> Automated trains are just like elevators

Ahem. No.

There is no collision hazard in elevators (essentially each elevator is on its own dedicated track). In railway, collision hazards are everywhere because you can change track and there are multiple trains on the same track, possibly (yikes) in head to head movements.

If you want to see the specs of a real Automatic Train Protection, the European one is public [1]. And that is only the protection part. There is no automatic pilot in there.

[1] https://www.era.europa.eu/content/set-specifications-3-etcs-...

Nitpick: there are collision hazards in some modern elevators. See for example https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/a20847/the-futur... (company pages are, IMO less clear: https://twin.thyssenkrupp-elevator.com/ or even https://www.thyssenkrupp-elevator.com/en/products-and-servic...)

But go further, faster and carry way more people while having an incredibly varied operating environment, unlike an elevator/lift.

The whole basis of signaling kind of makes it all moot. If the signal is red, the train stops. If the signal is green, you go through. Their may be yellow signals as well, generally meaning that there is train x signals ahead, proceed at caution (generally reduced speed).

A very large number of accidents are due to the operator failing to follow these very basic signals.

>incredibly varied operating environment

How many variables do you see here?

The absolute safest scenario is likely automated trains with a driver with a red button to stop the train, in case of emergency. After years go by without even having to use the button, even those operators could be removed. We're living in a world where automated driving is starting to overtake automated trains, something that literally exists on rail, and switching is controlled electronically on almost every passenger rail in the western world.

[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2020/07/07/red...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hordorf_train_collision

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hordorf_train_collision

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_passed_at_danger#Accide...

> How many variables do you see here?

Unless we are talking metro, where I live it is not that uncommon to have some animal wonder on the tracks, people trying to commit suicide on the track, people throwing things at the train from bridges, ...

Hell, I there was even an hot air balloon that crashed on the train track a few years back in my city, blocking trains for the whole day.

Those are really all one variable, object on tracks.

And I got some bad news if you think 140 car freight trains stop for a deer on the tracks.

>people throwing things at the train from bridges,

I'm not too sure what you think an operator does today, besides maybe calling their dispatch/911.

> automated trains with a driver with a red button to stop the train

This is an ergonomics nightmare scenario. The operator needs to pay attention to keep situational awareness all the time while just observing the train doing its thing. Then, all of a sudden, the train starts doing something that it shouldn't be doing (due to a failed signal, another train doing something stupid, an obstruction, a malfunction...) and they need to quickly react and do a safe abort (slamming the brakes may actually be a bad idea sometimes)

This is an issue in aircraft with heavy automation - everything seems normal until it isn't and then the pilots need to quickly figure out exactly what happened, how they got where they are and how to get out.

>This is an issue in aircraft with heavy automation - everything seems normal until it isn't and then the pilots need to quickly figure out exactly what happened, how they got where they are and how to get out.

This isn't flying though, and you can stop a train by slamming the breaks, and this is perfectly fine in 99% of scenarios (and which is exactly why each train car has an emergency break cord/button).

I can't really imagine a situation where a possible derailment is better than stopping the train. If your on a narrow bridge, surely stopping is better than the possibility of being unable to stop when the bridge is out.

>> Automated trains are just like elevators, except they move horizontally.

Really? I haven't heard of any elevators killing dozens of people lately. I haven't seen many elevators crash, burst into flames and effectively remove entire city blocks from the map. I haven't heard of people studying elevator operators for PTSD.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Lac_mega...

"Traumatic exposure and posttraumatic symptoms for train drivers involved in railway incidents"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4462444/

>>Because of involuntary exposure to PUT [Person Under Train] incidents, the likelihood of train drivers to witness the violent death of a person is much higher than that of the general population, and that puts the train driver at risk of psychological trauma.

>>Of the 193 train drivers, 152 (78.75%) reported at least one PUT incident. Respondents reported as much as 14 PUT incidents/person, with a mean of 4 (SD = 2.83) incidents/train driver.

In all honesty, a train driver is more likely to see someone die violently in front of them in a given year than the average soldier.

All the more reason to take train drivers out of the picture.

Doesn't solve the problem of people using trains to commit suicide, which isn't certainly going to be solved by any amount of automation.

So? Nobody said that it would, just that drivers won't suffer the associated ptsd.

Need some of the mitigations they use in Japan like calming blue lighting at the platform ends, full length barriers and gates.

“Trains” and “automated trains” practically are two distinct concepts like “cars” and “golf cars”

An eggcorn maybe?

The vehicle you're probably thinking of is a golf cart.

A Golf Car is a popular model of motor vehicle from Vauxhall.