The union that represents conductors says it will ask the Federal Railroad Administration to deny CSX’s request to become the first railroad to use Trip Optimizer’s Zero-to-Zero feature, which allows the advanced cruise-control system to automatically start and stop trains.
After a round of tests in 2020 and 2021, CSX initially sought FRA permission to use Zero-to-Zero in 2022. The FRA has yet to make a decision on the safety waiver request, partly due to the need to conduct a detailed study and partly due to the agency’s reluctance to approve technology-related waivers during the Biden administration.
CSX has said the goals of using automatic start and stop are to save fuel and improve safety by reducing the potential for train pull-aparts.
The SMART-TD union doesn’t buy that. It sees Zero-to-Zero as a gateway to autonomous operations.
“While CSX claims the system will reduce fuel consumption and emissions, SMART-TD believes these claims are little more than a smokescreen for CSX’s true intentions: cutting costs at the expense of safety,” the union says.
If the FRA ultimately approves CSX’s plan, the other Class I railroads will follow CSX’s lead and seek permission to use Zero-to-Zero.
The union claims Trip Optimizer — which has operated trains for more than 300 million miles — is “not ready for prime time,” is unreliable, and poses a safety risk.
“A computer system or an algorithm cannot replace the skill, judgment, and adaptability of a trained engineer and conductor. Allowing a system that depends on flawed technology to control the train’s most essential safety feature is a dangerous gamble,” the union says.
In conventional Trip Optimizer use, the system’s auto throttle mode is not designed to operate at slow speeds. Wabtec says Trip Optimizer can apply dynamic brakes, and when air brakes are required can recommend how much air the engineer should use and for how long, as well as when to release brakes.
Zero-to-Zero goes a step further than automatic throttle and dynamic braking. It gives Trip Optimizer control of the train’s air brakes, which allows it to start and stop a train automatically. The system receives signal aspects and track authorities from the positive train control system.
What Zero-to-Zero can’t do: Operate a train automatically in areas where there are no signals, such as yards, or when entering passing sidings that require a train to stop within half the engineer’s range of vision.
But it can automatically stop and start trains on the main — for crew changes, for example — as well as depart from passing sidings.
“CSX has lauded the proven fuel efficiency and environmental benefits of Trip Optimizer technology for more than 20 years,” railroad spokesman Austin Staton says. “CSX is interested in saving an additional 4.9 million gallons of fuel per year when moving between zero and nine miles per hour with Zero-to-Zero Trip Optimizer.”
“While we are disappointed in SMART-TD’s misrepresentation of CSX’s enhanced use of Trip Optimizer, review of this technology is currently pending before the FRA,” he adds. “CSX will continue to work with the FRA during this product approval process.”
Wabtec did not respond to an email seeking comment about the union’s claims about its Trip Optimizer product.
But Gary Wolf, a prominent derailment investigator and rail safety expert, says neither Trip Optimizer nor its Zero-to-Zero feature pose a safety risk.
“The airline industry has been using autopilot systems to operate aircraft for many years. The trucking industry is moving forward with driverless trucks. Compared to aircraft and trucks, it is relatively simple to operate a train on a fixed guideway,” Wolf says, noting that automated control systems have advanced since they were introduced two decades ago.
Starting and stopping freight trains is an engineer’s biggest challenge, says Wolf, a former locomotive engineer.
“If technology can assess the relative slack in the train, the relative velocity and deceleration rates of each railcar and where they are on the grade, and the propagation rate of the air brake reduction, then there is no question that it can do a superior job day in and day out of controlling train forces and minimizing fuel consumption,” Wolf says. “The skillset of locomotive engineers, like aircraft pilots, largely fits a bell curve. Automation has the ability to bring the average, or even subpar, engineer up to the A+ level day-in and day-out. It will provide consistency, safety, and reliability in performance.”
The FRA’s two-person crew rule, along with contract agreements between labor and the Class I systems, don’t permit engineer-only operation on most trains. Railroads are challenging the two-person crew rule in federal court, but did not seek to shift conductors to ground-based positions as part of the current round of national contract negotiations.
