Could railways become high speed roads for automated vehicles?

[Ashfordian6]

Moderator note: split from

Train drivers role disappearing?

The role of train driver may become redundant in the future as GoA5 or GoA6 etc technology whichever may come in will eventually automate all trains, we're already starting this process with DLR, Elizabeth Line and some tube lines are already driverless with the driver opening and closing...

www.railforums.co.uk

I think everyone is missing one thing here.

I think rail outside of The Underground will cease to exist when road traffic automation has been adopted as the rails can be removed and become thoroughfares for high speed automated road vehicles. They are perfect for this type of evolution.

 

[The Planner]

However, I think every one is missing one thing here. I think rail outside of The Underground will cease to exist when road traffic automation has been adopted as the rails can be removed and become thoroughfares for high speed automated road vehicles. They are perfect for this type of evolution.

I suspect most on this forum will be 6 foot under when that happens.

 

[yorkie]

However, I think every one is missing one thing here

I don't think it's "missing"; more a case of seeing the bigger picture and having some understanding of the challenges...

. I think rail outside of The Underground will cease to exist when road traffic automation has been adopted as the rails can be removed and become thoroughfares for high speed automated road vehicles. They are perfect for this type of evolution.

Are railway alignments consistently wide enough for high speed roads? On busy corridors, can cars match the capacity of trains at frequent headways? What happens to the traffic when it reaches the end of the high speed road; would it not cause congestion? How would you cater for the increase in car parking required?

 

[Horizon22]

Pretty sure a train would still have more capacity than road vehicles.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I think rail outside of The Underground will cease to exist when road traffic automation has been adopted as the rails can be removed and become thoroughfares for high speed automated road vehicles. They are perfect for this type of evolution.

No, for several reasons.
1). Even with coach type vehicles, the surface would be impacted and need resurfacing periodically (frequent heavier vehicles lead to swifter road surface deterioration), plus you'd still need frequent tyre replacement and have particulate pollution from tyre particles, unless you retained the rails!
2) A vehicle on rails is one of the most efficient forms of transport, due to the reduction of friction at the interaction with the surface.
Per passenger, the road vehicle will need more energy to power it at the same speed.
3) Tarmac surfacing cannot handle the same range of temperatures as rails can.
E.g. during wet weather, the railway itself can typically perform as normal (issues often result from items external to the railway falling onto the railway during a storm).
As for road traffic, speeds have to be reduced, accidents are more likely to happen etc.

 

[deltic]

Yes railways could be converted into high speed corridors for autonomous cars but the key point as @yorkie flags up is what happens when those vehicles come off those corridors often into congested town centres. National Highways is already looking into a similar issue. The presumption is that autonomous vehicles will first start operating on the strategic road network. This could increase the carrying capacity of that network negating the need for costly new roads. However, autonomous vehicles are more likely to struggle in urban areas due to the interaction with pedestrians and cyclists. (If all cars are autonomous I would just walk out into the road when I want to cross knowing that the car will be forced to stop. You can forget about pedestrian crossings, in busy pedestrian areas vehicles just wont be able to move). Hence National Highways concern is how to manage their network if traffic starts to back up from the local road network and where is this most likely to become an issue.

 

[Bald Rick]

Moderator note: split from

Train drivers role disappearing?

The role of train driver may become redundant in the future as GoA5 or GoA6 etc technology whichever may come in will eventually automate all trains, we're already starting this process with DLR, Elizabeth Line and some tube lines are already driverless with the driver opening and closing...

www.railforums.co.uk

I think everyone is missing one thing here.

I think rail outside of The Underground will cease to exist when road traffic automation has been adopted as the rails can be removed and become thoroughfares for high speed automated road vehicles. They are perfect for this type of evolution.

Very unlikely.

The awkward truth is that the relatively few places where railways are sufficiently lightly used that conversion to a highway might make sense are precisely the places where the existing highway network has plenty of capacity, and vice versa.

 

[PTR 444]

I could potentially see it happening for lightly used regional branch lines such as Plymouth - Gunnislake and the Conway Valley Line, but definitely not on any busy commuter or intercity routes.

 

[AM9]

I could potentially see it happening for lightly used regional branch lines such as Plymouth - Gunnislake and the Conway Valley Line, but definitely not on any busy commuter or intercity routes.

Why would a tiny place like Gunnislake need more than the existing network of country roads?

 

[deltic]

This academic paper https://link.springer.com/chapter/1...acity,possible with purely autonomous traffic. comes to the conclusion that

Compared to today’s observed capacity values of a lane of 2200 veh./h, an increase of traffic volume to about 3900 veh./h would thus be possible with purely autonomous traffic.

Assuming these are all cars gives a throughput of around 4-5,000 people an hour per carriageway. There are few rail routes that achieve a higher throughput per line if London Underground is excluded.

 

[JonathanH]

Why would a tiny place like Gunnislake need more than the existing network of country roads?

It has a railway precisely because those roads are inadequate as regards getting to Plymouth.

While I am not advocating such a solution, an autonomous roadway from Plymouth and across Calstock viaduct could provide quicker access to Plymouth than the existing road network, including from Tavistock.

 

[Egg Centric]

It has a railway precisely because those roads are inadequate as regards getting to Plymouth.

While I am not advocating such a solution, an autonomous roadway from Plymouth and across Calstock viaduct could provide quicker access to Plymouth than the existing road network, including from Tavistock.

Don't forget that in the future autonomous cars would be able to travel far quicker than current human driven cars due to what will eventually be their instantaneous reactions and ability to see round bends / coordinate with each other due to *waves hands* some kind of networking. It's not therefore clear that roads will have to be upgraded.

 

[Magdalia]

Cambridge has some relevant experience here.

• Cambridge already has the guided busway, which is used much less than forecast, and with what ought to be its busiest section closed for safety reasons
• Cambridge had the Autonomous Metro proposal which got no further than Mayor Palmer's imagination and a lot of fees for consultants
• Cambridge has a proposal for an unguided busway on the south eastern side, partly on the trackbed of the Haverhill line, currently paused because of funding issues.

Turning railways into roads for autonomous vehicles would entail huge conversion costs, and there would be major safety issues unless they continued to be fenced with no access for non-vehicle traffic.

And how would it work for freight, especially container traffic to/from Felixstowe and Southampton?

 

[JonathanH]

Don't forget that in the future autonomous cars would be able to travel far quicker than current human driven cars due to what will eventually be their instantaneous reactions and ability to see round bends / coordinate with each other due to *waves hands* some kind of networking. It's not therefore clear that roads will have to be upgraded.

Does that apply to the railway as well? Presumably a very light rail vehicle with track brakes and the same sort of autonomy could equally run quicker between Plymouth and Gunnislake.

 

[Egg Centric]

Does that apply to the railway as well? Presumably a very light rail vehicle with track brakes and the same sort of autonomy could equally run quicker between Plymouth and Gunnislake.

I guess in principle it could, but the railway would be pretty pointless as a transport solution in areas like that by then. Could be useful on the tube though.

 

[LAX54]

I suspect most on this forum will be 6 foot under when that happens.

and their children !

 

[WAO]

Vehicles can travel at speed closely most safely within narrow dynamic envelopes when they are coupled together and equipped with continuous brakes. Such networks of vehicles (perhaps we might call then "trains"?) could also be very closely spaced at high speeds using IT based control (ERTMS/moving block?). A vast saving in energy use and necessary traction power could also be made by substituting for the pneumatic tyre/tarmacadam interface, the steel wheel/steel rail interface that has perhaps 10% of the rolling resistance.

A GCSE pass in Physics would help IT journalists in their preparation of copy.

WAO

 

[Egg Centric]

Vehicles can travel at speed closely most safely within narrow dynamic envelopes when they are coupled together and equipped with continuous brakes. Such networks of vehicles (perhaps we might call then "trains"?) could also be very closely spaced at high speeds using IT based control (ERTMS/moving block?). A vast saving in energy use and necessary traction power could also be made by substituting for the pneumatic tyre/tarmacadam interface, the steel wheel/steel rail interface that has perhaps 10% of the rolling resistance.

A GCSE pass in Physics would help IT journalists in their preparation of copy.

WAO

Very droll but it ignores people setting off from/arriving at different destinations plus cool tricks like taking crossroads at full speed and so on that you could do if all the cars were talking to each other.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Very droll but it ignores people setting off from/arriving at different destinations plus cool tricks like taking crossroads at full speed and so on that you could do if all the cars were talking to each other.

Most people have these revolutionary things called "feet" to convey them to the places where the train periodically halts with facilities for ticket purchase and other amenities,if you've heard of them.

 

[Egg Centric]

Most people have these revolutionary things called "feet" to convey them to the places where the train periodically halts with facilities for ticket purchase and other amenities,if you've heard of them.

That's fine in London but you can easily be a day's walk away from a station at either end outside of it. I continually go out of my way to take the train but it's rarely the "sensible" option on any metric and if I need reliability or speed I will just drive.

 

[AlastairFraser]

That's fine in London but you can easily be a day's walk away from a station at either end outside of it. I continually go out of my way to take the train but it's rarely the "sensible" option on any metric and if I need reliability or speed I will just drive.

I agree in general, but the idea that cars could ever be an efficient replacement for rail travel intercity is fantasy.
That's the premise the OP of the thread seems to be working on

 

[WAO]

That's fine in London but you can easily be a day's walk away from a station at either end outside of it. I continually go out of my way to take the train but it's rarely the "sensible" option on any metric and if I need reliability or speed I will just drive.

I actually agree with you that many journeys are better by private car in that they can be door to door, along lightly used corridors and with baggage. However a glance at US urban freeway widths will demonstrate the land use consequences of trying to combine the private car with high capacity and speed. Even California is dallying with 25kV OLE!

Clearly, there are horses for courses but the cut-off between the two modes may not be sharp.

WAO

 

[yorksrob]

I was thinking about this earlier this week when old Musky was predicting that AI would remove the need for all employment.

That's a lot of leisure time, with potentially lots of people wanting to move around. Do we really have enough road generally for everyone to be off on their jollies whizzing around in driverless cars. The traffic today can make a lot of towns and cities quite unpleasent to navigate.

I suspect that there will still be a need for some of us to take public transport to prevent the country becoming a hellish deathtrap of speeding vehicles.

 

[Egg Centric]

I was thinking about this earlier this week when old Musky was predicting that AI would remove the need for all employment.

That's a lot of leisure time, with potentially lots of people wanting to move around. Do we really have enough road generally for everyone to be off on their jollies whizzing around in driverless cars. The traffic today can make a lot of towns and cities quite unpleasent to navigate.

I suspect that there will still be a need for some of us to take public transport to prevent the country becoming a hellish deathtrap of speeding vehicles.

It wouldn't be a death trap though, any more than standing by the platform at Northallerton as an Azuma goes through at 125mph inches away is today. Be safer if anything. The super brains of the cars would be able to avoid you (and if unsure about that would already be going slower).

 

[AM9]

It has a railway precisely because those roads are inadequate as regards getting to Plymouth.

While I am not advocating such a solution, an autonomous roadway from Plymouth and across Calstock viaduct could provide quicker access to Plymouth than the existing road network, including from Tavistock.

A single lane (one way?) road with a 12ft 6in headroom under however many overbridges. So queuing up to cross the Calstock bridge might sometimes save a few minutes, but there's also the Tamerton Lake and Tavy bridges as well. Even if only for cars, that's a hell of a waste of funds to speed a few cars up be a few minutes, (if indeed it did save any time). My guess is that if the Tamar Valley line was ever closed to rail traffic, it would be a prime pedestrian/cycle path down that picturesque valley.*
* unless we have a car-loving rail-hating Conservative Government forever!

 

[yorksrob]

It wouldn't be a death trap though, any more than standing by the platform at Northallerton as an Azuma goes through at 125mph inches away is today. Be safer if anything. The super brains of the cars would be able to avoid you (and if unsure about that would already be going slower).

So lets imagine we come to this denser, more efficient flow of traffic on the edge of town. Is it going to all just stop, every time myself, or some other pedestrian needs to cross the road ? I doubt it somehow.

More likely pedestrians will be hearded around even more than now.

 

[Egg Centric]

So lets imagine we come to this denser, more efficient flow of traffic on the edge of town. Is it going to all just stop, every time myself, or some other pedestrian needs to cross the road ? I doubt it somehow.

More likely pedestrians will be hearded around even more than now.

I think it could be made to actually. It would concentrate the minds of the engineers if pedestrians always had priority. Possibly exception of eg inner town expressways but pedestrians already ignore those.

 

[yorksrob]

I think it could be made to actually. It would concentrate the minds of the engineers if pedestrians always had priority. Possibly exception of eg inner town expressways but pedestrians already ignore those.

Even AI can't solve away the laws of physics. Lots of fast moving, close knit vehicles are always going to be a nuisance for pedestrians to negotiate.

 

[AM9]

Even AI can't solve away the laws of physics. Lots of fast moving, close knit vehicles are always going to be a nuisance for pedestrians to negotiate.

No doubt a right-wing government would resort to fencing pedestrians in as has been the case in the past where major roads pass through busy shopping areas. Of course with few or no IC vehicles on the roads soon, there, there won't be the excuse that giving vehicles priority over everything else keeping vehicles moving reduces pollution.

 

[yorksrob]

No doubt a right-wing government would resort to fencing pedestrians in as has been the case in the past where major roads pass through busy shopping areas. Of course with few or no IC vehicles on the roads soon, there, there won't be the excuse that giving vehicles priority over everything else keeping vehicles moving reduces pollution.

Indeed. We'll all be forced to make ridiculous detours so as not to get in the way of the all important cars.