Teleoperation of trains and other innovations in operation

Stonewolf

So it's Saturday and not much is happening on here and I'm a bit bored. I thought I'd start a thread about something less pie in the sky than an Irish Sea tunnel but only slightly more so than sell off CIE, everything must go!

I recently watched the following very interesting but not directly train related video because it had a bit about lunar mining on it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVmD3s1DODI&list=UUqs3uAvkKD18YuMGtxshwSw&index=35&feature=plcp

For the hard of attention span and those with no interest in the subject matter this is a video about teleoperation of mining equipment and related technologies and the operational enhancements it brings with a segue into mining in extreme environments via these methods at the end.

I was put in mind of it by the Nenagh thread in which people complained a lot about IE not innovating and more recently by the signalling video in Train Porn.

What the idea is
Trains are operated remotely by men in air conditioned offices with teleoperation rigs.

Advantages

• Consolidation of train operation into discrete number of centres.
• Operator shifts no longer linked to train movements which creates significant increases in staffing flexibility.
• Ability to swap in/out operators on the fly means increased flexibility in terms of break cover, emergency cover, absence etc ...
• SPAD can be enforced through teleoperation system and logging can enable root cause investigation of any incidents.
• Bulk of technology already exists and is proven.
• Teleoperator and Train driver are not the same job and therefore would not share the same contract.
• Unlike a fully automated system this retains a man in the loop.

Disadvantages

• Adaptation to railway domain would take some R&D
• Would require a significant enhancement to current train communications infrastructure (though not to any impractical degree)
• Less staff on the train
• Much higher staffing requirements than a full automated system

That's my initial thoughts on the idea anyway, what do others think?

dowlingm

Probably easier to switch to full CBTC control than worry about lots of realtime comms links - US military can do it because they have huge dosh to throw at the problem (not mention the GPS spoofing incident a while back)

Thing is - how would a Broadmeadow situation be handled. The train would have better comms so the need to place detonators and contact the signalman would be avoided - but would the train computer have noticed the impending issue in the first place?

Stonewolf

In the case of Broadmeadow the driver noticed the collapse and took appropriate measures. In a teleoperation situation the exact same would happen, the operator would see via his cameras that there was a collapse up ahead and take appropriate measures.

Jehuty42

While such a system might work, I would never see Ireland as suitable for taking the initiative. Maybe Germany or the US will come up with a prototype solution.

The biggest problem is keeping communication with the train constant and uninterrupted. I think that's a bit harder than you're giving it credit, especially given the bandwidth of transmitting back a constant video stream of high enough quality for the teleoperator. I'm not sure passengers would psychologically be happy with no member of staff, even a token one like Tube drivers on fully ATO lines, especially if there's a problem and you ended up stranded in the middle of nowhere.

corktina

i thought it said Teleportation..... beam me up!

steamengine

corktina wrote: »

i thought it said Teleportation..... beam me up!

Yea, the passengers could just sit behind the driver in the operating centre. :D