【24h】

Letters to the Editor

机译:致编辑的信

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Your editorial on driverless trains in Observer 355 was most interesting, and in certain circumstances there is no reason why they shouldn't be used. I've travelled on driverless trains in the London docks area and also at some airports - and they work well. The biggest problem today for railway operators is finding enough dedicated people to become footplate crew. But with driverless trains, wherever they operate, mishaps will happen - and who pays the compensation? This could be a massive amount if a mishap occurred in a built up area, whether residential or industrial. I would hate to have paid for the damage to the runaway iron ore train M02712, on the Mount Newman Railway near Port Headland, on 5 November 2018. The derailment destroyed two locomotives, 245 ore cars and 2km of track, not to mention the downtime for all the other workers, and lost production. A read of a report by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau Rail Occurrence Investigation - R.O.2018-018 Preliminary dated 12 March 2019 - is most worthwhile. A two-man crew would have prevented this run-away.
机译:您在《观察家355》中有关无人驾驶火车的社论最有趣,在某些情况下没有理由不应该使用它们。我曾在伦敦码头区和某些机场乘坐无人驾驶火车旅行-而且它们运行良好。如今,铁路运营商面临的最大问题是找到足够的专职人员来担任踏板工作人员。但是,无人驾驶火车无论在哪里运行,都会发生事故-谁来赔偿?如果在住宅区或工业区的建筑区域发生事故,这可能是一个巨大的数目。我不愿为2018年11月5日在海德兰港附近的纽曼山铁路上失控的铁矿石火车M02712造成的损坏付出代价。出轨摧毁了两辆机车,245辆矿车和2公里的轨道,更不用说停机了对于所有其他工人,损失了生产。最值得一读的是澳大利亚运输安全局铁路事故调查报告-R.O.2018-018初步日期为2019年3月12日。两个人的船员本来可以防止这种失控。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号