|
|
| Canarsie CBTC (96616) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 8 |
|
|
| (96616) | |
Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 08:25:04 2005 Today's Times has an article regarding the Canarsie Line's CBTC project.I'd say they are in phase 2.5, judging from the article. I hope the papers are published on the web. They should make interesting reading. Phase 1 - Enthusiasm Phase 2 - Disillusionment Phase 3 - Panic!!! Phase 4 - Search for the Guilty Phase 5 - Punishment of the Innocent Phase 6 - Praise & Honors for the Non-participants |
|
|
| (96617) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Jun 9 08:29:23 2005, in response to Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 08:25:04 2005. Heh, wait until Phase 7 - lawyers stripping the clothes off the dead.Interesting article though; thanks for posting it. your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (96628) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 08:55:43 2005, in response to Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 08:25:04 2005. While you are busy poking fun at the TA (from your safe kibbitzing chair, without any involvement or responsibility yourself), you missed the point of the article. The TA and Siemens are sharing the perils and pitfalls of this new project with the rest of the world (or whoever wants to attend the conference). Why bother presenting a paper at all? They could have kept all this to themselves and forced interested parties to dig for information, use FOIA, etc. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (96630) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 09:08:36 2005, in response to Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 08:25:04 2005. Ericcson linkhttp://www.ericsson.com/support/telecom/part-a/a-2-9.shtml Tha above is a link to the OSI data communication model. Stephen, this model explains the implications of trying to connect two systems together which cannot directly communicate. How does Siemens' TA implementation differ from Siemmens' Paris Metro implementation in this regard? I'm not ta;lking about whether you can swap equipment with other vendors or rail systems - I'm talking about what happens in the installed system itself - how does Siemen's RF scheme for the TA differ from the Siemens Paris Metro scheme and why? Since you brought it up I'd like you to explain it. |
|
|
| (96632) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Jun 9 09:09:18 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Fred G on Thu Jun 9 08:29:23 2005. An olde engineering tome ... NICELY adapted though! We get to ENTIRELY skip "What the customer WANTED" and the LAST tire in the tree. :) |
|
|
| (96633) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Jun 9 09:10:23 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 08:55:43 2005. Who wants to DIE on "NEXT TRAIN --->" ??? :) |
|
|
| (96635) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Jun 9 09:18:10 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Jun 9 09:09:18 2005. LMAO, tanks for da mammaries!your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (96641) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 10:01:29 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 08:55:43 2005. The TA and Siemens are sharing the perils and pitfalls of this new project with the rest of the world (or whoever wants to attend the conference).You have progressed directly to Phase 6 - Praise & Honors for the Non-participants. The major perils and pitfalls were those Siemens and the TA chose to take. They already had a working RF system that had been field tested. They chose to substitue a different one that did not exist. Why bother presenting a paper at all? Phase 5 - Punishment of the Innocent - some people are subtly sending out their resumes. |
|
|
| (96646) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 10:05:45 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 10:01:29 2005. OK, Stephen. Itf it's easier for you to spin fantasies instead of discussing a topic intelligently, I guess we can skip this... |
|
|
| (96681) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Brother Pielet on Thu Jun 9 11:33:58 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 10:05:45 2005. Ron thats exactly what you do here. Since when did I state a child was crossing between cars without adult supervision in that other post? Thats what YOU said. You pick a sentence in a paragraph, make it the headline then tell us how WE are wrong and you are right like a 5 year old. Where did you say you live in, Kansas? |
|
|
| (96686) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 11:52:08 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Brother Pielet on Thu Jun 9 11:33:58 2005. Did you notice which thread you're in? Do you remember your name?Since you seem lost even with a map in front of you I thought I'd check to see if you were oriented at all. If not, maybe Brother Thienpont could bring his ambulance around to help you. Is Brother Thienpont ringing your bell instead that big one outside the monastery ? 8-) I really have to bring that up with him. |
|
|
| (96703) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Thu Jun 9 12:51:21 2005, in response to Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 08:25:04 2005. "Resignaling a line under revenue service is no bed of roses," Mr. Mura said, using a term for trains that are carrying passengers. He said that only a few other cities, including Hong Kong, had tried to replace a signaling system on an active line.That's BS, the Philly MSL was resignaled while the line was in service and there were few if any disruptions. The problem is this stupid CBTC thing. They should have just moved to a cab signal system like just about every other transit system uses. It involves less hardware that can fail, provides just as much capability for ATO and is a proven technolocy that's been in use since the BART and the DC Metro. |
|
|
| (96704) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 13:00:15 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Jersey Mike on Thu Jun 9 12:51:21 2005. You're right in that CBTC is newer (esp the RF) and more difficult to install."that's been in use since the BART and the DC Metro." BART uses CBTC, just not the RF variety. |
|
|
| (96752) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 15:55:29 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Jersey Mike on Thu Jun 9 12:51:21 2005. Resignaling a line under revenue service is no bed of roses,Phase 4 - Search for the Guilty They should have just moved to a cab signal system like just about every other transit system uses. As mentioned in a previous thread, they wanted to substantially reduce the maintenance costs associated with wayside equipment. This goes for standard track circuits as well as inductive loop. |
|
|
| (96770) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Thu Jun 9 16:37:00 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 15:55:29 2005. But the CTBC will have far MORE "maintainables" than either of the previous systems. Moreover, they need to maintain track circuts in some capacity for broken rail and debris detection. |
|
|
| (96829) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by tracksionmotor on Thu Jun 9 20:07:52 2005, in response to Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 08:25:04 2005. One major problem yet to be addressed is detection and systemrecognition of BROKEN RAILS. CI peter |
|
|
| (96830) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by tracksionmotor on Thu Jun 9 20:12:14 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 09:08:36 2005. RailwayAge.com |
|
|
| (96833) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by tracksionmotor on Thu Jun 9 20:18:21 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 13:00:15 2005. Jeff H. pointed out to me that RF is cheaper...I knew that!Problem partially resolved is odometer tracking...braked wheels are a poor source of information other than anti-lock braking and traction control ('slip and slide.') TA will have to accept a proprietary control system to advance CBTC AND use a different frequency for every interoperable trainset beyond L and 7. CI peter. |
|
|
| (96835) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by tracksionmotor on Thu Jun 9 20:29:15 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 15:55:29 2005. ATO/ATC/ATS requires an inductive loop installation. Think of this...RealRoad covers long distances and does not require extensive comm points...just a few milemarkers, stations, interlocking and switch points. NYCTA subways will be on the order of say every 200 feet. So, you can mount a batch of RF transponders with concrete screws and use the twisted pair for a LAN. System will detect and comm trainsets but totally oblivious to hazards like broken rails... something BART and GE discovered. 'Monkey Brain' will just drive through and derail. CI peter |
|
|
| (96869) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 21:45:28 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by tracksionmotor on Thu Jun 9 20:07:52 2005. One major problem yet to be addressed is detection and systemrecognition of BROKEN RAILS. Among the problems that CBTC does not address are broken rails, interlockings and foreign equipment (non-CBTC equipped) on the line. The solution is an auxillary wayside system. This system need only handle 4 tph (15 minute headways). This translates to 4 or 5 blocks for the entire Canarsie Line. |
|
|
| (96873) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 22:07:43 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by tracksionmotor on Thu Jun 9 20:29:15 2005. I'm not following you.ATO/ATC/ATS requires an inductive loop installation. ATO/ATC/ATS requires some form of communications to the moving train at all times and places. This has taken the form of coded track circuits, inductive loop, leaky transmission lines and direct RF. The pardigm can be either CBTC or a conventional block system. RealRoad covers long distances and does not require extensive comm points...just a few milemarkers, stations, interlocking and switch points. NYCTA subways will be on the order of say every 200 feet. You cannot have dead spots in a CBTC system. For direct RF, you need to place as many access points as are required for reliable communications. This is based on RF propagation not whether it's a class I RR or the NYCT. System will detect and comm trainsets but not trainsets with faulty RF equipment. |
|
|
| (96903) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Thu Jun 9 22:57:33 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by tracksionmotor on Thu Jun 9 20:29:15 2005. System will detect and comm trainsets but totally oblivious to hazards like broken rails... something BART and GE discovered.BART is CBTC? BART WILL BE CBTC [RF] when their 3rd generation stuff is in. They are being smart and buying MOTS (Millitary Off-The-Shelf) -no painful re-development of the wheel. They paid a severe price for re-designing the track circuit in the '70s. Can you say "Block Operators?" |
|
|
| (96909) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 23:04:22 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by H.S.Relay on Thu Jun 9 22:57:33 2005. They are being smart and buying MOTS (Millitary Off-The-Shelf) -no painful re-development of the wheel.They could have saved a lot more money and development time/costs by using wi-fi. |
|
|
| (96914) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Thu Jun 9 23:09:27 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Jersey Mike on Thu Jun 9 12:51:21 2005. I'm glad you picked that out, It irks me... (I guess I enjoy being pissed off)He said that only a few other cities, including Hong Kong, had tried to replace a signaling system on an active line. NYCT has been resignalling under traffic for 85 years now. Local tracks' signalling had to be installed in the 1920's by order of the city after a series of rear end accidents. Today enhancements to the existing signal system are cut in weekly with no service diversions. Even with the luxury of express tracks you can't have a system that runs 24/7 and not develop a way to cut in under traffic. Does the NY Times think that U.S. mainline railroads - already strapped for capacity - could possibly afford to shut down tracks to install the signal upgrades they are currently installing? -I digress. |
|
|
| (96939) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by tracksionmotor on Fri Jun 10 00:17:12 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by H.S.Relay on Thu Jun 9 22:57:33 2005. Can you say 'track is broken and train will derail?' 'Three Cities CBTC' in RailwayAge magazine. I have NO objection to inductive link comm... BART is CBTC non-rf according to the article I read. Can you say 24/7 block operators of Moskow subway? The BART system is supposedly under full automation and trainset ran block crashing several years ago.I don't want CBTC to be Part 15 radio. IF it is to be radio, it must be licensed on a specific interference free frequency. IF a T/O comms CBTC on a frequency I am assigned to use, by Federal LAW the T/O must first determine IF the frequency is active and then ask for my permission for use. I can refuse as a licensee. If the T/O engages comm, he and the system is subject to interference as a secondary user. Explaining further, your 2.4 gHz wireless color cam transmits pics 24/7 and trainset goes by while your neighbor makes adjstments to balance load in her brassiere and signal wipes out CBTC....who is to blame? You for being a 'peeping Tom,' manufacturer of camera or CBTC provider. Even a wireless phone could potentially affect CBTC. CI peter |
|
|
| (96954) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 01:01:23 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by H.S.Relay on Thu Jun 9 22:57:33 2005. "BART WILL BE CBTC [RF] when their 3rd generation stuff is in."BART is currently CBTC. They don't use the RF variety. You imply that CBTC is only RF, which is false. |
|
|
| (96979) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Fri Jun 10 03:59:41 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 21:45:28 2005. There are other ways of doing broken rail protection without trackcircuits. As for the AWS, I'd debate that it "need only handle 4 tph". That may be the spec, but realistically it's a can of worms. Especially on a line like 14 St/Canarsie, where there are very few places to stash a bad order train. What happens when the carborne CBTC equipment craps out (don't tell me that will never happen!)? You'll have to go OOS and move that train as if it were foreign equipment, over a considerable portion of the railroad. If that happens during the rush hour you're screwed...you might do better turning the whole signal system off and going to manual block :) |
|
|
| (96980) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Fri Jun 10 04:03:48 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by tracksionmotor on Fri Jun 10 00:17:12 2005. Whoa, Pete, now we know what you do with _your_ spare timeand the ISM band :) |
|
|
| (96983) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Fri Jun 10 04:05:48 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 9 23:04:22 2005. You're kidding, right? You'd advocate using a garbage consumer-gradetechnology like "Wi-Fi" (802.11) for a life safety vital system? |
|
|
| (96985) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 06:51:41 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Jeff H. on Fri Jun 10 03:59:41 2005. Which is why the AWS philosophy is changing a little for Flushing. |
|
|
| (96986) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 06:53:41 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Jeff H. on Fri Jun 10 04:05:48 2005. It's like Shannon with the relays, put four bluetooth WiFi's in series-parallel, and viola! Vital system! |
|
|
| (96987) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 06:55:23 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 01:01:23 2005. Under the current system, how does the train communicate to the wayside? |
|
|
| (96989) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 10 07:18:45 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Jeff H. on Fri Jun 10 03:59:41 2005. As for the AWS, I'd debate that it "need only handle 4 tph". That may be the spec, but realistically it's a can of worms. Especially on a line like 14 St/Canarsie, where there are very few places to stash a bad order train...I think two factors dictated the AWS spec. The first factor was the line's topology itself. They simply broke the line into 4 or 5 absolute blocks, based on where the switches were. Given that a trip from 8th Ave to Canarsie takes a little less than 40 minutes and assuming that these blocks are more or less of equal length, then 10 minute headways could be maintained. The second factor was the spec that CBTC could be turned off for maintenance at night without disrupting service. Night time service levels are 3 tph, so this gives them the option to provide slightly more service. . What happens when the carborne CBTC equipment craps out (don't tell me that will never happen!)? You'll have to go OOS and move that train as if it were foreign equipment, over a considerable portion of the railroad. That's one of the reasons they have two sets of operating equipment per train. Yes, it will crap out. Yes, it will be a disaster in rush hour. However, current systems using track circuits and vital relays also crap out during rush hour with equally disaterous results. The alternative would be to make the AWS fully capable of 40 tph operation. That would make CBTC double the cost of a conventional track circuit based system and subject it to that system's maintenance cost. If CBTC is to be successful from an economic standpoint, it will not be able to rely on an AWS backup. |
|
|
| (96995) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 10 07:40:31 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Jeff H. on Fri Jun 10 04:05:48 2005. You're kidding, right? You'd advocate using a garbage consumer-grade technology like "Wi-Fi" (802.11) for a life safety vital system?I am serious and so are CBTC vendors Alcatel (Seltrak) and Wabtec. The Las Vegas system uses wi-fi, even if it cannot make its operating cost. It is being intalled in Hong Kong and Paris. I posted this link a while back, outlining wi-fi's use in RF-CBTC. I guess you missed it, based on your surprise comment. I suppose wide-fi would be a reasonable choice for mainline railroads, once it matures in the harsh consumer applications environment. |
|
|
| (96996) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 10 07:46:48 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 06:53:41 2005. It's like Shannon with the relays, put four bluetooth WiFi's in series-parallel, and viola! Vital system!Not necessary. IP already has error detection/retransmission built in. I assume they are using TCP so loss of "connection" is noted at both ends. They could use UDP and accomplish the same result at the application level. But why bother, when it is already free. |
|
|
| (97082) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Alex L. on Fri Jun 10 14:38:23 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 08:55:43 2005. 8:30 - 10 a.m.Communications Based Train Control (CBTC) LeBateau Room, Ballroom Level For CBTC systems, innovation is compared with tradition and reliability in assessing next-generation technologies. In renovation, transit systems face a number of challenges. Experience the risks, pitfalls, and benefits with presenters who will discuss operational flexibility, safety in signaling and train control, maintenance, and the lifecycle costs of dedicated automated solutions. Moderator: Gary K. Pruitt, director, advanced transportation programs, ARINC, Annapolis, MD Trainguard MT CBTC: The Solution for Resignalling Lines in Revenue Service * Jean-Pol Mura, export sales director, Siemens Transportation Systems, Montrouge Cedex, France Lessons Learned from New York City Transit's Canarsie Pilot CBTC Project-Putting Them into Effect On the Flushing Line * Edwin A. Mortlock, principal systems engineer, advanced technology signals, Parsons Corporation, New York, NY Communications Based (Positive) Train Control-Consistent Safety Assessment for Diverse Technical Approaches * Kenneth K. Jackson, senior research scientist, Battelle Memorial Institute, West Henrietta, NY One of three papers in a 90 minute session, shared with "The Industry". I'm sure a whole of info was released. |
|
|
| (97119) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 15:31:35 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Alex L. on Fri Jun 10 14:38:23 2005. What date was this?Thank you for posting. That was very thoughtful of you. |
|
|
| (97160) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Alex L. on Fri Jun 10 17:03:46 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 15:31:35 2005. June 5 - 8, 2005 Pittsburgh PAUpcoming APTA conferences Next year's APTA Rail Transit Conference will be June 11 - 14 at the Hilton here in NYC. The 2006 International Rail Rodeo will be June 8 - 12, most likely in Coney Island Yard (that's two days of school car, the competition on Saturday and the winners announced on Monday). |
|
|
| (97170) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Fri Jun 10 17:10:35 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Brother Pielet on Thu Jun 9 11:33:58 2005. Kansas must have madder helium than the air in Bayside. |
|
|
| (97176) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 17:21:00 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 10 07:18:45 2005. However, current systems using track circuits and vital relays also crap out during rush hour with equally disaterous results.True enough. And one track circuit or one red signal can create a conga line real fast, but it is a failure at one location. A NB CBTC train failing at DeKalb Ave will be forced to operate at 10mph until it sees a green Approach signal at Bedford Ave interlocking - 7 stations. In rush hour this is going to cause a much more widespread delay that a conventional signal failure in a single location. ATS-CBTC will spread the stranded followers out one-per-platform, but that's the only advantage. Today the ATD would stretch the departures out of 14/8 using common sense and experience, and without spending a bZillion dollars. -But we're not talking about ATS. |
|
|
| (97179) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 17:23:35 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 10 07:46:48 2005. joken. Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line. A mischievous trick; a prank. An amusing or ludicrous incident or situation. Informal. Something not to be taken seriously; a triviality: The accident was no joke. An object of amusement or laughter; a laughingstock: His loud tie was the joke of the office. |
|
|
| (97185) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 17:33:04 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 9 08:55:43 2005. Dude, both parties may be teaming up to share SOME information, BUT Siemens is holding enough cards close to ensure no real competetion on further bids. Its a magnificent business plan, when you come down to it. Alstom saw that, and they backed out of their "follower" role.And Siemens is not sharing the COST of this R&D either, the riders are paying for it - at the turnstile, and paying in time wasted on CBTC testing GO's where no testing happens. |
|
|
| (97189) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 17:35:49 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by South Ferry on Fri Jun 10 17:10:35 2005. I've been to North Dakota (stopped off briefly on a train). I could swear I was getting dizzy breathing that cold, thin, northern air. I could send some O2 masks to the monastery...:0) |
|
|
| (97193) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 17:37:52 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 17:33:04 2005. Time is not "wasted" on testing. If that were true you'd never have anything new introduced on the subway - might as well stick with horses and steam engines. |
|
|
| (97197) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Fri Jun 10 17:39:26 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 17:37:52 2005. Time is wasted on testing when the testing that is supposed to occur does not occur. |
|
|
| (97204) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 17:46:36 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Fri Jun 10 17:39:26 2005. That can happen with any project. You try to minimize that, but it will sometimes happen. |
|
|
| (97226) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 18:26:05 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 17:37:52 2005. No, you're hearing me wrong. The recent string of daytime diversions were a pain for riders that seemingly would never end. The TA did the right thing by allowing copious time to test the system, but Siemens wasted the time - for example by having the design engineers remain in Paris. |
|
|
| (97229) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 18:28:54 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Fri Jun 10 17:39:26 2005. Exactly. That happened a lot. And when "testing" did happen, it happened consistently late, and it was like visiting a restaraunt with only one seating per evening - no hurry! |
|
|
| (97237) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Jun 10 18:56:31 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by H.S.Relay on Fri Jun 10 18:26:05 2005. Thank you. If Siemens did not assign an on-site team appropriately, then you're right - and Siemens should be penalized for that. |
|
|
| (97364) | |
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Sat Jun 11 01:27:16 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 10 07:18:45 2005. That's one of the reasons they have two sets of operating equipment per train. Yes, it will crap out. Yes,it will be a disaster in rush hour. However, current systems using track circuits and vital relays also crap out during rush hour with equally disaterous results. The more recent design philosophy of centralzing everything leads to a higher likelihood of catastrophic failure. The philopsophy of distributed, localized control points tends to isolate the failures to specific places on the railroad. You can get a handful of supervisors down on the roadbed to deal with it and have your rush hour back. Well, you used to be able to do that. Now everyone is afraid to make a decision and get service moving. There are some pretty heavy failure modes in CBTC. What happens when a zone controller crashes, for example. Much of the operating cost savings of CBTC amounts to transferring operating budget to capital budget, which, guess what, eventually comes back into the operating budget as debt service! I'm sure TA CBTC will eventually work, but right now first base (being able to reliably measure train speed and position) is still 90 feet away. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 8 |
|
