Driverless Trains - A Recipe for Disaster?

[adamadamant]

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, is considering a proposal whether to bring in driverless trains on the London underground. No doubt this has been proposed as a cost saving exercise but could it be a recipe for disaster?

[principled]

The initial costs would be pretty high, so not much saving there. Assuming the technology is reliable (a big if) then it would free the underground from the threat of strike action by what are very well paid drivers. At least £10k more than a nurse -See first link - (and that was BEFORE their latest bumper pay rise) See second link
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/5496579/Tube-drivers-earn-10000-a-year-more-than-nurses.html
www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23995459-tube-drivers-to-be-balloted-for-industrial-action.do

[adamadamant]

But what is of concern is that, in the interests of saving money, the safety aspects of the underground might be seriously compromised. There is nothing wrong in saving money where practicable but I feel uneasy about fully automating traveling on the underground because there is always the possibility that something unpredictable might occur where, in an automated system, it is not catered for. You would have several hundred people traveling in, essentially, a metal tube deep underground physically isolated from the surface and if something seriously went wrong might lead to great panic. Surely, the need for a professional to be present at times of emergency is of paramount importance. You can never fully predict what the circumstances might be if and when something goes wrong.

[rsmith7]

I think Boris is simply pointing out that underground drivers aren't irreplaceable before entering wage negotiations.
He should ban union membership for a start or at the very least membership of the marxist TGWU.

[adamadamant]

Nov 2, 2011 12:41:50 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

I think Boris is simply pointing out that underground drivers aren't irreplaceable before entering wage negotiations.
He should ban union membership for a start or at the very least membership of the marxist TGWU.

Probably so, but if it came to actually dispensing with drivers what would happen in a terrorist attack on the underground? You need someone there who has been trained to handle emergencies and if the public were left to their own devices Heaven knows what would happen! If this idea was brought in it would be treating ordinary people as guinea pigs and I for one would be uneasy about it.

BTW, what is the difference between underground drivers seeking as much remuneration as they can get and bankers, who do the same thing? What's good for the goose is good for the gander!

[rsmith7]

Nov 2, 2011 13:17:35 GMT 1 adamadamant said:

Nov 2, 2011 12:41:50 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

I think Boris is simply pointing out that underground drivers aren't irreplaceable before entering wage negotiations.
He should ban union membership for a start or at the very least membership of the marxist TGWU.

Probably so, but if it came to actually dispensing with drivers what would happen in a terrorist attack on the underground? You need someone there who has been trained to handle emergencies and if the public were left to their own devices Heaven knows what would happen! If this idea was brought in it would be treating ordinary people as guinea pigs and I for one would be uneasy about it.

BTW, what is the difference between underground drivers seeking as much remuneration as they can get and bankers, who do the same thing? What's good for the goose is good for the gander!

The "bankers" provide about a sixth of the country's tax income from which the train driver's wages are paid - that's why.

[adamadamant]

The "bankers" provide about a sixth of the country's tax income from which the train driver's wages are paid - that's why.

This thread seems to be straying off topic and is turning into a discussion about the bankers - not unmanned trains. Is this MB actually moderated at all?

[rsmith7]

Nov 3, 2011 11:08:39 GMT 1 adamadamant said:

The "bankers" provide about a sixth of the country's tax income from which the train driver's wages are paid - that's why.

This thread seems to be straying off topic and is turning into a discussion about the bankers - not unmanned trains. Is this MB actually moderated at all?

You brought up the subject of bankers so stop whining and address my point.

[jonjel]

If anyone thinks that in 50 years time we will be stuffed into a metal tube with a driver at one end and a red light at the other he is deluding himself.

Driver-less trains will without doubt be the norm - they already exist in Docklands and other areas.

Whether they will be powered by electricity compressed air or all the people on board rowing or peddling is another matter.

[striker16]

BTW, what is the difference between underground drivers seeking as much remuneration as they can get and bankers, who do the same thing? What's good for the goose is good for the gander!

The "bankers" provide about a sixth of the country's tax income from which the train driver's wages are paid - that's why.

And so they should since they earn incredible amounts of money incommensurate with their productivity. Even when the country isn't doing well they want to be paid far too much.

[striker16]

Nov 3, 2011 12:27:59 GMT 1 jonjel said:

If anyone thinks that in 50 years time we will be stuffed into a metal tube with a driver at one end and a red light at the other he is deluding himself.

Driver-less trains will without doubt be the norm - they already exist in Docklands and other areas.

Whether they will be powered by electricity compressed air or all the people on board rowing or peddling is another matter.

jonjel, automation can't cover all eventualities. This is what is worrying.

[rsmith7]

Nov 18, 2011 22:06:45 GMT 1 striker16 said:

BTW, what is the difference between underground drivers seeking as much remuneration as they can get and bankers, who do the same thing? What's good for the goose is good for the gander!

And so they should since they earn incredible amounts of money incommensurate with their productivity. Even when the country isn't doing well they want to be paid far too much.

Providing a sixth of the country's tax income isn't productive?
I see.

[striker16]

Nov 19, 2011 8:19:27 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

Providing a sixth of the country's tax income isn't productive?
I see.

But the taxpayer had to bail them out! How is that being productive?

[principled]

Striker

automation can't cover all eventualities

Technology is advancing very fast in the area of visual sensing and automated control. Human error is the cause of almost all accidents and I have no doubt that in the future machines controlled robotically will be a safer alternative.

As a Problem... it is generally recognised that 'driver error' is a significant factor in more than 90% of all car accidents... a far more serious problem than such things as road conditions or mechanical failure.

From www.roadsupervisors.net/aeg.car-accidents.htm

Remember, machines don't get tired and they don't get distracted!
P

[rsmith7]

Nov 19, 2011 9:27:57 GMT 1 striker16 said:

Nov 19, 2011 8:19:27 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

Providing a sixth of the country's tax income isn't productive?
I see.

But the taxpayer had to bail them out! How is that being productive?

The bankers got into trouble because they were forced to lend money to people who couldn't pay it back. Look up Clinton's banking bill and Brown's FSA and their "deregulation" of the banks. Of course it wasn't deregulation at all - it was replacing good regulations with bad.
All part of the plan.