CBTC failure -- Is this the future?

CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (1602372)	Home · Maps · About

Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

(1602372)	view threaded
CBTC failure -- Is this the future?
Posted by gbs on Wed May 18 22:30:21 2022 This evening, around 7:35, there was a "signal malfunction at 111 St", and all #7 service was suspended in both directions from Junction Blvd to Main St. Is this the future with CBTC? No service at all when there's a malfunction? With ordinary signals, even a stuck signal with a raised trip-arm can be circumvented and keyed by under proper supervision. Is there no override with CBTC? No way to operate on manual? If that is the case, who sold that idea to the TA as a viable system with no way to operate when there's some outage? Our local entered Junction Blvd normally, and then sat there "held by supervision". Then an express entered normally and many of us changed from the local to the express. Both trains then sat there. Eventually our conductor advised those going to Citifield to exit the subway and walk to 108 to take the Q48. Then the train operator announced that Junction Blvd would be the last stop on the express, so we all got off and got back on the local, which continued to sit there. Eventually the express left with passengers Manhattan-bound (next stop 74 St). Meanwhile the stupid automatic announcement system continued to say that there was a Main St bound express train 4 minutes away. Some time later our local closed down and crept to 103 St and then to 111 St. After waiting there several minutes, the conductor announced that there was no service going into Main St and told us to take the Q48 downstairs. As of 10:00 the MTA website is saying that there are still extensive delays because of the signal malfunction at 111 St. There's got to be a way to provide some kind of service even when there's some kind of outage. Completely suspending service cannot be an option.
Post a New Response

(1602377)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?
Posted by Stephen Bauman* on Wed May 18 23:37:14 2022, in response to CBTC failure -- Is this the future?, posted by gbs on Wed May 18 22:30:21 2022.* CBTC's failure mode is to rely on its Auxiliary Wayside System (AWS). This is a standard block system that's used for both interlockings and track breaks. Its capacity depends on how it was designed. The MTA's AWS can handle 3 tph. It's used when non-CBTC equipment is detected, such as work equipment is used at night. The MTA went cheap on its CBTC implementation. They could have used an AWS that could handle higher service levels. That would have increased CBTC's initial and maintenance costs. Also, track workers are supposed to carry beacons that would alert the CBTC of people on the track. The MTA chose not to purchase these. Work crews must call command and command will then place track sections on slow.
Post a New Response

(1602389)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by R46 5636* on Thu May 19 08:08:52 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed May 18 23:37:14 2022.* So, the running joke becomes true after all. What CBTC truly stands for: CBTC = Catch Bus to Canarsie CBTC = Catch Bus to Corona And now... CBTC = Catch Bus to Continental So there's the answer, very little investment was made into an override incase of signal failure. This was doomed from the start. Some thought they learned after taking most of the signals off the Canarsie line, although Transit never learns in some ways it seems. Better hope these systems are EMP proof or they'll be the first to stop working (immediately) if something like that were to happen. Nice to know they're investing millions into a signal system that is designed to fail in some ways.
Post a New Response

(Sponsored)

iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It

(1602436)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP* on Thu May 19 20:28:56 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by R46 5636 on Thu May 19 08:08:52 2022.* The first time that happens on the I Love Lucy line, Ricky will be moaning, "Aye-aye-aye."
Post a New Response

(1602461)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Allan* on Fri May 20 14:38:49 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu May 19 20:28:56 2022.* And they will have some 'splainin to do.
Post a New Response

(1602472)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP* on Fri May 20 19:45:06 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Allan on Fri May 20 14:38:49 2022.* Yep, that too.:)
Post a New Response

(1602473)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?
Posted by https://salaamallah.com/* on Fri May 20 19:47:09 2022, in response to CBTC failure -- Is this the future?, posted by gbs on Wed May 18 22:30:21 2022.* WHY WAS THIS CRAP INSTALLED IN THE FIRST PLACE
Post a New Response

(1602487)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by randyo* on Fri May 20 23:01:07 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by R46 5636 on Thu May 19 08:08:52 2022.* And with CBTC being installed on the Culver Line, Its "Catch Bus To Coney."
Post a New Response

(1602513)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?
Posted by Allan* on Sat May 21 14:55:19 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?, posted by https://salaamallah.com/ on Fri May 20 19:47:09 2022.* The intended result is to eventually do away with operating crews in the future. This crazy younger generation is so addicted to computers and computerization they couldn't make a move or decision w/o it.
Post a New Response

(1602549)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Train Dude* on Sun May 22 15:02:47 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by R46 5636 on Thu May 19 08:08:52 2022.* "Better hope these systems are EMP proof or they'll be the first to stop working (immediately) if something like that were to happen." I was not a fan of the first generation CBTC with it's optical sensors but the subsequent evolutions seem to be more reliable. I an intrigued, though about your EMP scenario. How would an EMP that would knock out the system, be generated?
Post a New Response

(1602551)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Jackson Park B Train* on Sun May 22 15:08:24 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Train Dude on Sun May 22 15:02:47 2022.* catastrophic failure at a nuclear generating station leading to a fission detonation.
Post a New Response

(1602552)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Train Dude on Sun May 22 15:16:45 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun May 22 15:08:24 2022. Yes, of course, a nuclear detonation and of course, inoperable subway signals would be our 2nd biggest problem.
Post a New Response

(1602554)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Stephen Bauman* on Sun May 22 15:55:29 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Train Dude on Sun May 22 15:02:47 2022.* How would an EMP that would knock out the system, be generated? There are EMP test generators that are used by circuit designers to test their equipment against EMP's. The test generator EMP is in a much more concentrated area than a high altitude fission bomb blast. There's also the ESD problem. Spark generators are much easier to build and hide. Of course, NYCT does a pretty good job of making CBTC fail without recourse to outside malevolent forces.
Post a New Response

(1602556)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Train Dude* on Sun May 22 16:04:18 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun May 22 15:55:29 2022.* Well, just for shit and giggles let's suppose that the newer CBTC installations are hardened against an EMP. So we'd have operational signals - except that the entire con Ed grid is not hardened against EMPs. Oh well at least if there was signal voltage, the signals would work. Perhaps we should ask Dr. Fowchee about this too.
Post a New Response

(1602557)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Train Dude* on Sun May 22 16:04:18 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun May 22 15:55:29 2022.* Well, just for shit and giggles let's suppose that the newer CBTC installations are hardened against an EMP. So we'd have operational signals - except that the entire con Ed grid is not hardened against EMPs. Oh well at least if there was signal voltage, the signals would work. Perhaps we should ask Dr. Fowchee about this too.
Post a New Response

(1602579)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Stephen Bauman* on Sun May 22 22:10:23 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Train Dude on Sun May 22 16:04:18 2022.* let's suppose that the newer CBTC installations are hardened against an EMP. So we'd have operational signals - except that the entire con Ed grid is not hardened against EMPs Equipment that is designed for space travel is hardened against EMP and ESD failure. Con Ed's equipment is less sensitive to such failures because of its nature. Transformers are not subject to EMP failure. The grid is designed to disconnect, when instabilities are sensed. Consider NYCT's post Sandy hardening of the subway. They are designing and building to withstand a 24 foot storm surge. What do you think the rest of NYC would look like after such a surge?
Post a New Response

(1602582)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail)
Posted by Train Dude* on Sun May 22 23:55:19 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future? (Yes, designed to fail), posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun May 22 22:10:23 2022.* So what is your actual point? EMP hardened signal systems would be useless and an unnecessary extravagance.
Post a New Response

(1602670)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?
Posted by Jersey Mike* on Tue May 24 09:22:53 2022, in response to CBTC failure -- Is this the future?, posted by gbs on Wed May 18 22:30:21 2022.* If 111th master takes a dump there are going to be major delays CBTC or not.
Post a New Response

(1602671)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?
Posted by Jersey Mike* on Tue May 24 09:25:58 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed May 18 23:37:14 2022.* I believe the capacity is higher than 3tph. On the L you are looking at absolute block operation between interlockings which are located every couple of stations. No different than a general signal power failure, except less need to tie down trip stops.
Post a New Response

(1602682)	view threaded
Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?
Posted by Stephen Bauman* on Tue May 24 12:04:57 2022, in response to Re: CBTC failure -- Is this the future?, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue May 24 09:25:58 2022.* On the L you are looking at absolute block operation between interlockings which are located every couple of stations. I believe it's pretty much the same thing on the Flushing Line.
Post a New Response

[ Return to the Message Index ]