Railroad companies have penalized workers for taking the time to make needed repairs and created a culture in which supervisors threaten and fire the very people hired to keep trains running safely. Regulators say they can’t stop this intimidation.
Automated signaling exists and can manage all sections at the maximum safe speed. Trains shouldn’t even have anyone inside to drive normally. The job is obsolete today. (drivers might be useful in yards, or little used branches, but not the main line - in both cases the driver should live near their section and work when there is a train then go home)
Of course automatic signaling is programmed to be safe. Thus if that section cannot be driven faster than 10mph (or whatever speed) there is no override to go faster anyway.
Exists, yes, but is not installed throughout the US rail systems.
But there should still be a human on the trains. Automatic signaling won’t stop a train when there’s a stalled car on a crossing, or someone walking on the tracks.
I’m not 100% sure about that. Can you give me a little context as to where your knowledge comes from? Railroaders I’ve seen discussing fully automated trains seemed to have some doubts about the viability of the technology.
Many passenger trains around the world run fully automated.
the big issue is without someone on board there is nobody to see someone on the tracks and hit the emergency brake. My counter to that is it doesn’t matter as the train won’t stop until long after whoever was on the track is hit and dead.
Passenger trains have better maintained tracks and so are not likely to derail. They are also less likely to hit things because they are grade separated - fenced, elevated tracks, in tunnels. These are more cost, but they are things society wants (not the same as rail executives) Trams which run on the street are much slower and do have drivers.
Automated signaling exists and can manage all sections at the maximum safe speed. Trains shouldn’t even have anyone inside to drive normally. The job is obsolete today. (drivers might be useful in yards, or little used branches, but not the main line - in both cases the driver should live near their section and work when there is a train then go home)
Of course automatic signaling is programmed to be safe. Thus if that section cannot be driven faster than 10mph (or whatever speed) there is no override to go faster anyway.
Exists, yes, but is not installed throughout the US rail systems.
But there should still be a human on the trains. Automatic signaling won’t stop a train when there’s a stalled car on a crossing, or someone walking on the tracks.
A human on board won’t stop a train either. They will hit the brakes, but trains don’t stop fast enough to make a difference in those situations.
Feel free to consider other scenarios. That’s just the first that came to mind.
I’m willing to, but so far I’m not ware of any.
I’m not 100% sure about that. Can you give me a little context as to where your knowledge comes from? Railroaders I’ve seen discussing fully automated trains seemed to have some doubts about the viability of the technology.
Many passenger trains around the world run fully automated.
the big issue is without someone on board there is nobody to see someone on the tracks and hit the emergency brake. My counter to that is it doesn’t matter as the train won’t stop until long after whoever was on the track is hit and dead.
They’re not there to hit the brakes, they’re there to report it.
Passenger trains generally don’t go that fast in areas where they’re likely to hit something or derail. Which is not what rail executives want.
Passenger trains have better maintained tracks and so are not likely to derail. They are also less likely to hit things because they are grade separated - fenced, elevated tracks, in tunnels. These are more cost, but they are things society wants (not the same as rail executives) Trams which run on the street are much slower and do have drivers.