Fleet assignment paradox in mining: traditional vs modern solutions

View profile for David Kubota

Innovation and AI Development Manager

🚜⚡ The paradox of fleet assignment in mining Today, most mining sites still operate with traditional FMS systems (Modular, Hexagon, MineStar, Wenco). They are robust for truck dispatching and delay recording, but they continue to reduce operations to “queues and routes.” The problem is that mining operations are multivariable and dynamic: Shovel–truck interaction, micro-delays, blending, weather, road conditions, operator and equipment performance, among many others. Without that real understanding, analysis keeps arriving in post-mortem reports. Meanwhile, we keep adding safety layers: collision avoidance, fatigue, drowsiness systems. All of them critical, yes… but each sold as a separate module, at costs that far exceed mass-market technologies. Here’s the paradox: 👉 A Tesla or a BYD already comes from the factory with proximity control, automatic braking, driver fatigue monitoring, and assisted driving. 👉 In mining, each of these features is paid for as a separate system—more expensive and less integrated. Mining companies pursue productivity, yet at the same time avoid testing new decision layers that could actually model operations as a living system. In the end, it’s like fighting Goliath: David didn’t win by having a more expensive system, but by using a smarter and more efficient solution. The real question is: are we still just dispatching… or are we starting to understand the operation?

  • No alternative text description for this image

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories