7 ms·

What if I told you I could offer you a 99% automated intercity solution? That's right, a solution where 99% of the people involved have no obligation whatsoever

What if I told you I could offer you a 99% automated intercity solution? That's right, a solution where 99% of the people involved have no obligation whatsoever to engage with piloting the vehicle... EVER! Where the vehicle just sort of seems to... drive itself? Is this some futuristic sci-fi fantasy? Well hold onto your hat, because the future is NOW! Behold! https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7177/6894934663_0619c8bea3.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7177/6894934663_0619c8bea3.jpg Bonus: the vehicle can be resized at will, depending on the number of passengers.

Sharlin 7y ago
Yep. Intercity traffic is a problem we solved in the 1800s.
- dmix 7y ago
  Riding trains is great, getting to the train station(s) in a busy city, worrying about the schedule and being in the right spot for the right train, etc, is not at all fun. But otherwise agreed a ton of this stuff could be solved with modern trains. But appeasing all of the special interest groups in between has made infrastructure development impossibly expensive or takes a decade. So we keep driving cars even long distances between cities.
  - bpye 7y ago
    This is still a solved problem in many European cities. Train stations are often in the city centre, or on the edge of it. They almost always connect with either metro or bus networks, typically with frequent services.
    - zahrc 7y ago
      Not in Germany, may be in big cities, but any other region is plagued by disruptions and way less frequent services paired together with horrible local public transport. The former government owned national railway basically owns every piece of important track and doesn’t give a damn about customers. The prices are constantly rising while the service declines. Can’t count how much time I’ve wasted on several train stations, waiting for up to two hours for late trains, hell, even having to get a hotel multiple times.
  - fataliss 7y ago
    Cities like Tokyo have solved most of that for now decades. Def depends on whether the government is willing to make the investment (heavy) into the right amount and level of infrastructure. When you know that Los Angeles used to have over a 1000 miles of rails before the 60's and after pressure from car and tire makers ripped it all away, you understand where all our traffic problems come from :)
  - zahrc 7y ago
    I know it’s practically impossible and sheer utopic but I dream of an never-ending Train going in a circle, kind of like a moving tunnel.
    - aikinai 7y ago
      The main loop in Tokyo comes every two minutes; it’s as close as you can get practically get to a constantly moving tunnel.
    - jpindar 7y ago
      You might enjoy this classic story. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Roads_Must_Roll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Roads_Must_Roll
  - ascagnel_ 7y ago
    > Riding trains is great, getting to the train station(s) in a busy city, worrying about the schedule and being in the right spot for the right train, etc, is not at all fun. I'd say that, in the majority of cases, it's either no more difficult or outright easier than getting to an airport, as airports tend to be located on the outskirts of cities (requiring connecting train/bus service or private cars), while most rail hubs tend to be in city centers.
- Tiktaalik 7y ago
  Intracity transportation was also solved in the 1800s. (compact towns & bicycles)
bpye 7y ago
It's interesting to consider what would have happened had the US invested the money it spent on the interstate system on intercity rail instead.
rmtech 7y ago
Trains kind of suck though. I used them a lot in the UK because I didn't have a car. The UK has an OK train network. The problem with trains is that they are very, very inconvenient for most journeys. Sunday evening? forget it. After 11pm? Nope. Journey that runs perpendicular to the local line to London? Lol, enjoy a 5 hour journey to go 100 miles. Want to take cargo like a new washing machine? Lol. Want to go somewhere that's not near a station by bus? Enjoy Journey times that are 4, 5 or 10 times slower than a car. Trains are good for busy commuter lines and nothing else.
- bamboozled 7y ago
  "Trains kind of suck though. I used them a lot in the UK because I didn't have a car." You're blaming trains because you want to have a boozy night out? Get a hotel or start and leave earlier like everyone else. This is just a silly comment.
  - NoSorryCannot 7y ago
    I can't find where the parent mentioned drinking. But to stab at that anyway, it wouldn't be silly if he did. People driving impaired for lack of other good and affordable options is an emergent reality, no matter how morally hazardous it is.
  - rmtech 7y ago
    I don't drink, but it is very, very inconvenient if your activities are constrained by the train timetable. Much better to have a car available and be able to travel when you want to. Of course sometimes you dont want to travel late or at weekends
- 0xB31B1B 7y ago
  1) trains go basically everywhere frequently in Japan, it’s very much a functioning rail network, they exist and kick ass. 2) a train doesn’t need to replace 100% of personal car trips to be useful. I’m sure you’re not transporting dishwashers or taking trips after 11 pm every day. Covering 90% of use cases is sufficient, and the other 10% can be handled by either renting a car or taking an Uber. 3) we can and should make busses faster than cars during times of congestion by giving them their own lanes.
kortex 7y ago
Albany is a middlin' sized city. Taking the train to NYC is like, still a nontrivial event. Also passenger rail has to sidestep freight on this corridor. Megabus is a bit better experience overall but also kinda meh. On top of that, I personally (and know many agree) HATE the stress of keeping track of times, scheduling around infrequent departures, logistics to/from stations, etc. > Bonus: the vehicle can be resized at will, depending on the number of passengers. Yeahno. "please wait 15-30 minutes as we shuffle cars around the rail yard" is not exactly "at will"
- pas 7y ago
  Waiting 30 minutes while a new carriage is attached still beats sitting in a traffic jam. At least for me. I gladly pick rail over car for good lines, because it's stress free. Get to the station in time (with public transportation it's quite deterministic, subways and trams don't get into traffic jams, buses sometimes do). Cars of course win when it comes to flexibility (late night getting to a small town address).
wwweston 7y ago
I quite like trains. I hope someday the US gets back to having better rail service. Highway-autonomous vehicles would give you the benefits of rail service plus arbitrary departure times, more direct routes, on-demand route changes, and you're traveling in a vehicle that you can use for first and last mile and intra-city travel.
softwaredoug 7y ago
The problem in the US is we aren’t going to start getting European level train infrastructure anytime soon. Also it’s arguably not a worthwhile goal, we have so much space, and it’s an uphill battle to change US culture to be one where trains are going to be a good fit for our land use and urban planning.
- Ericson2314 7y ago
  I think surmounting those challenges is useful in itself, not just as a way to enable trains. Using self driving cars to avoid doing that would be a real shame.

Sharlin 7y ago

Yep. Intercity traffic is a problem we solved in the 1800s.

dmix 7y ago
Riding trains is great, getting to the train station(s) in a busy city, worrying about the schedule and being in the right spot for the right train, etc, is not at all fun. But otherwise agreed a ton of this stuff could be solved with modern trains. But appeasing all of the special interest groups in between has made infrastructure development impossibly expensive or takes a decade. So we keep driving cars even long distances between cities.
- bpye 7y ago
  This is still a solved problem in many European cities. Train stations are often in the city centre, or on the edge of it. They almost always connect with either metro or bus networks, typically with frequent services.
  - zahrc 7y ago
    Not in Germany, may be in big cities, but any other region is plagued by disruptions and way less frequent services paired together with horrible local public transport. The former government owned national railway basically owns every piece of important track and doesn’t give a damn about customers. The prices are constantly rising while the service declines. Can’t count how much time I’ve wasted on several train stations, waiting for up to two hours for late trains, hell, even having to get a hotel multiple times.
- fataliss 7y ago
  Cities like Tokyo have solved most of that for now decades. Def depends on whether the government is willing to make the investment (heavy) into the right amount and level of infrastructure. When you know that Los Angeles used to have over a 1000 miles of rails before the 60's and after pressure from car and tire makers ripped it all away, you understand where all our traffic problems come from :)
- zahrc 7y ago
  I know it’s practically impossible and sheer utopic but I dream of an never-ending Train going in a circle, kind of like a moving tunnel.
  - aikinai 7y ago
    The main loop in Tokyo comes every two minutes; it’s as close as you can get practically get to a constantly moving tunnel.
  - jpindar 7y ago
    You might enjoy this classic story. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Roads_Must_Roll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Roads_Must_Roll
- ascagnel_ 7y ago
  > Riding trains is great, getting to the train station(s) in a busy city, worrying about the schedule and being in the right spot for the right train, etc, is not at all fun. I'd say that, in the majority of cases, it's either no more difficult or outright easier than getting to an airport, as airports tend to be located on the outskirts of cities (requiring connecting train/bus service or private cars), while most rail hubs tend to be in city centers.
Tiktaalik 7y ago
Intracity transportation was also solved in the 1800s. (compact towns & bicycles)

bpye 7y ago

It's interesting to consider what would have happened had the US invested the money it spent on the interstate system on intercity rail instead.

rmtech 7y ago

Trains kind of suck though. I used them a lot in the UK because I didn't have a car. The UK has an OK train network. The problem with trains is that they are very, very inconvenient for most journeys. Sunday evening? forget it. After 11pm? Nope. Journey that runs perpendicular to the local line to London? Lol, enjoy a 5 hour journey to go 100 miles. Want to take cargo like a new washing machine? Lol. Want to go somewhere that's not near a station by bus? Enjoy Journey times that are 4, 5 or 10 times slower than a car. Trains are good for busy commuter lines and nothing else.

bamboozled 7y ago
"Trains kind of suck though. I used them a lot in the UK because I didn't have a car." You're blaming trains because you want to have a boozy night out? Get a hotel or start and leave earlier like everyone else. This is just a silly comment.
- NoSorryCannot 7y ago
  I can't find where the parent mentioned drinking. But to stab at that anyway, it wouldn't be silly if he did. People driving impaired for lack of other good and affordable options is an emergent reality, no matter how morally hazardous it is.
- rmtech 7y ago
  I don't drink, but it is very, very inconvenient if your activities are constrained by the train timetable. Much better to have a car available and be able to travel when you want to. Of course sometimes you dont want to travel late or at weekends
0xB31B1B 7y ago
1) trains go basically everywhere frequently in Japan, it’s very much a functioning rail network, they exist and kick ass. 2) a train doesn’t need to replace 100% of personal car trips to be useful. I’m sure you’re not transporting dishwashers or taking trips after 11 pm every day. Covering 90% of use cases is sufficient, and the other 10% can be handled by either renting a car or taking an Uber. 3) we can and should make busses faster than cars during times of congestion by giving them their own lanes.

kortex 7y ago

Albany is a middlin' sized city. Taking the train to NYC is like, still a nontrivial event. Also passenger rail has to sidestep freight on this corridor. Megabus is a bit better experience overall but also kinda meh. On top of that, I personally (and know many agree) HATE the stress of keeping track of times, scheduling around infrequent departures, logistics to/from stations, etc. > Bonus: the vehicle can be resized at will, depending on the number of passengers. Yeahno. "please wait 15-30 minutes as we shuffle cars around the rail yard" is not exactly "at will"

pas 7y ago
Waiting 30 minutes while a new carriage is attached still beats sitting in a traffic jam. At least for me. I gladly pick rail over car for good lines, because it's stress free. Get to the station in time (with public transportation it's quite deterministic, subways and trams don't get into traffic jams, buses sometimes do). Cars of course win when it comes to flexibility (late night getting to a small town address).

wwweston 7y ago

I quite like trains. I hope someday the US gets back to having better rail service. Highway-autonomous vehicles would give you the benefits of rail service plus arbitrary departure times, more direct routes, on-demand route changes, and you're traveling in a vehicle that you can use for first and last mile and intra-city travel.

softwaredoug 7y ago

The problem in the US is we aren’t going to start getting European level train infrastructure anytime soon. Also it’s arguably not a worthwhile goal, we have so much space, and it’s an uphill battle to change US culture to be one where trains are going to be a good fit for our land use and urban planning.

Ericson2314 7y ago
I think surmounting those challenges is useful in itself, not just as a way to enable trains. Using self driving cars to avoid doing that would be a real shame.