caltrain would be an effective commute for many more workers.

meddlepal 10y ago

At least in the US, the FRA is a regulatory nightmare though and extremely red tape heavy. The lack of progress in train automation is partly caused by the heavy-handed rules the agency rights which push implementation costs through the roof. It'll be interesting to see if the DOT reacts similarly in time to vehicle automation.

parsnips 10y ago
This. I worked in the PTC space in the early 2k's. The person that the FRA send to be their regulatory representative to our program did not trust transistors over electromechanical switches, because you couldn't see how the transistors were failing. As you can imagine, our progress was slow.

iofj 10y ago

For trains, where 1 person directs 200+ cars, the reward just isn't great enough. For trucks, where one person directs 1 truckload, it's 200+ times as rewarding. Plus, almost every country in the world has stopped building infrastructure to allow trains to go where you'd want them to go. So trains are only useful for huge manufacturing firms and things like harbors. Goods trains don't even go to most airports anymore.

randomsearch 10y ago
Bit of an aside, but I've often heard it argued that trains make more sense for passenger traffic. The reasoning is that you can shift a lot of people into one central station, and they then deliver themselves over the last stage of a journey through ambulation.
- mdrzn 10y ago
  Interesting! Have you read anything recently about that? Any link?
- akgerber 10y ago
  That entirely depends on land use. If downtown Palo Alto near the station were full of skyscrapers, as its land value would justify, the Caltrain would be an effective commute for many more workers.