daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 26th, 2012, 08:50 PM   #441
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,980
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
Actually that ETCS is "the most secure" is not a given. In Switzerland there has already been a minor accident caused by bugs in the ETCS software...
That can be fixed by fixing the software. ATB can only be fixed by replacing the system
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 27th, 2012, 04:34 PM   #442
sekelsenmat
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,139
Likes (Received): 50

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silly_Walks View Post
That can be fixed by fixing the software. ATB can only be fixed by replacing the system
It would be interresting if someone could further substantiate the claims that ETCS is so much superior.

I am not 100% familiar with the systems, I know only a little bit about the Brazilian system which has:

*ATC divides the entire track in segments which remain always the same ones and prevents 2 trains from being in the same segment at the same time.
*CBTC dynamically generates the segments, so that CBTC could make smaller distances between trains, so Sao Paulo Metro is migrating to CBTC to get smaller intervals.

But that don't make CBTC safer, from what I read the opposite, ATC is more stable. But then I don't know if the brazilian ATC is the same as this ATB. Also have no idea if CBTC is related to the european standard...
__________________
True Democracy for Android - A realistic political simulation game where you are the premier/president and guides your country competing against other political parties =)

My blog about trains, politics and urbanism.
sekelsenmat no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 06:15 PM   #443
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by sekelsenmat View Post
It would be interresting if someone could further substantiate the claims that ETCS is so much superior.
ETCS is part of a whole concept that intends to make it easier to run trains across national borders within Europe. At the moment each country has its own train protection system, it's own signalling system, it's own rulebooks etc...

ETCS communicates to the train not only a movement authority (like how fast it is allowed to go until what point) but also information about line geometry, like grades and curves. This is presented to the driver in a standardised format. In theory that means that in the future it will be possible for a single train driver to operate a train from for example Rotterdam to Basel without needing intimate knowledge of all the signals he might encounter. And that in all safety.

Furthermore ETCS can (but this is not a must) be implemented in a way that increase capacity too, but that is not unique to ETCS.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 06:32 PM   #444
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,539
Likes (Received): 21251

Automatische treinbe´nvloeding is not a complete ATC system. And - its weaker point - it doesn't deploy automatic brakes for trains going under 40km/h. It is a rather outdated system, unsafe an unable to be upgraded.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 06:39 PM   #445
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
Automatische treinbe´nvloeding is not a complete ATC system. And - its weaker point - it doesn't deploy automatic brakes for trains going under 40km/h.
That's not a bug. That's a feature. You have to realize that any train protection system must allow for efficient railway operation too. Trains are already incredible safe. Making operations more complex, and adding more opportunies for false positives that interrupt operations is a high cost to pay for maybe saving a life every other decade...
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 06:51 PM   #446
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
It is a rather outdated system, unsafe an unable to be upgraded.
BTW: These are the numbers for "passengers killed in train colisions" for the last coupld of years for several countries:
TIME 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Belgium 6 3 0 1 5 0 188
Bulgaria : : 0 0 0 1 0
Czech Rep 16 0 1 1 36 0 1
Denmark 2 1 0 0 0 0 0
Germany 10 9 17 3 21 4 3
Estonia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ireland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Greece 0 0 3 2 0 0 0
Spain 5 0 0 0 0 3 0
France 1 0 4 0 0 2 0
Italy 5 53 16 4 0 18 36
Latvia 0 8 0 0 0 0 0
Lithuania 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Luxem. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hungary 0 15 6 5 7 0 0
Netherl. 7 0 4 0 0 0 0
Austria 1 22 1 1 0 0 2
Poland 0 1 0 0 3 0 9
Portugal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Romania 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
Slovenia 0 0 0 0 4 0 0
Slovakia 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
Finland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sweden 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
UK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Norway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Switzerland : : : : 0 2 1
Croatia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Turkey 86 7 10 0 28 0 25

Notice something?

(BTW, I wonder what happened in Belgium in 2010...)
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 06:56 PM   #447
Federicoft
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 12,651
Likes (Received): 4380

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
(BTW, I wonder what happened in Belgium in 2010...)
This
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halle_train_collision

Btw those numbers don't seem correct, whatever the unit of measurement is.
Federicoft no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 07:06 PM   #448
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Federicoft View Post
This
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halle_train_collision

Btw those numbers don't seem correct, whatever the unit of measurement is.
Apart from the figure for Belgium for 2010 the figures do seem plausible. In many countries the number of passengers killed in train collisions is indeed 0 in most years.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 07:11 PM   #449
Federicoft
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 12,651
Likes (Received): 4380

Indeed, it's figures other than 0 that don't seem plausible.

Last edited by Federicoft; April 27th, 2012 at 07:18 PM.
Federicoft no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 08:00 PM   #450
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 35,260
Likes (Received): 63103

For the Netherlands the numbers are also not correct, if the list is about passengers killed in train collisions.

The last collision with passengers killed was in 1988 at Rilland when a passenger drove into the back of a freight train. 3 passengers lost their lives and 1 crew members. The last deadly accident was in 1992, when an IC derailed at Hoofddorp. 3 people lost their lives in that accident that was caused by the train was driving to fast at a spot that had just been repaired after the international train to Paris had derailed (without casualties) at the same spot 2 days before.

For all the years in the list the number is actually 0.

Although 2 freight train drivers passed away in 2003 and in 2009. Incidentally both drivers had suffered from hart failure just before their trains collided with a passenger train (2003) and a freight train (2009).

The 188 for Belgium looks very much like a typo since the actual number was 18. Although I can't find anything on such high numbers for Italy, it doesn't look like this list is correct at all.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 08:08 PM   #451
Federicoft
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 12,651
Likes (Received): 4380

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
The 188 for Belgium looks very much like a typo since the actual number was 18. Although I can't find anything on such high numbers for Italy, it doesn't look like this list is correct at all.
Italy had two serious accidents in 2010 (Latsch-Kastelbell, 9 casualties) and 2009 (Viareggio, 32 casualties). None of them was caused by train collision, though. In the first case it was a landslide and in the second a mechanical failure. And anyway those figures are still way off.
Federicoft no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 08:22 PM   #452
KingNick
Make Wu'bar Great Again
 
KingNick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,039
Likes (Received): 8718

Quote:
Originally Posted by Federicoft View Post
Indeed, it's figures other than 0 that don't seem plausible.
Suicides?
KingNick no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 08:34 PM   #453
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,539
Likes (Received): 21251

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
That's not a bug. That's a feature. You have to realize that any train protection system must allow for efficient railway operation too. Trains are already incredible safe. Making operations more complex, and adding more opportunies for false positives that interrupt operations is a high cost to pay for maybe saving a life every other decade...
I know it is a feature.

ETCS is quite cumbersome to install but reliable. It does provide more false positives BUT it allows dynamic spacing and, depending on the specific protocols, increased capacity.

Matter of fact is that many rail infrastructure companies and/or regulatory agencies are extremely anti-modernity in many countries. FRA leads that pack, but others follow the principle of "software is not reliable, electrical circuits are" mantra when it comes to positive train control systems.

But fixed blocks-based signaling is outdated anyways, by ignoring that actual safety depends not only on your tracks, but what is running over there.

Single, closed systems operating not so high frequencies can get away with that, but not a railway that carries many different train types.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2012, 09:22 PM   #454
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 35,260
Likes (Received): 63103

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingNick View Post
Suicides?
If suicides are counted the number should be much higher for all countries.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2012, 12:49 AM   #455
AlexNL
Registered User
 
AlexNL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,629
Likes (Received): 537

Perhaps the numbers indicate the amount of people that got hurt or killed when an accident occurs. For example, when that VIRM EMU got hit by a steel beam a couple of months ago, some people probably got hurt.
__________________
We are shaping the future
AlexNL no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2012, 01:32 AM   #456
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingNick View Post
Suicides?
Not included in those figures. And that I did on purpose. When we are discussing the impact of train protection systems on the safety of the public one should only consider those casualties that are caused by the kind of accidents that train protection systems are designed to prevent.
Suicides are a completely different issue, and ETCS will not make a difference there.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2012, 01:34 AM   #457
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
I know it is a feature.

ETCS is quite cumbersome to install but reliable. It does provide more false positives BUT it allows dynamic spacing and, depending on the specific protocols, increased capacity.
If by "dynamic spacing" you mean moving block than you only get that with level 3, which only exists on paper so far....

And don't forget that false positives will reduce the capacity of your railway, exactly the opposite of what you want to achieve.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2012, 11:06 PM   #458
Ale Sasso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Genoa
Posts: 199
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
(...) level 3, which only exists on paper so far....(...)
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/new...plication.html
Ale Sasso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2012, 12:35 AM   #459
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 35,260
Likes (Received): 63103

Quote:
Originally Posted by sekelsenmat View Post
It would be interresting if someone could further substantiate the claims that ETCS is so much superior.
1 big difference between the 2 systems hasn't been mentioned here. The ATB only has one way communication. The trackside system tells the train that is goes to fast or that it passed a red signal the moment it passes the signal. Then the train automatically stops, or slows down.

With the ETCS level 2 there's constant communication using GSM-R between the train and the trackside system. Therefor the ETCS knows exactly where the train is and how fast it goes and can therefor automatically stop a train before a red signal.

Where the ATB only acts when a mistake is already made the ETCS Level 2 can prevent mistakes.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2012, 12:42 PM   #460
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale Sasso View Post
Interesting:

"At present train integrity is supervised by the drivers, but an end-of-train detector is under development."

Which means that it's not really full ETCS level 3 yet as specified, and so not suitable for lines with a lot of traffic. So as a solution to increase capacity on busy lines it's not really there yet.

But I was not ware that it was also considered as a solution to save money on less used regional lines. They call it ERMTS regional, and it appears to be similar to what Scotrail has on its highland lines.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium