3 ms·

One issue with automated trains is when something inevitably goes wrong, if it happens in a heavy trafficked system like in NYC you might have dozens to hundred

One issue with automated trains is when something inevitably goes wrong, if it happens in a heavy trafficked system like in NYC you might have dozens to hundreds of people dead compared to a couple of people with a driver-less car incident, which will make it much bigger news, which will mean a much bigger backlash. And safety experts will go on the news and explain how the train incident was one issue among billions of safely-moved people and it was really a human error that was the root cause and the automated trains are much, much safer than human drivers by the statistics and they'll be completely right, but people won't care because omg robots.

ChuckMcM 14y ago
I don't doubt there will be some of that. One can hope their will be fewer issues than on human operated trains, and the issues will not result in the loss of life or even the same scale of injury. People ride in elevators after all. But more importantly is that if it is 'safe enough' such that a critical mass of people use it, then the anti-tech antibodies won't matter. Some people refuse to fly, others to drink tap water, but the system is 'safe enough' that its self sustaining and can tolerate lack of participation by these folks.
Anechoic 14y ago
One issue with automated trains is when something inevitably goes wrong, if it happens in a heavy trafficked system like in NYC you might have dozens to hundreds of people dead Can you give an example of a subway accident (in NYC or another US system) that lead to that many dead? A head-on collision on the WMATA system resulted in only 9 dead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2009_Washington_Metro_train_collision http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2009_Washington_Metro_trai... From this list of NYC subway accidents, the worst involved an accident in 1991 that killed 5 passengers: http://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/Subway_FAQ:_Accidents http://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/Subway_FAQ:_Accidents
- georgemcbay 14y ago
  Nope I can't. The numbers I randomly made up are certainly on the high side, but they were made on the assumption that along with automation there would be other changes like increasing the average travelling speed of the trains by a significant amount and having increased loads due to better scheduling algorithms.

ChuckMcM 14y ago

I don't doubt there will be some of that. One can hope their will be fewer issues than on human operated trains, and the issues will not result in the loss of life or even the same scale of injury. People ride in elevators after all. But more importantly is that if it is 'safe enough' such that a critical mass of people use it, then the anti-tech antibodies won't matter. Some people refuse to fly, others to drink tap water, but the system is 'safe enough' that its self sustaining and can tolerate lack of participation by these folks.

Anechoic 14y ago

One issue with automated trains is when something inevitably goes wrong, if it happens in a heavy trafficked system like in NYC you might have dozens to hundreds of people dead Can you give an example of a subway accident (in NYC or another US system) that lead to that many dead? A head-on collision on the WMATA system resulted in only 9 dead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2009_Washington_Metro_train_collision http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2009_Washington_Metro_trai... From this list of NYC subway accidents, the worst involved an accident in 1991 that killed 5 passengers: http://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/Subway_FAQ:_Accidents http://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/Subway_FAQ:_Accidents

georgemcbay 14y ago
Nope I can't. The numbers I randomly made up are certainly on the high side, but they were made on the assumption that along with automation there would be other changes like increasing the average travelling speed of the trains by a significant amount and having increased loads due to better scheduling algorithms.