This isn't a HS2 thread. Let's leave it there.
The same was true of aircraft systems in the 1960s, yet by the 1990s pilots were flying transoceanic sectors with the computer in control all the way.Yes they are but as we are finding in the real world half the functions on new trains don't work properly yet or are turned off because they are hellishly unreliable.
The same was true of aircraft systems in the 1960s, yet by the 1990s pilots were flying transoceanic sectors with the computer in control all the way.
Indeed. But significantly less than the "hundreds of years" mooted earlier.30 years is a long paperound
Although I'm not expert on railway technology, I have to agree with this comment in relation to the wider rate of tech change across sectors and industries. Technology advances at an exponential rate and surely, with such a process driven activity such as train driving, you would expect technology to quickly reach the stage where no driver is needed.The same was true of aircraft systems in the 1960s, yet by the 1990s pilots were flying transoceanic sectors with the computer in control all the way.
I suspect that there will be a train driver for quite a long time but, much like pilots, their workload is largely going to consist of monitoring the automation, and taking over in situations that the automation can't handle. Those interventions will likely be frequent to start with, but increasingly rare as the technology develops.Technology advances at an exponential rate and surely, with such a process driven activity such as train driving, you would expect technology to quickly reach the stage where no driver is needed.
Indeed. But significantly less than the "hundreds of years" mooted earlier.
This is more of a red-herring than it initially appears to be. An automated train could, today, determine its location to within a couple of metres. It could also, today, know the location of every signal on a route also with an accuracy of a few metres. It could also, today, be taught what a semaphore signal looks like in the on and off state.Bare in mind significant sections of railway are still controlled by a man in a wooden cabin at rhe line side pulling a steel lever, via pulleys and more wires rises or drops a sheet of steel to tell the human driver in his train built in the 1960s to stop or go!
The same was true of aircraft systems in the 1960s, yet by the 1990s pilots were flying transoceanic sectors with the computer in control all the way.
This is more of a red-herring than it initially appears to be. An automated train could, today, determine its location to within a couple of metres. It could also, today, know the location of every signal on a route also with an accuracy of a few metres. It could also, today, be taught what a semaphore signal looks like in the on and off state.
Putting those together, recognising and responding to semaphore signals is a trival task as compared to what self-driving cars are capable of. Today.
That's where the technology has caught up to the problem. Between artificial vision and accurate positioning it's conceivable that at least semi-autonomous trains (with the driver monitoring the systems) could be on the network within a decade, two at the most.It’s antiquated signalling and the vast expense of upgrading the Victorian railway network.
I am not saying this to wish anyone out of a job, but.... A train attendant will probably attract a lot lower salary than a train driver, and there will probably be a lot of trains that need replacing over the next thirty years or so.Im not doubting it technical possible, but U.K. Rail does things as cheap as possible.
That's where the technology has caught up to the problem. Between artificial vision and accurate positioning it's conceivable that at least semi-autonomous trains (with the driver monitoring the systems) could be on the network within a decade, two at the most.
That's where the technology has caught up to the problem. Between artificial vision and accurate positioning it's conceivable that at least semi-autonomous trains (with the driver monitoring the systems) could be on the network within a decade, two at the most.
So forgive me if I call nonsense on your predictions! No doubt in another five years time there will be yet another thread like this predicting automated trains etc etc in a decade or two
The railway is not unique in having institutional inertia. However there will come a point where it will be forced to adapt or die. That may be ten years from now, or it might be thirty. But it *will* come.few years in this industry and I’ve seen how resistant to change and antiquated the railway is, in terms of embracing technology.
However there will come a point where it will be forced to adapt or die.
The march of automation is an irresistible force.
At present, yes. But other industries have been too important to fail but have more or less disappeared (e.g. coal mining).Granted this is a unique situation but there is a reflection of how important the railway is to the country.
Which is why, as I've said at least a couple of times, the most likely future is train drivers being replaced by train operators - much like the modern day pilot who might only have hands on controls from pushback up to 1,000ft, and from landing roll to gate. Most of the time they are just keeping an eye on the automation.Maybe in some industries but there is a lot of evidence to say that automation isn't the great saviour its deemed to be and that the best way forward is to have a mix of human and machine.
I appreciate that it's a sensitive topic given that many posters in this section of the forum are drivers.
But by the same token I'm sure the longer in the tooth members will look back at the job role when they started and realise that as much has changed about it as has stayed the same.
Most of those limitations can be resolved - but it needs to be implemented first! That's the only way to get the data to build the models. It's a chicken v egg situation.Technophiles like yourself only really see how wonderful technology is and often fails to see its limitations in real world applications.
All it will take is someone to work out how much money could be saved...When it comes to technology and the railway, I am reminded of the task of Sisyphus :/
Most of those limitations can be resolved - but it needs to be implemented first! That's the only way to get the data to build the models. It's a chicken v egg situation.
I am not saying this to wish anyone out of a job, but.... A train attendant will probably attract a lot lower salary than a train driver, and there will probably be a lot of trains that need replacing over the next thirty years or so.
Spend an extra million or two on a train, to save £100K a year on salaries? Sounds about right for UK Rail.
It's a chicken v egg situation.
And most likely in another 20 years. Absolute block will still be a thing, even then .