On 19/02/2022 22:00, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 19/02/2022 16:18, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 19/02/2022 16:03, Tweed wrote:
>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> On 19/02/2022 12:02, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>> Drones exist, autonomous rail vehicles don't.
>>>>
>>>> There are some but most of the work is aimed at carrying rail
>>>> freight. A
>>>> small self-contained vehicle is much easier.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Autonomous Track Inspection: Keeping Railways Safe & Efficient
>>>>
>>>> https://railway-news.com/autonomous-track-inspection-keeping-railways-safe-efficient/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The railway industry is entering a new era of autonomous track
>>>> inspection that couples frequent inspections of track with defect
>>>> detection and software analysis capabilities, which in turn optimise
>>>> railway maintenance and renewal planning, reduce risks through earlier
>>>> identification of track defects, and improve rail network safety.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder if we’ve got to the point where every train/locomotive could be
>>> fitted with track monitoring equipment?
>>>
>>
>> Theoretically yes, the only constraint is cost.
>
> One-off costs would be expensive, undoubtedly, but would that not be
> able to pay for itself over a set time?

Need a lot more information, much of it probably confidential, to make a
sensible answer to that question. The gut feeling is no, not if we are
talking about equipping every single bit of motive power with the kit.
As I've suggested, a representative sample would probably be just as
effective and a lot cheaper.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 22:10:12 +0000, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 19/02/2022 22:00, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 19/02/2022 16:18, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> On 19/02/2022 16:03, Tweed wrote:
>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 19/02/2022 12:02, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>>> Drones exist, autonomous rail vehicles don't.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are some but most of the work is aimed at carrying rail
>>>>> freight. A
>>>>> small self-contained vehicle is much easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Autonomous Track Inspection: Keeping Railways Safe & Efficient
>>>>>
>>>>> https://railway-news.com/autonomous-track-inspection-keeping-railways-safe-efficient/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The railway industry is entering a new era of autonomous track
>>>>> inspection that couples frequent inspections of track with defect
>>>>> detection and software analysis capabilities, which in turn optimise
>>>>> railway maintenance and renewal planning, reduce risks through earlier
>>>>> identification of track defects, and improve rail network safety.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if we’ve got to the point where every train/locomotive could be
>>>> fitted with track monitoring equipment?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Theoretically yes, the only constraint is cost.
>>
>> One-off costs would be expensive, undoubtedly, but would that not be
>> able to pay for itself over a set time?
>
>Need a lot more information, much of it probably confidential, to make a
>sensible answer to that question. The gut feeling is no, not if we are
>talking about equipping every single bit of motive power with the kit.
>As I've suggested, a representative sample would probably be just as
>effective and a lot cheaper.

Agreed. If you fit all the stock, there's also a lot more data to analyse, but you probably wouldn't get any extra
results.

On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 22:01:43 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk" <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On 19/02/2022 11:57, Recliner wrote:
>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> On 19/02/2022 10:20, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>> It'll be even worse when visas are needed as passengers will be stuck
>>>> airside at the airport.
>>>
>>> How many people had Canadian visas when much of the US air traffic was
>>> diverted to Canada after 9/11?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Most people (including Brits) don't need visas to visit Canada.
>>
>It depends on nationality, of course.

Obviously. That's why I worded it as I did.

On 19/02/2022 22:02, nib wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 20:16:58 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 14:20:29 +0000, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> My first digital camera, purchased in the summer of 2000, had a card
>>> slot, but the biggest card I could afford at the time was only 48MB.
>>> Images were about 600kB, so that card could hold about 80 images. Of
>>> course, if you were wealthy enough to afford more than one card, then
>>> you could shoot an unlimited number of pictures on a trip.
>>>
>>> This is one of the first images I took, which is surprisingly topical
>>> today: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/49424447721>
>>
>> This is the second photo I took with my first digital camera:
>>
>> https://markgoodge.com/misc/DSCF0002.JPG
>>
>> (The first was an unusable photo of the inside of my flat that shows
>> nothing, because I'd got the settings wrong!)
>>
>> It's interesting, looking back at those early photos, how I typically
>> treated the camera as if it was a film camera, taking shots sparingly.
>> Because, of course, the memory wasn't that much better than a roll of
>> film! It wasn't until much later that I had a camera with enough memory
>> to be able to take multiple shots of every subject and then weed them
>> out later to select the good ones.
>>
>> Mark
>
> But the real wow of the digital camera was the instant picture. I
> remember the first time I took a picture of a piece of kit we were
> talking about with our owners in Japan and e-mailed it to them then and
> there, even they were impressed! Fujifilm DS-7 in 1997. VGA resolution
> (and then horribly compressed), about 30 images on a 2M card.
>
> nib

The first time I saw a digital camera used for real I was covering a
boxing match in Denmark. The snapper next to me had just got a brand new
Nikon DSLR, claimed to be the first in Europe, to do the stills for the
local sports paper. At the end of each bout his assistant downloaded the
images onto a laptop and emailed them to the news paper office, using a
dial up modem! By the time the matches were finished the crowd could buy
the late edition of the paper with full photographic coverage on their
way out of the venue! Old hat now, but at the time it was very impressive.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 19/02/2022 21:43, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 19/02/2022 21:19, MB wrote:
>> On 19/02/2022 16:08, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> Another exaggeration. The pound is down, the economy is down,[1] chunks
>>> of the City have legged it, as you put it, but carry on denying it.
>>
>> And companies have moved to the UK from Europe but the Remoaner rags
>> never report things like that.
>
> Name one.

Shell is in the process of moving here.

On 19/02/2022 22:10, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 19/02/2022 22:00, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 19/02/2022 16:18, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> On 19/02/2022 16:03, Tweed wrote:
>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 19/02/2022 12:02, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>>> Drones exist, autonomous rail vehicles don't.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are some but most of the work is aimed at carrying rail
>>>>> freight. A
>>>>> small self-contained vehicle is much easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Autonomous Track Inspection: Keeping Railways Safe & Efficient
>>>>>
>>>>> https://railway-news.com/autonomous-track-inspection-keeping-railways-safe-efficient/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The railway industry is entering a new era of autonomous track
>>>>> inspection that couples frequent inspections of track with defect
>>>>> detection and software analysis capabilities, which in turn optimise
>>>>> railway maintenance and renewal planning, reduce risks through earlier
>>>>> identification of track defects, and improve rail network safety.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if we’ve got to the point where every train/locomotive
>>>> could be
>>>> fitted with track monitoring equipment?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Theoretically yes, the only constraint is cost.
>>
>> One-off costs would be expensive, undoubtedly, but would that not be
>> able to pay for itself over a set time?
>
> Need a lot more information, much of it probably confidential, to make a
> sensible answer to that question. The gut feeling is no, not if we are
> talking about equipping every single bit of motive power with the kit.
> As I've suggested, a representative sample would probably be just as
> effective and a lot cheaper.
>
The clue to the cost is that the measurements and videos are working at
line speeds of 125mph and processed in real time. Some of those sensors
are probably unique to the test trains and very, very expensive. For
certain faults the train will stop in section until a block can be put
in place. Do you expect that to be tolerated on a passenger service?

On 19/02/2022 22:02, nib wrote:
> But the real wow of the digital camera was the instant picture. I
> remember the first time I took a picture of a piece of kit we were
> talking about with our owners in Japan and e-mailed it to them then and
> there, even they were impressed! Fujifilm DS-7 in 1997. VGA resolution
> (and then horribly compressed), about 30 images on a 2M card.

There are so many things that I wished I had a digital camera years ago
and so been able to take many more photographs.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 19/02/2022 12:02, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> Drones exist, autonomous rail vehicles don't.
>
> There are some but most of the work is aimed at carrying rail freight. A
> small self-contained vehicle is much easier.
>
>
>
> Autonomous Track Inspection: Keeping Railways Safe & Efficient
>
> https://railway-news.com/autonomous-track-inspection-keeping-railways-safe-efficient/
>
> The railway industry is entering a new era of autonomous track
> inspection that couples frequent inspections of track with defect
> detection and software analysis capabilities, which in turn optimise
> railway maintenance and renewal planning, reduce risks through earlier
> identification of track defects, and improve rail network safety.
>
>

That article is about attaching unattended track monitoring equipment to
normal service rail vehicles, rather than running special Infrastructure
Monitoring trains staffed with people watching the data real-time.

It doesn't appear to be about fully unstaffed rail vehicles for checking
that the line is clear after a storm.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On 19/02/2022 21:43, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 19/02/2022 21:19, MB wrote:
>>> On 19/02/2022 16:08, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>> Another exaggeration. The pound is down, the economy is down,[1] chunks
>>>> of the City have legged it, as you put it, but carry on denying it.
>>>
>>> And companies have moved to the UK from Europe but the Remoaner rags
>>> never report things like that.
>>
>> Name one.
>
> Shell is in the process of moving here.
>

That's due to factors unrelated to brexit, afaik.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Nobody <jock@soccer.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 11:57:53 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 19/02/2022 11:46, MB wrote:
>>>> On 19/02/2022 10:20, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>> It'll be even worse when visas are needed as passengers will be stuck
>>>>> airside at the airport.
>>>>
>>>> How many people had Canadian visas when much of the US air traffic was
>>>> diverted to Canada after 9/11?
>>>>
>>> The world is a different place since then with red tape hatred towards
>>> UK citizens vastly increased since then.
>>>
>>
>> I don't think we need visas for anywhere now that we didn't three years
>> ago.
>
> But not everyone on a flight from the Ewe Kay to the Excited States
> is/was necessarily entering under visa-free reciprocity.
>

As I said, nothing has changed in the last few years.

Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
> Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>> On 19/02/2022 21:43, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> On 19/02/2022 21:19, MB wrote:
>>>> On 19/02/2022 16:08, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>> Another exaggeration. The pound is down, the economy is down,[1] chunks
>>>>> of the City have legged it, as you put it, but carry on denying it.
>>>>
>>>> And companies have moved to the UK from Europe but the Remoaner rags
>>>> never report things like that.
>>>
>>> Name one.
>>
>> Shell is in the process of moving here.
>>
>
> That's due to factors unrelated to brexit, afaik.

Yes, as with Unilever. Dual NL/UK listings have fallen out of fashion, and
UK listings were better for those companies than NL listings. Brexit had
nothing to do with those decisions.

But, in general, young tech companies much prefer to be based and raise
capital in the UK than any EU country. That was true both before and after
Brexit. However, if they do well, they tend to go public on Nasdaq, not in
London.

It's possible that post-Brexit rules will attract more medical and
bio-engineering research companies to the UK than the EU. That may prove to
be a rare area where Brexit has helped the UK.

On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 21:13:23 +0000, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 19/02/2022 12:18, ColinR wrote:
>> Yep, but if the track is found to be clear the autonomous vehicle has to
>> be got out of the way (into a siding or lifted off the track), a drone
>> just has to move itself out of the way to allow trains to run.
>
>It can be easily switched into sidings or another line, just like any
>other train. It is a lot easier task then an autonomous vehicle on the
>road.
>
If you have people there to lift it then (unless it is fairly small)
you might as well have someone on board to press the big red stop
button if needed.

On 20/02/2022 01:25, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
> It doesn't appear to be about fully unstaffed rail vehicles for checking
> that the line is clear after a storm.

It shows that unmanned equipment can monitor the track. If they can
design a freight train than can operate unmanned then a small rail
vehicle should be no problem.

A lot of effort seem to be being put into using UAVs but I cannot see
them being of much use in severe weather conditions which is when there
is a need for track inspection.

On 19/02/2022 22:44, Certes wrote:
> On 19/02/2022 21:43, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 19/02/2022 21:19, MB wrote:
>>> On 19/02/2022 16:08, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>> Another exaggeration. The pound is down, the economy is down,[1] chunks
>>>> of the City have legged it, as you put it, but carry on denying it.
>>>
>>> And companies have moved to the UK from Europe but the Remoaner rags
>>> never report things like that.
>>
>> Name one.
>
> Shell is in the process of moving here.

Because of non Brexit-related reasons. Can't be the one Martin i
thinking of because the Guardian et al did report it.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 20/02/2022 07:10, Charles Ellson wrote:
> If you have people there to lift it then (unless it is fairly small)
> you might as well have someone on board to press the big red stop
> button if needed.

Why do you need someone to lift it? It could drive into a building and
be stored there. It could have a special trailer that it could be
driven onto and transported to a different location - especially useful
if a section of track is unusable.

On 20/02/2022 01:03, Nobody wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 13:06:08 +0000, Graeme Wall
> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 19/02/2022 12:24, Recliner wrote:
>
>>> My first visit to Brazil was in 1989, and I didn't need a visa.
>>>
>>
>> I doubt whether the BA ground staff in Rio knew who on the flight would
>> need visas and who didn't.
>>
>> Also there is a funny about Visas for Brazil, or used to be, arriving at
>> Rio or Sao Paolo as a tourist and you don't need one. My first visit, in
>> 1992, was overland from Argentina (Iguacu) and I needed one.
>
> That even applied apparently to furriners (such as Canadians) visiting
> the falls from the Argentine side, but simply wishing to do a quick
> 'opposite view' entry/return.

I was one of those furriners, though not a Canuck. It was for the quick
look from the other side, which has the better view of the horseshoe
section of the falls.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message <surke3$p83$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:37:23 on Sat, 19 Feb
2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 19/02/2022 20:01, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <surh63$mih$2@dont-email.me>, at 19:41:55 on Sat, 19 Feb
>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>>>> We'll need visas for the EU soon so diversions to the EU will
>>>>>become a problem.
>>
>>>>  The EU system to be introduced is a visa-waiver system similar to
>>>>the ESTA  system for the USA, not a requirement for visas.
>>>
>>> In practical terms for the non-technical holiday-maker heading for
>>>sun, sex and sangria in Ibiza the difference is over their heads.
>>>It's another additional piece of red tape that Brexit was supposed
>>>to eliminate.

>> That of course was one of the classic lies from the Leave campaign.
>>While there might have been a prospect of cutting UK red tape so
>>companies could more easily exploit their domestic employees and
>>customers, there never a single shred of a possibility that becoming a
>>Third Country would cut any of the earlier almost invisible red tape
>>involved in interactions with the EU. It was bound to increase it.
>
>The whole reason for the single market and customs union was to
>eliminate all that red tape. Something that even some dedicated
>Brexiteers understood, at least at the beginning.

Not all red-tape was eliminated, there were some areas where it
persisted (entry to Schengen for example) and also perhaps the sort of
red tape some Brexiteers wanted to eliminate - having to notify data
breaches throughout the EU.

The problem with that ambition was: in the UK the ICO would do that for
you; nowadays if you are still trading with the EU, you have to do it
yourself, or find an agency to propagate it to all r27.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ut921hlsl7upd2gnvhlbe2g5ib16j94ps7@4ax.com>, at 20:16:58 on
Sat, 19 Feb 2022, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 14:20:29 +0000, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>My first digital camera, purchased in the summer of 2000, had a card
>>slot, but the biggest card I could afford at the
>>time was only 48MB. Images were about 600kB, so that card could hold
>>about 80 images. Of course, if you were wealthy
>>enough to afford more than one card, then you could shoot an unlimited
>>number of pictures on a trip.
>>
>>This is one of the first images I took, which is surprisingly topical today:
>><https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/49424447721>
>
>This is the second photo I took with my first digital camera:
>
>https://markgoodge.com/misc/DSCF0002.JPG

Ah yes, the mysterious Quayside (numbered as a continuation of
Waterside, and annotated as "Ship Lane" on lots of mapping).

>(The first was an unusable photo of the inside of my flat that shows
>nothing, because I'd got the settings wrong!)

The first photo for most of my cameras is usually the inside of my
office. (Just like back in the day the first mobile phone call most
people made was to their home number - quite handy for the police to
work out who 'burner phones' belonged to!)

>It's interesting, looking back at those early photos, how I typically
>treated the camera as if it was a film camera, taking shots sparingly.
>Because, of course, the memory wasn't that much better than a roll of
>film! It wasn't until much later that I had a camera with enough memory
>to be able to take multiple shots of every subject and then weed them
>out later to select the good ones.

I think the main advantage was the ability to delete bad shots
immediately, and also avoid having to buy rolls of film and wait
for them to be processed.
--
Roland Perry

In message <surmtn$4tv$4@dont-email.me>, at 21:19:51 on Sat, 19 Feb
2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 19/02/2022 16:08, Graeme Wall wrote:

>> Another exaggeration. The pound is down, the economy is down,[1] chunks
>> of the City have legged it, as you put it, but carry on denying it.
>
>And companies have moved to the UK from Europe but the Remoaner rags
>never report things like that.

Many companies "moving to the UK" are in fact supply-chain dependent,
and were forced to open new distribution centres here because they could
no longer guarantee next-day deliveries from across the channel.

While that creates a handful of jobs here, it also puts up prices.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ujGe+rqY9NEiFAVv@perry.uk>, at 12:15:20 on Sat, 19 Feb 2022,
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>In message <suqjvf$v70$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:23:27 on Sat, 19 Feb
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> ObRail2: But we did get to spend most of the next day visiting the
>>> Acropolis, which surprisingly had a short stretch of railway
>>> track at the top. I can't find my photo, but here's someone
>>> else's: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/andyhay/28360608514>
>>
>>Here's one of mine, with the Parthenon terminus in shot:
>><https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/47641974052/in/album-72157691093
>>123863/>
>>
>>The other end, to the crane:
>><https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/47642181062/in/album-72157691093
>>123863/lightbox/>
>
>Found it. Almost 20yrs ago and with my first digital camera.

I don't know why I said that. First *professional quality* (better than
640*480) digital camera perhaps.

Have now dug out lots of other shots from 1997 onwards (some in
resolutions like 320x240). Starting perhaps with digital movie cameras
that had a "still photo" mode, in essence just one frame grab.

A big batch when I visited the W&C 100th anniversary open day in August
1998. And a Thomas themed event perhaps on the Watercress Line.

> <http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Acropolis-railway.jpg>
>
>One had to be careful, only enough memory for about 30 photos, after
>which you had to download them by a cable to a PC. Not ideal while
>travelling, although of course I did have a laptop with me.

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <surmtn$4tv$4@dont-email.me>, at 21:19:51 on Sat, 19 Feb
> 2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>> On 19/02/2022 16:08, Graeme Wall wrote:
>
>>> Another exaggeration. The pound is down, the economy is down,[1] chunks
>>> of the City have legged it, as you put it, but carry on denying it.
>>
>> And companies have moved to the UK from Europe but the Remoaner rags
>> never report things like that.
>
> Many companies "moving to the UK" are in fact supply-chain dependent,
> and were forced to open new distribution centres here because they could
> no longer guarantee next-day deliveries from across the channel.
>
> While that creates a handful of jobs here, it also puts up prices.

And it's also worked in the other direction: UK companies have had to set
up distribution or assembly operations on the Continent, as it's now too
inefficient to supply EU customers directly from the UK.

On 20/02/2022 09:51, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <surmtn$4tv$4@dont-email.me>, at 21:19:51 on Sat, 19 Feb
> 2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>> On 19/02/2022 16:08, Graeme Wall wrote:
>
>>> Another exaggeration. The pound is down, the economy is down,[1] chunks
>>> of the City have legged it, as you put it, but carry on denying it.
>>
>> And companies have moved to the UK from Europe but the Remoaner rags
>> never report things like that.
>
> Many companies "moving to the UK" are in fact supply-chain dependent,
> and were forced to open new distribution centres here because they could
> no longer guarantee next-day deliveries from across the channel.
>
> While that creates a handful of jobs here, it also puts up prices.

Similarly numbers of UK based businesses have had to open distribution
centres in the EU. So leads to a net-zero sum when claiming benefits of
Brexit.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 20/02/2022 01:25, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>> It doesn't appear to be about fully unstaffed rail vehicles for checking
>> that the line is clear after a storm.
>
> It shows that unmanned equipment can monitor the track.

It's monitoring the track for gauge, top, line, twist faults etc, and
presence of the rail->sleeper track fixings. It's not checking for trees on
the line ahead.

> If they can
> design a freight train than can operate unmanned then a small rail
> vehicle should be no problem.
>

By unmanned freight train I presume you mean the Australian operation?
Totally unstaffed trains of any type usually require lots of track- and
trackside- equipment fitted to the line as well as equipment on the
vehicles.

> A lot of effort seem to be being put into using UAVs but I cannot see
> them being of much use in severe weather conditions which is when there
> is a need for track inspection.
>

What happens when the autonomous rail vehicle discovers an obstruction?
Surely you'd be better off sending a rail, or road-rail, vehicle with a
number of crew on board and some tools, who can then attempt to clear the
line?

NR Scotland use a helicopter to locate obstructions on the line after
storms.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On 20/02/2022 09:50, Roland Perry wrote:
> I think the main advantage was the ability to delete bad shots
> immediately, and also avoid having to buy rolls of film and wait
> for them to be processed.

If only they did delete the bad shots!

Though I have some early ones of mine that are perhaps the only known
photographs of some places/things because they have gone so valuable
even if only poor quality. I just wish I had taken more at the time
which I would have if I had had a digital camera with lots of memory.

On 20/02/2022 11:15, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
> What happens when the autonomous rail vehicle discovers an obstruction?
> Surely you'd be better off sending a rail, or road-rail, vehicle with a
> number of crew on board and some tools, who can then attempt to clear the
> line?
>
> NR Scotland use a helicopter to locate obstructions on the line after
> storms.

Easy to add cameras, LIDAR etc to see and identify obstructions as well
send the imagery back to somewhere.

LIDAR should tell you more than someone trying to look at night in a
storm with a torch.

Should be a lot cheaper to operate than a helicopter so a number could
be available rather than perhaps one helicopter grounded because of weather.