I think that it is more down to risk perception than risk acceptance. When driving a car the driver feels that she is in control, thats he is in a position to avoid and mitigate accidents. Whereas, on public transport you are putting your safety in the hands of other people who you do not know. The increase in road accidents after 9/11 when people no longer trusted the airlines to transport them safely bears this observation out. __________________________________________ David C Brown 43 Bings Road Whaley Bridge High Peak Phone: 01663 733236 Derbyshire eMail: dcb.home@gmail.com SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb *Sent from my etch-a-sketch* On 2 November 2017 at 07:53, rossano gobbi < straighttowardsextinction@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, probably, but people (on this part of the world) are very much > inclined to accept a certain risk when going by car and accidents are > accepted as part of the process. Railway accidents on the other part are > not well seen, as the rail is deemed "safe". As a consequence any rail > application of stuff that works and is already used on the road (e.g. > obstacle detection) must at the moment go trough SIL processes that take > time and money. This will eventually disappear in the future when we'll > have a safe enough road traffic (will we?) and the two will be comparable > in terms of safety. > Moving block systems for example are in development and maybe already in > use on light rail applications, but still nobody thinks of letting go the > good old braking distance, while when you drive your car the person behin= d > you probably already does! > > To add to this there's the fact that you need to find the reasons to > justify coupling and uncoupling moving coaches/trains, since rail traffic > is much different from road traffic. > > Something regarding trolley buses: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/ > wiki/List_of_trolleybus_systems_in_Switzerland :-) > > > Rossano > > > Il giorno 1 nov 2017, alle ore 18:05, Denny Esterline < > desterline@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > > Not sure I understand the concern here. Absolutely, coupling rail cars = at > > speed would be a big problem with existing rail equipment. I didn't see > > that requirement in the list :-) > > > > If you "squint and turn your head a bit" this is what's being discussed > as > > the future of self driving cars. Automatically merge and separate from > > other traffic. Follow very (very) close at speed. > > I would think that doing it on a fixed track would simplify the process > by > > removing several variables. > > > > -- > > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > > View/change your membership options at > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > -- > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .