[ExI] spanish train wreck

[spike]

>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] spanish train wreck

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:44 PM, spike wrote:
>>... OK old news...I don't understand: we have GPS, the track never
changes.
> How simple would it be to rig up trains with some kind of device which 
> doesn't allow a train to go faster than it can get around an upcoming
curve?...

>...<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23449246>

>...It looks as though a combination of circumstances and a few moments
inattention from the driver was enough to cause the crash.

>...BillK
_______________________________________________

Thanks BillK, and this makes my point: from a controls engineering
perspective, this is an easy problem, easy, easy.  The GPS can be aboard the
train, with redundancy, that make up a control system that is actually a
superset of what would be needed to assist a train driver.  We know the
argument that automated controls cause the human operators to neglect some
aspects of control, since the driver has the option to turn on the automated
system.  What I propose is something more robust: an automated GPS-based
maximum speed control that the driver cannot override, making it physically
impossible for her to defeat the maximum speed control even if she decides
to intentionally crash the train.  Then a few moments of inattention are
irrelevant.  

Similar systems could easily be installed in airliners.  We had an airline
crash locally, a Korean flight crew came in too slow and whacked the tail on
the threshold, slaying two and wrecking a perfectly healthy aircraft.  The
passengers aboard who were experienced at coming into San Francisco knew
several miles out that the plane was coming in too low and far too slow.
There is a case where the passengers knew more than the two yahoos guiding
the aircraft.

Automation of that glide path control would fix that problem.

spike