Re: Latest updates: R-179 order saga, R-160 CBTC for (L) line & special reports ... (1135149) | |||
![]() |
|||
Home > SubChat | |||
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
![]() |
Re: Latest updates: R-179 order saga, R-160 CBTC for (L) line & special reports ... |
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu Jan 26 23:06:17 2012, in response to Re: Latest updates: R-179 order saga, R-160 CBTC for (L) line & special reports ..., posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 26 16:58:39 2012. That is not the definition of CBTCWikipedia quotes the IEEE's definition of CBTC as a “continuous, automatic train control system utilizing high-resolution train location determination, independent of track circuits; continuous, high-capacity, bidirectional train-to-wayside data communications; and trainborne and wayside processors capable of implementing Automatic Train Protection (ATP) functions, as well as optional Automatic Train Operation (ATO) and Automatic Train Supervision (ATS) functions.” CBTC essentially means that the train is communicating with the network, the network reads that, and then sends the appropriate governance to the train. As the quote above states, CBTC does not mean that the trains will be ATO. In fact, NYCT originally looked at operating CBTC with the R42s, originally operated Canarsie manually, and may outfit R68s with non-ATO capable CBTC equipment in the future. ATO and CBTC are two different things. If the system is still getting the information it uses to govern train movements from track circuits (fixed blocks), then it's not CBTC. You can have ATO without CBTC, and you can have CBTC without ATO. the CBTC used in Paris and other places are induction loop based but they are definitely Communication Based Train Control. True, CBTC can be used with systems other than RF transmission. But the train has to be communicating its speed and location to the system through the same medium it is receiving its governing indications. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |