Safety of High Speed Guided Ground Transportation Systems: Human Factors Phase I: Function Analyses and Theoretical Considerations

Sheridan, T.; Lanzilotta, E.; Askey, S. · 1994 · ROSA P / United States. Department of Transportation. Federal Railroad Administration

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This report addresses the critical human factors challenges associated with the introduction of High-Speed Guided Ground Transportation (HSGGT) systems in the United States. The research is motivated by the fundamental disparity between increasing vehicle speeds and the constant sensory, information processing, and reaction time capacities of human operators. As speeds exceed 200 km/h, the severity of potential accidents increases significantly, while the time available for operators to perceive hazards and execute control actions decreases. The study aims to prevent safety errors by analyzing how task allocation between humans and machines must evolve to accommodate these high-speed demands, drawing lessons from historical railway failures and current international practices. The methodology involved a comprehensive review of human factors literature and comparative analysis of existing high-speed rail systems in France (TGV), Germany (ICE), and Japan (Shinkansen), as well as consultations with operators like Amtrak. The authors conducted function analyses for both on-board locomotive engineer tasks and off-board dispatching center operations, represented through functional flow diagrams. These diagrams map out processes for vehicle control, situation awareness, speed control, and emergency handling. Additionally, the report outlines sixteen classes of accident scenarios involving abnormal conditions to identify potential failure points. The study also examines theoretical frameworks for safety, including theories of human error and network modeling of system risk, while comparing HSGGT developments to automation trends in aviation and nuclear power. Key findings indicate that all major high-speed systems currently retain a locomotive engineer in the cab, though the degree of automation varies. The German ICE utilizes more extensive automation, such as cruise control, allowing the engineer to focus on system management, whereas the French TGV and Japanese Shinkansen systems emphasize aiding the "in-the-loop" engineer. The function analysis identified two specific problems exacerbated by high speed: sensing/communication delays and human decision latency, both of which can lead to command and control instability. The report highlights eighteen specific safety issues, including the need for in-cab signaling to replace wayside signals, enhanced alertness monitoring, and integrated "system health" displays. It also notes that while automation improves efficiency, it introduces new cognitive demands and requires higher levels of operator training and technology literacy. The significance of this work lies in its recommendations for the evolutionary adoption of automation in future U.S. high-speed rail systems. The authors advocate for a "human supervisory control" model, where humans are aided by computers for information and planning, rather than immediate full automation. They propose an incremental approach: starting with manual control aided by decision aids, progressing to discretionary automatic control, and only considering full automation after demonstrating reliability and securing public acceptance. The report concludes that successful implementation requires careful consideration of maintenance requirements, legal liability, and the cognitive consistency between operator mental models and system reality, ensuring that technological advancements do not outpace human capabilities.

Key finding

The disparity between constant human reaction times and increasing vehicle speeds necessitates a shift toward human supervisory control and automated systems to prevent command and control instability and ensure route integrity.

Methodology

theoretical

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• rail grade crossings