Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation

Germany Unveils First Self-Driving Train (techxplore.com) 60

Posted by BeauHD from the first-of-its-kind dept.
German rail operator Deutsche Bahn and industrial group Siemens on Monday unveiled the world's first automated, driverless train in the city of Hamburg, billing it as more punctual and energy efficient than traditional trains. TechExplore reports: Four such trains will join the northern city's S-Bahn rapid urban rail network and start carrying passengers from December, using the existing rail infrastructure. Other cities like Paris have driverless metros while airports often have automated monorail trains plying terminals, but those run on exclusive single tracks while the Hamburg train will be sharing tracks with other regular trains. The project, which Siemens and Deutsche Bahn called a "world first," is part of a 60 million euro ($70 million) modernization of Hamburg's rapid urban rail system. Although the train is controlled through digital technology and fully automated, a driver will still be present to supervise journeys whenever there are passengers on board, the companies said in a statement.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Germany Unveils First Self-Driving Train More

Germany Unveils First Self-Driving Train

Comments Filter:

  • Umm (Score:5, Informative)

    by slazzy ( 864185 ) on Monday October 11, 2021 @08:02PM (#61882145) Homepage Journal
    We got these in Vancouver in 1986, and i don't think we were the first city in the world... congrats i guess

    • There have also been driverless trains at many airports for 40 years.

      According to TFA, what makes this train different is that it is the first driverless train that shares the track with trains operated by humans. I'm not sure why that is a newsworthy milestone.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • At some point autonomous driving and robotics are going to end up merging. At what point will an autonomous shuttle and those robots in hospitals that collect lab samples differ? They both operate on a preordained path and must be mindful of objects, and people, that are dynamic to their environment. An autonomous vehicle is basically a big ass robot.
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

        • the only civilized form of powered transportation

          There are others, they're just expensive. First class with Precheck is the base level of this - it really is an entirely different experience from coach without. I've gotten on planes with fifteen minutes to spare. I've gotten on planes where the boarding door was already closed. They will do things for you that they would not for some rando. The TSA let me take a check-only size bag into the terminal in the latter case when I said I was going to have the gate agent check it (long story why). If you fly pri

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mark-t ( 151149 )
        Actually, the rapid transit here in Vancouver could work, to a limited degree, with traIns that are being manually operated. All of the trains are equipped with manual controls, so certainly manual operation is possible. The system is designed with sensors in the rails, so that the trains can sense proximity to eachother and are capable of responding appropriately to that. If one train gets too close to another, the trailing one will slow down and/or stop.

    • List of Automated Trains (Score:4, Informative)

      by Roger W Moore ( 538166 ) on Monday October 11, 2021 @09:08PM (#61882323) Journal
      Wikipedia actually has a handy list [wikipedia.org] of automated train systems graded by the degree of automation. The first systems seem to date back 50 years so this is very much not new.

      • Instead of reading Wikipedia, read TFA. You'll reaslise that your handy list is nothing at all like what is done here. The worlds first here is that this is a driverless "train", not an automated system. All those in your list rely on a full system and dedicated infrastructure to make the train function.

        This train drives on normal tracks, normal stations, and shares infrastructure with normal trains. The first actually driverless train in the world.

        • The first actually driverless train in the world.

          Except it still has a driver.

        • The worlds first here is that this is a driverless "train", not an automated system.

          How can any driverless train NOT be an automated system? If it's not automated then there is someone involved in driving it.

          All those in your list rely on a full system and dedicated infrastructure to make the train function.

          Do you know of any trains that can operate without a system of dedicated infrastructure to make the train function? I've never seen a train system without tracks and stations before.

          This train drives on normal tracks, normal stations, and shares infrastructure with normal trains. The first actually driverless train in the world.

          The fact that they have not upgraded all their trains to driverless does not make their system better. The docklands light railway in London drives on normal tracks, stops at normal stations and as far a

          • How can any driverless train NOT be an automated system?

            I think you desperately need to re-read my post and understand the difference between a train and a transit system.

            Do you know of any trains that can operate without a system of dedicated infrastructure to make the train function?

            Operate without automation infrastructure to make them self driving? Only one. You can find out about it in TFA.

            and as far as any passenger is concerned

            This is slashdot. No one is asking your grandma what she thinks of Windows vs Linux. No one gives a shit what passengers think. We expect readers of this site to put a bit of thought into the technology they are commenting on. Now be a good boy, engage your braincells, re-read my post

            • Operate without automation infrastructure to make them self driving? Only one. You can find out about it in TFA.

              Really? So how exactly does this system switch points without an automation infrastructure?

              We expect readers of this site to put a bit of thought into the technology they are commenting on.

              Do you mean like knowing that even these trains will require automated points? automated signals and level crossings? etc. Modern train systems, even ones with drivers onboard, are incredibly automated already and have an enormous automated infrastructure in place to prevent accidents.

              Your "thinking" on driverless trains seems to be that they are required to use a rail network that was not originally designed for

              • Really? So how exactly does this system switch points without an automation infrastructure?

                Seriously kid join us in the actual conversation. The only person talking about switching on rail lanes in this entire post is you. Unless the point you're trying to make is that when rails are switched we can simply get rid of drivers? But you couldn't be trying to say something that stupid.

                Learn what an engineer on a train does, and you may find out what it is everyone here is talking about, and why this is a self driving train, and the Paris Metro 14 is a fully automated transit system.

                Do you mean like knowing that even these trains will require automated points?

                Legally or physica

                • Seriously kid join us in the actual conversation.

                  You were the one who bought up automated infrastructure, not me. Sorry if your point did not lead to where you would have liked it to go but tough luck.

                  Learn what an engineer on a train does

                  The engineers are the people who design, build and maintain trains. Engineers and train drivers are not the same things: in particular train drivers are not (in general) qualified engineers. So please do learn what a train (and trained) engineer does. Clearly either your understanding of either trains or English is severely lacking.

                  You can move goalposts around all you want.

                  That's a bit rich comin

    • Shit, we had driverless trains in the 1950s, whenever my Uncle Robert had had a few too many his train was effectively driverless (night freight train with nothing else on the line).

      • No you didn't. You had driverless transit systems. They relied entirely on dedicated infrastructure to make them driverless. What you have here is literally just a driverless train, sharing tracks with other trains and pulling into normal stations. You didn't have anything like that until now.

        • You do realize its not the engineer that does most of the driving on regular tracks right? They control speed and brakes. Thats it. The majority of the operation of multiple trains on tracks are done remotely. At least in the US, one set of tracks operate in both directions. In order for two trains, traveling in opposite directions, to coexist, they must be timed to arrive at the same switching station close to the same time, so one train can be diverted to a parallel track long enough for the two to pass.

          • You do realize its not the engineer that does most of the driving on regular tracks right? They control speed and brakes.

            Not the engineer who does driving, they only control the two things that are involved in driving. Seriously dude don't post drunk.

    • Seconded. I think some cities had them in the 1800s.

      Because it's really not rocket science.
      There are sensors and triggers between the tracks and on the train. If it's underground, there's no people, so it's trivial.
      The only thing one might add for aboveground tracks, is the ability to stop if something is on the tracks.
      Which is basically one retroreflective sensor and a switch. Maybe with a slight rotation to follow curved tracks.
      But given a train's mass, it's not like humans could do that either. Unless th

      • No you didn't. You had an automated transit system. How could you be so ignorant on the topic while even also talking about the sensors needed to make your automated system work.

        This is an automated train, no sensors in the tracks, sharing the tracks with normal trains. The first such case in the world.

        TFA isn't very long. It would have taken you less time to read it than to sit here and advertise how you're Slashdot's most ignorant dolt.

      • Even with humans driving, people get killed by trains all the time. They dont exactly stop on a dime.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      As the summary points out, the innovation here is that these trains run on normal tracks with other manned trains, not special dedicated tracks.

      It's a big step up in complexity because rather than having a completely computer controlled system where the state of everything in it is known and stuff like signalling is purpose built for automation, it's more like a self driving car that operates on public roads.

      • A train operated by a human is in no way like driving a car. 90% of the trains operation is conducted off track at a control center. The operator controls speed and brakes. Thats it. The switching, akin to steering, is not done by the driver. You cannot compare it to autonomous driving.

    • We got these in Vancouver in 1986, and i don't think we were the first city in the world... congrats i guess

      No you didn't. Read the article. No other driverless train in the world shares common rail infrastructure with all other trains. Including yours in Vancouver (which had a dedicated track), and the Paris metro (dedicated tracks), or airports (dedicated tracks).

      This is a driverless train. Just a train. It uses normal stations, normal tracks, normal signaling, and share the tracks with normal trains, and that is what makes it a world first.

    • I got my first driverless train back in the 70s made by Lionel. It was super simple. Turn the dial to control the speed and the tracks did most of the work :-)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kriston ( 7886 )

      We have had self-driving trains since 1976 in Washington DC. Even earlier in San Francisco.

    • Yes, also London Docklands Light Railway (DLR) is driverless. Opened in 1987, 34 years ago. Still needs a human on board to manage the doors because people do stupid things when left unsupervised.

  • Making a self driving train is far less technically involved than making a self driving car. Considering the huge cost of a train, AI for self driving will be chump change over it. It makes sense to have automated trains, yet there are so few of them!

    • It's pretty much no achievement at all all the infrastructure for driverless trains has been in place for decades, Just reroute the signaling from track side signals into go no go controls for the trains acceleration, Trains steer themselves via the rail, no need to lidar to see bambi in the tracks. Trains can't stop that fast, either bambi gets off the tracks or becomes hundreds of little bambi giblets under the train.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        It's pretty much no achievement at all all the infrastructure for driverless trains has been in place for decades, Just reroute the signaling from track side signals into go no go controls for the trains acceleration, Trains steer themselves via the rail, no need to lidar to see bambi in the tracks. Trains can't stop that fast, either bambi gets off the tracks or becomes hundreds of little bambi giblets under the train.

        Exactly, although, the problem isn't bambi, it's more of cars and trucks and such, all of

    • They are!

      The "driver" has very little to no control already.

      All that's left is where he *could* make choices. Which can, mostly, be replaced with a bounded /dev/random. ;)

    • Because reducing the driver from the train isn't much of a cost savings. Already the ratio of passengers to drivers is easily 100:1 or more, a 99% reduction from a taxi where you'd be lucky to hit 1:1 (since the cab is driving around without any passenger some of the time). So, each passenger (or kg of cargo) on a train is already paying very little to the driver. Similarly, the cost pilot and crew is only 2% of a commercial flight, so going fully automated would save relatively little:

      https://skyref [skyrefund.com]

      • There's actually a good use case for this, it lets you increase frequency without increased hiring. It won't help too much on heavily-used lines, but imagine a lightly-used line to a suburb where the trains are running empty a lot of the time and you can only afford to serve it with a few trains a day, and you try to get as many people on those few runs you can do.

        Since the train doesn't run often, it's inconvenient since the train may not be there when you need it, so fewer people use the train. Frequency

  • Train Captain GOA3 or GOA2?

  • And amtrak is the best we have in the ðYðY.... Smh
  • I thought a lot of urban railways were already essentially self driving - with operators there just in case. Seems like a pretty simple control problem given that stopping distances are so long that if something is on the tracks, there isn't much you can do anyway.

    • The control problem here (and what makes it unique) is that it isn't on dedicated tracks. It shares the normal train infrastructure with every other train.

      Driverless transit systems are dime a dozen, but they all have their own infrastructure.

  • At least one of the big mining companies in NW Australian has been running driverless ore trains for several years now, using essentially the Positive Train Control technology now in the US with added functions to replace the driver entirely. Siemens has experience with PTC in the US and similar systems in High Speed Rail elsewhere - HSR trains are often nearly fully automated with the driver mainly attending in case of emergencies when on the dedicated high speed tracks. So it's not a revolution - it's evo

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hoofie ( 201045 )

      Rio Tinto run immense Iron Ore trains that are driverless in the Pilbara, the region you mention. The other major Iron ore miners are going in the same direction.

      Yes they run on dedicated tracks and do not share them with passenger or other trains.

      I take the articles point that they are the first driverless trains sharing track with normal traffic BUT the headline is factually incorrect as driverless Metros, which are still trains, have been around for decades and as mentioned above, driverless heavy freigh

    • At least one of the big mining companies in NW Australian has been running driverless ore trains for several years now

      Yes they have, on dedicated infrastructure. The "first" here is that this is a driverless train. Just a train. It uses normal tracks, normal stations, and shares that infrastructure with other rail vehicles.

      All other driverless systems to date have relied on dedicated infrastructure (like Rio Tinto's), fixed single use tracks laid out in a ring or two trains alternating (like those found at airports), or have a huge amount of dedicated smart platform infrastructure (like Paris Metro).

    • Also HSR trains are not fully automated. The only thing they do is adjust speed to suit specific segments of tracks. They are wholly reliant on the driver to stop, start, or to pull into stations.

  • Reading the article again the headline is a load of crap.

    It's a train being controlled automatically that still contains a driver in attendance.

    It's not driverless - the same has been in use on the London Underground since the 1960s

    The only true driverless trains [i.e. real heavy rail] are the immense iron ore trains in Australia that physically have no-one at the controls.
    Video showing it in operation here [youtube.com]

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by vivian ( 156520 )

      When I was working in London in 1998 to 2001 or so I'm pretty sure the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) in London was driverless - they had removable panels at the front carriage where there were also passenger seats, that a driver could remove and drive the thing manually - when there was a driver on board there was just a light chain between the row of seats behind him to seperate off the area.

      Often though, there was no one in control and it was all automatic.

      I assume they had that as an appeasement to the u

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by nagora ( 177841 )

        When I was working in London in 1998 to 2001 or so I'm pretty sure the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) in London was driverless - they had removable panels at the front carriage where there were also passenger seats, that a driver could remove and drive the thing manually - when there was a driver on board there was just a light chain between the row of seats behind him to seperate off the area.

        Often though, there was no one in control and it was all automatic.

        I assume they had that as an appeasement to the unions that probably insisted they still have the things driven manually X hours per week.

        No, it's for shunting work in depots, I think. I've never seen a driver in one.

        But, yes, the DLR has been driverless for decades.

      • The thing unique here is that this "driverless" train is not on dedicated infrastructure. We've made driverless transit systems since the 50s but they all rely on some combination of dedicated tracks, dedicated carriage, and dedicated stations loaded with sensors, or any combination thereof.

        E.g. the driverless train in Australia is travelling on a privately owned track. It doesn't need to stop or give way to other trains at any point.

  • What makes this unique (Score:5, Informative)

    by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Tuesday October 12, 2021 @04:37AM (#61883149)

    Since everyone is falling over themselves to point out that this isn't the first rather than actually RTFA, let me spell it out for everyone here:

    Existing driverless transit systems rely on some combination of dedicated tracks and smart infrastructure. This is a automatic train. It relies on neither. It uses normal tracks, normal stations, follows the standard signals, and shares a complex railway network with normal trains. That is what makes this unique and an order of magnitude harder problem to solve than any of those monorails you've travelled on when changing airport terminals.

    Give them some credit where it's due.

    That said, there's still a safety driver on board, so not fully driverless yet. But my guess is he'll be watching youtube videos rather than doing anything meaningful.

    • So exactly the same as BART?

      • No. BART is a fixed single purpose metro network, point to point, doesn't share any tracks with non-BART vehicles, and the last time they attempted a truly driverless system a carriage launched itself off the end of the track. Additionally the BART network's driver automation relies heavily on the network itself, and the only line really capable of full automation is a guideway transit line like the Paris Metro 14 and doesn't even connect to any other tracks in the BART network.

        I.e. You can't take a BART ca

  • Pakistan Ministry of Technology announced that 8 buildings in Karachi, all more than 10 stories tall will feature the country's pilot project: Self driving elevators. They said they plan to expand self driving elevators to all building before venturing out into self driving trains and then eventually import Chinese technology for self driving tuk-tuks

Slashdot Top Deals

[We] use bad software and bad machines for the wrong things. -- R.W. Hamming

Close