Quote:
We are still far away from driverless trains on non-segregated railway networks (unlike the Vancouver Skytrain or certain Metro networks like in Torino/Italy), but just installing ATP (Automatic Train Protection) to get rid of the second locomotive engineer would reduce labor costs significantly...
|
I should of made myself clear that I was indeed talking about automated trains on a
segregated network if it were to ever happen. No way in hell would I trust people to operate heavy vehicles alongside with machines operating heavy vehicles independent of human supervision.
I would imagine that if one were to build a Calgary > Red Deer > Edmonton line that you would need to construct new railroads anyways (?). So why not make it electric, automated, and fast?
Quote:
they can communicate efficiently with each other and therefore predict each other's movements, but they are clueless when it comes to predict the actions and reactions of a human driver.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban_Sky
Therefore, I strongly believe that driverless cars are a massive opportunity rather than threat for public transit and intercity trains, especially if the authorities exploit the data generated by driverless cars to introduce congestion pricing for using congested streets (which will strongly discourage the demand for driving all the way from the suburb to downtown)...
|
You kind of kill your own point here because since automated vehicles can only communicate with each other effectively (machine to machine) then they would need their own segregated right-of-way to operate on
any kind of distance.
It just isn't simply setting aside some lanes on a highway for driverless vehicles. Let me break it down:
1. You would have to construct some form of grade separation whether it would be a separate road or an elevated path (if you want to get fancy). With driverless ANYTHING, you absolutely CANNOT have the machine interact with the human-driver. Oh and don't forget to make barriers for any wildlife hazards that could interact with the vehicle on the journey.
2. Next you would have to construct grade-separations at every intersection (assuming that you follow the Queen Elizabeth Hwy route) it crosses along the path. These can be tunneled or elevated - your choice. And when these driverless vehicles get to their destined city, they will continue to need grade-separation until their final destination.
3. These vehicles will then need to park themselves somewhere. This will require a glorified parking lot or a parkade of some-sort. And don't forget that we need to make these parking structures accessible as well, so we need elevators, escalators, bathrooms, and good lighting. We also will need a good connection to intracity transit of some sort.
4. Speaking of which, the vehicles will also come at a cost as well. In this fantasy, are people sharing rides with each other or are they paying to just auto-drive themselves (like 1 person per vehicle)? Because now you need a fleet that is able to handle an anticipated capacity.
I say all this because at the end of the day, you are pretty much paying for the same infrastructure that a train system would require ANYWAYS. Except with an intercity driverless vehicle system you move less PPHPD. The train technology that we have available to us now can cleanly sustain the route demand for an extremely long time. I personally like automated trains that would travel at high speeds but there are plenty of options out there. I lean towards fast travelling automated trains only because if the tracks are separated anyways then we may as well cut our operating expenses by using automated systems. Of course if the tracks are shared with other rail services then that would change my opinion.
Even if the trains had drivers, the amount of driverless vehicles that you would need to purchase for this route would be extraordinary. I know for a fact that part of the appeal of driverless vehicles is that it is a private form of transportation. With that said, I also understand that they can accommodate up to (I think) 4-6 people? It's still less PPHPD than what a train of any technology would deliver.
If Edmonton or Calgary had amazing driverless dedicated roads that this intercity driverless system could connect to then this would be a very different conversation. However no city (to my recollection) has got a driverless vehicle system operating, nevermind a driverless car network that has them travelling 150 km/hr+ without human supervision. This isn't Tron lol.
If you want AB to be make innovative steps forward then a high speed (automated) rail link between Calgary and Edmonton would serve the region for well over 50 years with minimal operating expenses.