The Problem with Autonomous Freight Trains
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 มิ.ย. 2024
- Hi. I'm Sam, a railfan based out of Eastern Massachusetts. I film trains from all around the world and make narrated videos explaining how the railroad works. Thanks for watching and I'll see you out on the mainline!
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ TIMESTAMPS ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
0:00 - Intro
0:32 - Disclaimer
0:47 - Background
1:21 - Parallel Systems
3:09 - The Problem(s)
6:08 - Current Status of Parallel Systems
7:37 - Autonomous Intermodal
9:24 - GLĪD
10:33 - Outro
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ MY SOCIAL MEDIAS ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
TH-cam: WorldwideRailfan
Instagram: @worldwiderailfan
Flickr: Sam Dwyer Photo
Railroad.net: Sam Dwyer
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ SONGS USED ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Background songs:
lost/url - e46
YUKAI - forgot about myself
RACS - OTHR:WRLD
Mejer - kiwi
crys - where the water lilies grow
Outro song:
lost/url - its 4 in the morning
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ RAILFANNING EQUIPMENT ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Canon EOS Rebel T6 (amzn.to/3biyObx)
Canon VIXIA HF R800 (amzn.to/3eb6kCr)
DJI Mavic Mini (amzn.to/3uW9Czr)
iPhone 11 Pro (amzn.to/3sSRHI3)
GoPro Hero Session (amzn.to/3eluwC6)
GoPro Hero Plus (amzn.to/3c9NtoC)
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
WorldwideRailfan uses a specific system for locomotive model classifications. Further details can be viewed at the following link.
docs.google.com/document/d/1j...
All WorldwideRailfan videos are kid-friendly.
©2024 WorldWideRailfan - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
![เกิดใหม่ทั้งทีก็เป็นสไลม์ไปซะแล้ว ซีซั่น 3 - ตอนที่ 58 [ซับไทย]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TgNEbYSTY0Y/mqdefault.jpg)
between this and hyperloop, i find my self wanting to scream, *_just use a fucking train_*
I mean intramotev Is using traditional standard rail cars. Like you look at the ones that they're testing and they're just plain rail cars
If I remember correctly, they can be remotely controlled on site or off-site. The main goal and idea is they are autonomous
They are pretty basic and not that exciting which is promising
Same. At least Automated InterModal has other potential applications if the autonomous idea proves (rightfully) to be a farce. Those innovative new well cars look promising.
For real feels like here in the US we just throw tech bros at our problems instead of using the solutions that actually work
@@josephknight3066 the problem in my eyes is that putting motors on each individual car is just a waste. I also dislike it as a conductor, all i can see from this is more furloughs if they move forward.
Just use a normal train, we don't need autonomous trains.
Why is this reminding me of that Jurassic Park quote, about being "so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should"?
Or weather a simpler version already exists.
Kind of have to could, to find out if it should. As in,railguys willjust say NO, without really considering.
Exactly.
Its like what I've said to many people.
Not all progression is the best progression.
Glider sounds like a roadrailer with extra steps
At least road railers works
this is literally just railroads saying: "BUT I DONT WANNA ELECTRIFY MY RAILROAD *insert image of spongebob crying*"
I love how we compared it to self-driving cars.
Back in the '90s, AI skeptics used to talk about how a fully autonomous autopilot was two to four orders of magnitude easier than a self-driving car.
Since there were no full autopilots in the '90s, It was considered impossible to ever make a self-driving car.
Well a self-driving train, is probably at least two orders of magnitude easier than a full autopilot.
And we have self-driving cars.
There's no point in comparing them to the worst example. Everyone knows Tesla is getting pretty good. Probably about the same as a teenager at this point when dealing with the worst situations. And way better than human when dealing with easy situations like highway driving.
So even if self-driving cars aren't perfect. We have them.
Something a million times easier at least, is just embarrassing that it hasn't been done.
There's nothing in the world that Californian tech bros think can't be improved with a USB port and lithium battery.
And overcomplicated electronics that have many weak points to fail.
@@digimaks dont frget these will be in yards that don't relly have skirady and I'm shore thows wood be raided for what they're worth and the parts that are taken are sold
Class 1 railroads will do anything to avoid investing in overhead electrification
Somebody just has to make a startup that "puts AI in overhead lines", and they will be flooded with billions in investment.
@@_yonas Also the overhead catenary railroad is ....""GREEN!"" hint hint hint!
Well, they could get the Government to be in charge of track infrastructure. It would reduce costs. Then just claim it's a matter of national security.
On the whole, I find long distance overhead electrification dubious from an environmental standpoint.
@@tomdegisi The trains would be faster and more efficient, and don't forget Regen braking that would go back into the grid to be reused elsewhere. Also less smog when they go through a city.
The Glide system is just an updated RoadRailer, which was an updated TrailVan, or whatever the New York Central called it.
It, and the other designs, are all trailer / intermodal cargo container focused. Not everything moves in those. And mixing a bunch of roving bricks in with that other freight traffic is a recipe for disaster.
The shortlines / branchlines others suggest as ideal locations for these really aren't ideal. They have less well maintained track, more grade crossings - some only guarded by a crossbuck, and their customers are least likely to be shipping or receiving containerized freight.
For your last point about branch lines being less likely to receive containerized freight, I would imagine that glide and parallel systems are aimed at taking over the highway semi-truck market share more than bulk material market that rail currently dominates. If these take off, I can see more warehousing moving back to spur lines and driving up traffic enough to justify higher levels of maintenance and grade crossing improvements. Definitely still very ambitious, but from a technical and regulatory perspective, autonomous electric trains seem way more achievable and beneficial than autonomous electric cars and trucks.
I think intramotev is The most likely to be successful for branch lines because they can just take like a box car any standard regular rail car
And if I remember correctly it can go either autonomously remote control on or off site.
My biggest issue with the first and third one is that you can't use these as part of a normal train because they don't have any way to couple to standard cars. That means you have to put the container on the automated trucks, and then when you want to put it on the mainline you have to remove it and place it into a normal well car. You're adding an extra step.
You also have to recharge these things, which means when the battery goes low you either have a container stuck on a car while it's charging that can't be moved by a normal locomotive or you have to add another extra step and take the container off of the dead trucks and place it onto another railcar.
Plus the extra overload on power grid. Also need charging stations built literally all over the line where they are expected to be used. Also battery mass disposal, when they start to die out! Plus the maintenance cost per EACH.
Jeez, people quit reinventing bicycle and concentrate on making new, electric, high speed railroad like many other countries in teh world have.
the whole efficiency of trains is that its 1 engine and 20-50 cars, or multiple engines and even more cars. giving each car their own engines completely destroys the idea. And trains are so smart that they have designated tracks to drive on, and you can hang a wire over those and you can have electric trains running directly off of the grid instead of using batteries. I dont understand why theres so little electrification when it has been a thing for over 100 years.
But muh freedom dinosaur juice /s
Snow is detrimental to overheadlines and to a lesser extent rain. A high capacity dessert port would be a good place for rail electrification.
@@joeljong931 what, any main line is a great place for electrification, it doesn't have to be a desert?!
Catenary can handle rain without issue and snow isn't a problem either as long as they are used, biggest issue would be ice, but that's still a non issue for the most part except for the northern most areas.
The majority of the US is within a climate that is not a threat to catenary and therefore it makes no sense not to electrify and update the rail network, for cleaner and more efficient transit.
Autonomous and driverless trains are the future. Just not like how Parallel systems is trying to push.
There's already such things as an autonomous train and rail car it was called Crazy 8 . Honestly the concept of automatic trains is immediately a death sentence of some kind.
Indeed, CSXT 8888 was "autonomous" for a while in 2001! CSX was fortunate that nobody was hurt then, although other such autonomous trains may not be so fortunate...
The 8888 didn’t have autonomous technology on board to stop it remotely
There was a whole movie about 777, based off of the real story of 8888, that shows exactly why this is a bad idea.
@@ninyaninjabrifsanovichthes45 Comparing a normal train that’s out of control to an autonomous train is like comparing apples to oranges, look at how successful Australia has been for just the past 6 Years with autonomous freight trains
@@ninyaninjabrifsanovichthes45, I've heard of this movie! It is called _Unstoppable,_ and (though I haven't watched it) it does demonstrate the value of drivers, whether on a Triple-7 or a Crazy-8.
Thanks for the comment!
Automatic freight trains gonna make Cajon Pass even more mind-blowing
There's gonna be like 10 massive derailments in the first year.
@@ninyaninjabrifsanovichthes45 don't you mean 120 small ones
I find it very funny and sad that the one that is the less flashy tends to be more realistic and grounded in reality but lesser known. Like I wouldn't know about AIM without this video!
Like intramotev?
I do see a use for these type of cars for use in Container ports or yards as movements. Especially for current ports that dont have space on the waterfront. You can efficiently take containers off ships and move them to inland yards. If you look ports like Long Beach, Baltimore, Seattle its their biggest issue is not having storage for containers along with the class 1s not moving containers inland fast enough.
I think Auto switchers are something we should look into. You could have the class 1s drop cars at the yard, and have the last mile done by a guy sitting in the office. Wouldn't need large switchers with crews to drop one car here, a few there, and so on. Hopefully it could take trucks going from amazon type warehouses off the roads from the west coast to the last mile easily. Multiple applications from grain terminals, oil/gas, warehouse, manufacturing could have easier logistics.
GRIFT. Some emergency happens. Good luck sending a technician that could be very time consuming.
Train drivers often don't have the parts, training, or permission to fix a train if anything serious goes wrong.
So... Exactly the same as today then?
As a final mile this sounds very valuable.
An diesel engine can long haul between intermodal stations and upon arriving in station, part or all of the cargo cars can disassemble on their own reassembling for another diesel if being forwarded thru another long haul or taking themselves to the truck distribution area, replacing shunters and shunting staff.
And micro intermodal sounds very easy if it can be added to existing rail lines especially on sidings.
Thank you for speaking out about this stupid idea. Great video!
As usual, I found this an informative video! Now, I know a lot more about these odd, autonomous vehicles, as well as the disadvantages of them.
Thanks for the video!
Trains haven't changed for nearly 200 years because they haven't needed to. Why do people keep trying to fix what isn't broken?
My dad is an engineer. A lot of them never get the idea to leave well enough alone.
man just electrify the railroads i stg
With those traffic cones stopping autonomous cars shows how these cars can fail thanks to pranksters who'd place something on the rail line just to disable them.
Those things weould be abnoxiouos to any kind of emergency situation on the track!
@@digimaksyou can already block a train by placing large things on the tracks so I don't think it would be a new problem.
@@nativeafroeurasian Yeah, but the difference is that the train operator can recognize the problem, and get out and remove it.
Glid looks like a complex road railer system. limited by 80,000lb load limit.
This would be pretty valuable in ports, as most of them curently use a train to get the cargo from port to truck pickup.
I have a feeling that in order to keep the train safe, they need to also attach a manned car somewhere in the train, I think the best would be the end of the train, with visibility from above or sides.
Great, we just reinvented *caboose*.
What would this person control?
The battery and autonomous parts of the parallel systems are not great, but the micro terminals are a good idea. Making the "last mile" shorter would be a boon.
Yet every time a railroad tries to open a terminal, the NIMBY crowd scream bloody murder.
@@robertcooper6853 Can't we just Ignore them?
Do it the old fashioned way, have a terminal/freight unloading in every town and then just work closely with local truck companies to arrange last mile.
I think these things would be useful at major cargo terminals for moving containers between areas.
Thing is, we already have them for that purpose.
Would like to mention that Australia (mainly the western side) has self driving locomotives
And that actually works. Plus it also make sense cince they are used on iron ore trains in the middle of nowhere. While being monitored.
AFAIK they're not even technically self driving, they're "ghost ridden" without a crew.
AIM has no idea about railway engineering. If they make well cars with one shared axle between units, then the axle load will be around twice of what track is rated for.
Current double stack units (3 and 5 body units) already share a truck between bodies. The single axle shown in the drawing looks like an artifact of the drawing process rather than a final design proposal.
There may be some aspects of Parallel Systems that could be reapplied into useful concepts. Strip out most of the chaff, and you get a smart bogy that can serve a variety of uses.
Linking a train engine to a single smart bogy might be an extremely cheap way to upgrade an engine's sensor/electronics capacity without actually redesigning the engine itself.
High price passenger trains might benifit from health monitoring in the bogy itself, which could cut down on maintinance downtime and breakdowns.
Similarly, putting the majority of parts in a standardised bogy might make the design, construction, and servicing of MCUs easier.
A single very light Parallel Systems bogy riding a mile or two ahead of a manned train could give the human driver all the time they need to actually stop the train.
This is awesome. Until they get fully approved, they just need a small pilot car in the front of the autonomous train so that an engineer can engage the brakes if something goes wrong. Autonomous cars\trucks did the same thing for a few years when testing, they had a driver who didn't drive. This would be great for last-mile deliveries. It's even better than autonomous trucks since you don't need to share the roadway with anyone but your own company, so it's a closed system, unlike the highways. Cameras, Radar, and LIDAR can be used to sense what is ahead of the train. The biggest pushback will be from the unions who don't want to loose their jobs.
The problem with these is that they purport to deal in making last mile problems more efficient, but don't really address any last mile problems through the technology they advocate.
Its as if they said, "trains have certain drawbacks that trucks don't". But instead of trying to mitigate those drawbacks they jumped straight to: "how can we make trains more truck-like?"
I can see self-propelled cars that shunt themselves on either end of the trip be a thing. Though, if you make the journey long enough, manual labor might just be worth it.
It will always be trains in one form or another, but autonomous vehicles at the individual cargo container level is not the solution.
Intramotev is probably the most promising. It automates traditional railroad cars meaning any standard rail car can go Autonomous
Due to the fact it can be connected to a large train just like any other rail car. It can do the majority of the transportation by traditional mile, long crate trains and then the last mile or almost last Mile underneath its own power and its own autonomous system
It also, I think plans to have it be also available to be controlled by someone else at a dispatch center
All together. That means they can do short lines self assemble themselves into trains and be ready for pickup by longer trains going over medium to long distances
And they work by converting standard rail cars with standard couplers
And they can use standard vacuum braking connector to tell the wheel set to go into regen braking mode which means the rail car arrives at the spur/yard charged ready to dispatch without having to attach it to a charger
These are not going to replace mainline rail, they are intended to replace semis.
That's not what the idiots proposing them are marketing them for.
I actually wouldn't be surprised if automated freight trains take 50-100 years. Most modern automated trains are able to be automated because of signalling, not just the trains themselves. This is why most automated trains are new metro lines. It's easier to automate an isolated system. It's much harder to do on systems that use multiple types of signalling and trains hence for frieght, making it automated is really hard as it has to operate on multiple railroads using multiple signalling systems. Trains also last 30-50 years, they advance but as passengers if we are using certain routes the trains are only usually upgraded every 30-50 years.
I see these as more of a switching vehicle for big intermodal yards
I think these startup guys outta go out to India and check out their DFC's. Grade separated electrified double stack intermodal trains with very close container spacing is about as efficient as your gonna get. Efficiency is important regardless of how the energy was produced.
India is still a shit country tho
One possible idea, along the lines of AIM, would be adding some kind of cover above the double stacked intermodal containers to reduce drag.
The Problem with Autonomous Freight Trains is that the entire fucking point of freight cars is that they aren't autonomous
Driverless cars are on open roads, at least the trains are on tracks, I only see this happening with branchlines and shortlines
This idea works better inside a city than long distance trips.
Parallel Systems should focus on Europe. Shorter distances and frequent shunting
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Trains aren’t broke. Don’t fix them.
They could definitely be improved in tha US but tech bros are coming up with the dumbest ways to
Instead we should just do what japan and Europe does since they have made good working rail networks. But i guess thats not as flashy to governments and investors as generic tech startup 372883 making stupid pod trains
@@tux_the_astronaut the US has the best freight train network.
Horse and cart weren't broken. Don't try to fix them by inventing automobiles.
@@DerekWhite-yx2ce
That's not mutually exclusive with there being room for improvement. The US's rail network moves the most freight out of any rail network in the world, with the best overall efficiency, but it manages to do so on poorly laid and maintained track, with dispatching and control systems prone to errors, business practices that practically resemble feudalism, and technologically backwards equipment that would never pass standards in any other developed country in the world, all of which result in low travel speeds, efficiency losses, delays and accidents. Imagine our already incredibly capable rail network _without_ those problems, with better trackage and equipment to allow for higher speeds between yards, depots, etc., dispatching and control systems with improved reliability to prevent accidents, and better treatment of crews and staff so that people are given a reason to care about their jobs. That idealized US freight rail network would be to the US's current network as the US's current freight rail network is to the rest of the world.
@@HenryLoenwind
Bad analogy. Horse and cart required the upkeep of a live animal, produced enormous amounts of manure which lead to unhealthy conditions in cities, and had a low travel speed. Cars, with all the issues they themselves have, were a vast improvement over the horse and cart. So, no, the Horse and Cart definitely WERE broken.
Whereas these shitty "pod trains" that keep getting proposed result in significantly lower freight throughput and limited range with the only slight advantage being that a single container gets to where it's going slightly faster but only within the pod train's range and at a massive capacity and efficiency loss.
Odd that the startups want to chop the train up... Efficiencies of scale, formidable length of trains, it's like the first principle that makes long distance rail transport competitive. Shunting in a port or yard could be an application for these battery carts, I'll give them that.
Tech companies want everything to use technology in the future (Ex: self-driving cars. Also, Tell me if this is false.) Sometimes technology can be game-changing. Other times, it can have so many problems that it is inferior to other older ways to tackle the project (Example of that is self-driving cars.) Sometimes, older technologies can solve our problems because they are already proven while newer technologies are not.
Just my two cents, I don't think the title is the most accurate. The issue isn't autonomous train systems, it's those stupid "pod train" things that techbro grifters keep proposing. I'd have to double check but I believe in Australia they actually let conventional trains "ghost ride" without crew across long distances and it works great even without any on-board controls.
Another thing not mention is that autonomous transit systems have significantly more people per car and per mile then corgo teains already have due to how relatively small the systems are, with the largest system being a whole 45 miles with a total of 3 branches, though this may expand to 60 miles across 5 branches depending on use level.
The problem with autonomous trains is that, unless you're running at very high frequency with tight capacity limitations (EG a subway), there is very little in economic savings from removing the one driver and possibly second engineer.
5:57 Parallel Systems pod train downsides... 7:37 Autonomous intermodal 9:29 GLĪD road-to-rail gliders for intermodal terminals?
There are still innovations. As a more relevant concept in this particular area, let me point to Innofreight Solutions GmbH in Austria, whose idea could be sloppily summarized as "containerize everything" - for every kind of freight, use the same wheelbase and platform, and mount different superstructures on top of that. They're not exactly a startup; they currently seem to have over 2000 of their railcars in use all over Europe.
Honestly a better idea is making/modifying train cars with motors being powered by rhe locomotive/s to assist the entire train. But first we should actually try and electrify properly.
I'm glad to see you share the same opinion as Alan Fisher, great informative video
Australia already uses them
Because it’s Australia and they unlike the rest of the world’s railways can do whatever they want and make it work. See Southern Plains Railfan to see what I mean
It;s in inhospitable land, so it was kinda required.
The first one could've been a game changer if it didn't aim so high. Automatic rail cars with more environmentally friendly battery technology but less range are a great idea for shunting. Yards are a closed area so the safety is much better and the signalling upgrade costs aren't as bad compared to the entire network. It also makes the entire freight train into an EMU!
Imagine Parallel Systems taking over. An average train consists of 100 double-stacked Intermodal cars. These bogies are too high to double stack, so you'd need 200 of the motorized flatcars. That's just for one train. Take a line like the Southern Transcon that sees 80 trains a day. To match the traffic on the line you would need 16,000 of these flatcars. Not to mention that so far they only seem to work with Intermodal containers. What about heavier and larger loads like grain, coal, and autoracks? What about heavy-duty flatcars? Also, each and every one of these cars would need to be regularly charged, inspected, and maintained. I can't imagine the cost of this being less than what it takes to just buy some diesel fuel and run a few locomotives.
About the cargo DMU, I have little faith in it as well. Germany tried EMUs in freight service with its CargoSprinter and results proved unsatisfactory. With this, nothing can be switched out and exchanged without the use of a crane. To my knowledge, the only time a multiple unit has proven useful in cargo service is Japan's M250, but that is because everything it transports goes from Tokyo to Osaka with nothing needing to be exchanged in the middle. The US is a lot more open and has a lot wider coverage of its lines with the position of its cities. Multiple units cannot be extended or shortened in peak or dull times, and thus the only way I could see this working is on a direct service between two cities, however at this length I cannot see how this is any more efficient than just running a locomotive-hauled train if it's this long. Another concern is if one of its bogies has a hotbox, then the whole train would be affected instead of just setting out the car with the hot axle. Not to mention that Intermodal well cars are already permanently coupled in sets of 3 and 5 and I think that's enough.
And the Glid, yeah, that one is just a bad idea as a whole. I don't need to say anything about this.
There's aspects of these "innovations" that will happen, I think.
Digital automatic couplings are coming. Europe wants its entire cargo fleet converted to them - I can't imagine how long that'll take, but they are working at it, with various trains testing current standards so they can identify areas of needed improvement for eventual adaption to all European cargo rail cars.
Self-driving is coming too, I suspect. Again, we already see serious intermediate experiments in use and unlike cars with infinite conflict points trains are in the end fairly predictable. Right now for example SBB and Alstom are doing experiments with remote control, with the goal of automating not necessarily main line traffic, but for example the assembly of trains for the day and such. I would be surprised if this didn't happened sooner or later; first with tight human oversight, then more and more automated.
What's stupid about these projects is the battery-electric bit, that just makes no sense (maybe if you just drag them along and then use the battery for last mile distribution? But all that effort for that? Eh...), and of course the entire "pod" concept. It's like combining the worst of road traffic with the worst of rail traffic, congratulations, maybe make them as slow as ships and as expensive as airplanes, too ... ?
When solid-state batteries become common, I could see someone converting current diesel-electric locomotives' electric batteries, and replacing the diesel engine with an overhead electric system that not only powers the train on electrified tracks, but also charges the batteries so the train can run on non-electrified tracks, particularly on long-haul runs.
@@PockyFiend Sure, let me know when a battery (Lithium Ion at 300 Wh/kg) catches up to Diesel (12500 Wh/kg).
To be honest, I'm less concerned about electrifying rail (partially because we already have a solution: overhead lines) and I'm more concerned about shifting more transportation from road to rail. Maybe if rail companies had reinvested any of their profits for the past 50 years we wouldn't have these problems.
That's why I said "when solid-state batteries become more common,".
@@PockyFiend Yippee, 400Wh/kg. A 20% increase doesn't mean anything when you're off by two orders of magnitude. Why reinvent the wheel? Use a wire.
All for increasing the efficiency of the transportation mode which is already the most efficient? The issue here is not technological
PSR is what is causing interest. Because Labor hurts profits.
Missing from the conversation is freight customer input. Will customers buy the service this equipment provides? How will the competition to rail carriers using this technology respond to protect their market? Railroad might be spending thousands to innovate, the truck competitor cuts rate a hundred dollars to keep the business, and railroad is left with rusting equipment and a hefty capital expense earning no money. Has happened many times before, often when non transportation people develop great stuff with little understanding of customer, market and competitor dynamics.
I’ve seen this mentioned in many cases, but beyond a yard a locomotive is more efficient over a distance.
Unman trains and automatic trains are a stupid idea
Not as stupid as driverless trucks or cars.
Why? Automatic already work. In europe we already try automatic trains on normal tracks.
@@guesepecz9191 this is America where people DO NOT RESPECT RAILROAD AND THEIR PROPERTY!
@@lowellvillerailfanproductions anyone who doesn’t respect the Railroad is not a real American
@@IronHorsefan1869 yeah I've seen people cheat death with trains and not respect their property and it makes me mad
I work on the railroad as a conductor- I'm not saying the railroad would ever replace current technology with something better- but the problem i'm seeing here is that, they're essentially reinventing the wheel and adding new problems to said design.
These designs are all pointless with an overhead line and an enginner to monitor and service the engine as needed. Autonomous processes are not inherently bad, but when it comes to things very large and need to be precise to adaptive changing conditions- it's a little risky. Not all track is the same and rail sometimes breaks and bends. People commit suicide and the engineer or conductor needs to call first responders and get help right away. Accidents happen and in the event hazmat material spills- someone needs to notify what was spilt and know the proper evacuation of a town or city when said accident happens.
I know that as a conductor I'll probably be one of the first people to be eliminated from road assignments- but not everything can be completely automatic. Cars need switched out and spotted and repaired. It'll be ungodly expensive to repair every single track and update every single switch stand in the US rail network. it's just cheaper to have manual labor and tried and true practicalness of the equipment we have now, doing all of this is simply stupid.
I'd support battery locomotives with the possibility of being RCL'd for yard assignments, but anything beyond that is a little too far to be realistic. No one from corporate is willing to take a hit from their annual salaries to satisfy an emissions quota.
if glide was instead just a regular truck with train wheels it could work for some local areas to reduce truck traffic on roads
I only see this as a good way for local or branch line freight using this kind of system. now if they added the ability to MU the units with regular rail freight then this gets interesting cause then this technology can be used to 100% always have one Engineer on route that means all railroads would jump to get the system integrated into their system. UP is being honest the other Railroads are just trying to placate to the general public.
I suggest using Thermal and renewable power stations for railroad electrification!..
I would think the biggest issue with rail still remains regardless of the autonomous system that is used, and that's the stranglehold that these companies have over "their tracks", so only said rail companies would really benefit from them
The real revolution for the rail industry would be developing a way to make it cheaper to build and maintain tracks and vehicles. Efficiency is the last problem that needs to be solved..
It's scary for a future railroader like me to see somthing that might take my future job
Dont worry diesel electric locomotives are here to stay these stupid autonomous trains are a government dream but the government always wants things that are not possible
Why do I see you everywhere?
@@FlightAndTrack idk lol
And thats yet another issue with this concept; this will completely eradicate an entire field of work, millions of jobs just vanish into thin air.
@@ninyaninjabrifsanovichthes45
More like 150,000 or so is all. The rail industry has been gutted in the last 50 years. I’m from a multi-generational railroad family and so glad my dad told me not to follow in his footsteps.
Isn’t the best shipping type ship?
The problem i have with most of these ideas is that they want the automatous trains is that they want them to be battery operated. It would make more sence to electrify the rails and have batteries on them for safty purposes. If anything they need to turn to the model railroading sectors to acutely get an idea what they need to do.
The best example of unmanned trains is in the Australian Pilbara.
0:46 blud knows his enemy , so far the vid's still up
The PS system doesnt seem inherently bad , ofc it is somewhat more efficient to just do regular trains intercity , but for short shunts from a terminal that has one of these autosorters drive over a track of one of these to send them to a small to medium system of heavy duty stores like an ikea , could be working as at that point locomotives can become more complicated and expensive per ton
On AIM they did the joke of trains can only be 75 cars long and then making 1 car be 10 segments , not anything against them but it doesnt seem fully flexible to fluctuations at a cost effective rate like the current ones , aswell as jacobs bogies likely leading to lower maintenance costs as it does put more stress on one set of wheels but it would also (under maybe not the most cutthroat operations) to more maintenance facilities kept open and stocked to deal with the replacement rate
On glīd (gl ï d) tho , just do what railroads did like 90 damn fucking years , just use a long flatcar and a ramp
They are the future for larger scale autonomous projects maybe even for outer space hmm
Why autonomous freight train don't use couplers?
This is safer than having these vehicles sharing the auto infastrucure, it can work
I feel like these pod trains would be best fit in the middle of every interstate lowering the amount of trucks on the road causing traffic
But then why not just have an electrified line carrying small cuts of conventional well cars in the middle of the interstate instead? It's going to have to go to a transfer depot anyway.
This basically just shows that railroad Ceo and boards are pretty stupid to think that this would ever be a good idea.
And the Genesee and Wyoming of automatically it's trying to get safety regulations Waved. and and do we even need to say what will happen if they get the go ahead.
They probably don't think it will work, but some positive things might come out of it that will be beneficial.
Ok good point but why are the drums going WILD out there?
I can’t believe that parallel systems actually made prototypes, I thought it would never get that far.
Same here. And not just one, but TWO! The idea is still shit, but I gotta give them credit for making it this far.
They have a SpaceX background, so it doesn't surprise me. SpaceX has a company culture that is all about building as many prototypes as possible to test the viability of their ideas.
Self driving is a dumb idea regardless of application. How will these pods handle emergencies in the more remote parts of the system? Will it sit there waiting for help to arrive from a couple hundred miles away? Tech bro types always offer expensive and complicated solutions to non-problems.
To be fair, rail is the best place for autonomous systems since there's far fewer variables to take into account. But why not just automate a conventional electric locomotive?
Wait till those things reach a sharp curve, and them shipping containers gon fall off😂😂😂🤣
ATP's designs are far too ambitious. 9,000 HP with 12 AC TMs powered by dual engines that meet EPA and CARB standards?
if that were possible, dontcha think every class 1 in the country would already be doing it? We get pretty close with 2 locomotives, but the tractive effort is way greater because of 1 key factor: the weight!!!
Where is Hobo Shoestring?
Autonomus trains everywhere should be the obvious next innovation, railroad technology entering its third century of existence. Plus advanced hazard detection that outperforms a human. Not sure even how often the driver in the cab is able to notice an obstruction timely enough to do anything about it; isn't the track record pretty damning in that regard already?
The comparison to self-driving cars is pretty irrelevant, fixed tracks and signalling systems are a given on railroads. The safety rules requiring a person in the cab must change to rather enforce positive train control by the track and signalling systems, at all times.
Nearly perfected? There is still alot of room for incremental improvement in traditional rail. E.g. advanced train control systems with moving block technology, enhancing traditional railcars with sensors etc...)
Railway bandits will be in favor of this system. It will be far simpler to steal products from the train. It will work especially well in California where the tracks are already covered in empty cardboard boxes.
Interesting link, Parallel systems - SpaceX - Elon Musk - Hyperloop. Anyone see the problem?
They already have driverless autonomous freight trains that can be remotely controlled and monitored by a human in a control centre.
A minor track obstruction miles from anywhere causes instant failure of the whole system as there is nobody to remove it.
Isn't it more efficient to move a 100 car consist with two or three locomotives rather than 100 autonomous freight cars each with two sets of powered trucks that require more overall maintenance and frequent recharging stops? Wouldn't take less time to refuel three locomotives as opposed to recharging a dozen or so autonomous cars at random spots of a consistent? What happens in extremely cold weather?
Mostly, why spend so much money overhauling the railroad system for a technology that only addresses containers? Certainly, no one would want the chance of a lithium ion battery fire anywhere near a tanker car or a coal harper. Even with only containers, any derailments could prove to be catastrophic.
FORE RIVER SPOTTED
7:51 WTF HELL NO
Fr
That is the most horrendous train ive ever heard of
It's funny. Railroads are trying to phase out road railers and here these little tech companies are trying to bring them back.
This is all about cutting cost maintaining the bottom line by all means necessary.
Am I the only one that thinks these automated bogies will make people think they're a ghost train?
Literally just trying to take railroaders jobs away that's all it is
AIM will be used at container ports.
Probably thought up by people who had no experience with railroads or a very basic and base level understanding if I had to guess.
Like electric trucks, battery powered railcars will need enormous infrastructure for charging. That's the main problem. There's more.
Some airports have unmanned passenger cars running on a third rail and on a single continuous loop, but how could that concept work with freight over thousands of miles.
The only way I would trust such a system is if there were zero grade crossings in the entire line.