Skip to main content

Rail Summit to discuss automated operations in Aviation and Rail, Vienna

The often repeated comparison between the levels of automation in the aviation and rail sectors will come under scrutiny at the Intelligent Rail Summit Vienna 28 – 30 November, according to a report in rail knowledge sharing platform Railtech.com. Dick Terleth, director mobility at ADSE consulting and avionics specialist Sander Van Lochem, will discuss automated operations and focus on the introduction, operation and lifecycle
October 4, 2017 Read time: 2 mins

The often repeated comparison between the levels of automation in the aviation and rail sectors will come under scrutiny at the Intelligent Rail Summit Vienna 28 – 30 November, according to a report in rail knowledge sharing platform Railtech.com.  

Dick Terleth, director mobility at ADSE consulting and avionics specialist Sander Van Lochem, will discuss automated operations and focus on the introduction, operation and lifecycle management of automated train operations. Terleth stated that the main differences is that unlike with rail, in aviation sector there is constant communication between the pilot and ground control but there is no active automated interface between the airplane and traffic control as happens with signalling and control systems in rail.

“This is completely different in the railway sector, where space is more confined to the rail track and a much higher level of interaction between the vehicle and the rail infrastructure takes place. Also, there are more factors, like people walking along the track, to take into consideration. A lot more needs to be done to successfully implement an automated driving system on rail, as the prerequisites are much harder to fulfill,” he added.

Referring to a safety culture developed to the aviation industry, he recognised that it is not as paramount in the rail industry, but a similar focus in inevitable to a successful implementation.  He added that overcoming challenges caused by system malfunctions and acceptance among passengers are two challenges that need to be overcome.

Related Content

  • Amsterdam Group turn ITS theory into practice
    August 6, 2013
    ASECAP’s Marko Jandrisits discusses the Amsterdam Group’s efforts to bring a sense of order to cooperative ITS deployments. When an issue arises which is deemed to require a technological solution governments and public-sector agencies around the world all too often tread the same sorry path. A decision is made to research and develop said technology to the production-ready stage, the work is done and the technology realised but then the money for deployment runs out and the technology is left on the shelf
  • Crossing the line: managing traffic across jurisdictions
    June 18, 2024
    The US will eventually have a fully-digitised transportation network, with traffic management devices talking to each other across massive distances. It’s really a question of pain points on the road to full deployment, explains Mark Talbot of Q-Free
  • New Haven shows small can be beautiful
    October 22, 2014
    Connecticut’s new administration is using smart policy and ITS solutions to bridge social divides. Andrew Bardin Williams investigates. With only 130,000 residents, New Haven can hardly be called a metropolis. Measuring less than 502km (18 square miles), the city is huddled against the coast, squeezed between two mountains (appropriately called East Rock and West Rock) that, at 111m and 213m (366ft and 700ft) respectively, can hardly be called mountains. The airport is small and has limited service, and th
  • Opening the closed-loop to realise ITS benefits
    April 8, 2014
    Jim Leslie, manager of ITS applications engineering at the Econolite Group looks at practical steps in transitioning from closed-loop masters to a centralised ATMS. Not many years ago the standard method of coordinating signalised intersections in local areas was to install an on-street master – each of which monitored and controlled a limited number of signal controllers or intersections as a closed-loop system. And, to a certain extent, each closed-loop system was autonomous from others deployed by the ag