Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,990 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4825 on Mar 7, 2012, 12:46pm »
LAofAnaheim's hi-rail truck has finally moved. It turned out that it was there for installing the Culver City Station artwork, which has now been installed using the crane on the truck. The Culver City Station is now almost ready for the train test runs, which are being planned to start around March 16.
This Saturday they will repave National Boulevard at Washington Boulevard, which will then look like a brand-new environment. It has been a war zone surrounded with K rails. It will look much, much different on Sunday. It will be interesting to see.
Elsewhere, they are working on the landscaping improvements and Farmdale Station.
Joined: Feb 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 424 Location: Cheviot Hills, Los Angeles, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4827 on Mar 7, 2012, 1:34pm »
Regarding the Blue Line/ Expo Line junction, Steve Hymon wrote today on thesource.metro.net:
The junction has to be able to handle trains running in both directions at very close intervals; the Blue Line already is running every six minutes during peak hours. Needless to say, that junction needs to work flawlessly for reasons of both efficiency and safety.
I know a lot of people are asking when the Expo Line will open. The short answer: No date has been set yet as testing of the line and the Automatic Train Protection system at the junction continues. To repeat: It can’t just work great. It has to work flawlessly.
Joined: Feb 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 424 Location: Cheviot Hills, Los Angeles, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4828 on Mar 7, 2012, 1:40pm »
Regarding the bikepath between Jefferson and National/Washington, since the bikepath is on the north side of the tracks with no tunnels to the south, efficient acces to the Hayden track is denied.
The only alternative from the east is to exit the bike path at Jefferson and proceed along National or the sidewalk (?!) west, and from the west to proceed along the sidewalk or city streets south of Washington.
I would love to have seen a tunnel at the Media Tower.
Hymon notes:
...it’s nice to see some progress being made on the bike path running on the north side of the tracks in Culver City. The path should offer an easy way for areas residents and workers to reach both the Venice/Robertson and La Cienega stations.
That part is just silly. Name one thing that runs flawlessly on Metro. Nothing does. He's trying to trivialize the difficulties by implying that it works really well when it obviously does not even work acceptably.
That part is just silly. Name one thing that runs flawlessly on Metro. Nothing does. He's trying to trivialize the difficulties by implying that it works really well when it obviously does not even work acceptably.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4831 on Mar 7, 2012, 8:00pm »
Earlier I mentioned my brother, whose engineering team designed the hydraulics for the Space Shuttle landing gear. THAT had to work (and did work) flawlessly. A railway junction does not have to be flawless, it just has to work safely. This means, in simple terms, the principle of "fail safe"--if anything goes wrong, the signals all go "red" and everybody stops and stays put until it is safe to move. Not sure if this is still the case, but traditional railroad signal relays were designed to be actuated by an electromagnet, but returned to their "off" position by gravity. This position would cause the signals to display their "most restrictive aspect", usually red (or horizontal for a semaphore).
Earlier I mentioned my brother, whose engineering team designed the hydraulics for the Space Shuttle landing gear. THAT had to work (and did work) flawlessly. A railway junction does not have to be flawless, it just has to work safely. This means, in simple terms, the principle of "fail safe"--if anything goes wrong, the signals all go "red" and everybody stops and stays put until it is safe to move. Not sure if this is still the case, but traditional railroad signal relays were designed to be actuated by an electromagnet, but returned to their "off" position by gravity. This position would cause the signals to display their "most restrictive aspect", usually red (or horizontal for a semaphore).
Come on now, Bob, the space shuttle blew up in space twice. That's far from flawless. LOL
Earlier I mentioned my brother, whose engineering team designed the hydraulics for the Space Shuttle landing gear. THAT had to work (and did work) flawlessly. A railway junction does not have to be flawless, it just has to work safely. This means, in simple terms, the principle of "fail safe"--if anything goes wrong, the signals all go "red" and everybody stops and stays put until it is safe to move. Not sure if this is still the case, but traditional railroad signal relays were designed to be actuated by an electromagnet, but returned to their "off" position by gravity. This position would cause the signals to display their "most restrictive aspect", usually red (or horizontal for a semaphore).
Come on now, Bob, the space shuttle blew up in space twice. That's far from flawless. LOL
I think bob was referring to the hydraulics specifically, which never failed. Nor did the avionics software. It is often used as an example when teaching about redundant systems and fault isolation techniques.
I concur with Bob's point, which is that if the junction stops working, that it fail safe, meaning nothing bad happens, but the trains do stop. A completely automated system needs to be much more thoroughly proven, since there are no humans to intervene. There are many automated junctions operating in the world. This is not the first...
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,990 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4834 on Mar 7, 2012, 11:04pm »
The idea is to eliminate the accidents caused by human error.
Remember Chatsworth. Two-dozen people died only because the person who was driving the train was highly incompetent. If they had ATP, the accident wouldn't happen. Now, Metrolink will have ATP everywhere eventually.
There will always be a highly incompetent light-rail-vehicle operator, no matter how you screen or train them -- that's part of the human error. There is a very good chance of a large fatal accident at the junction unless you put ATP there, which will then completely prevent it. It's almost stupid not to have it.
I don't think there is any question whether we should have ATP at busy rail junctions. The only question is why this simple ATP at this simple junction is taking so long to figure out. It's definitely not "space shuttle" science.
Nevertheless, I am confident that they will solve this problem in a couple of months. Hopefully the train testing in Culver City will be finished by then and the line can fully open.
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,990 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4835 on Mar 8, 2012, 12:25pm »
A lot of Expo developments are currently happening.
TPSS in Culver City is now turned on -- indicated by the blue light -- and this means that the Culver City section is now ready for train test runs.
LAofAnaheim's hi-rail truck has now assumed its usual position. They are now finalizing the details around the station platform, and in a week everything should be finished and cleared and the truck should exit using the nearest at-grade crossing (Hauser Blvd).
They are now paving the bike and pedestrian path in Culver City.
Farmdale Station ATP is now being hooked up. There was a Metro crew working on the control boxes. It's important to finish the Farmdale Station before the line opens because there is a 10 MPH speed limit all the way from Buckingham to way past Farmdale because of the construction. It looks like Farmdale and Culver City may both be ready for a May opening.
A lot of landscaping improvements are taking place.
They are now grounding the fences along the line to prevent people from being electrocuted if some overhead wire falls on a fence.
Finally this is fun:
(Read the description of the video on YouTube to find out what exactly happened.)
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4837 on Mar 8, 2012, 10:34pm »
Quote:
There is a very good chance of a large fatal accident at the junction unless you put ATP there
False, and in several different ways too. For one, there are dozens of tram systems operating similar junctions all over the world, almost all of them without ATP systems, including light rail systems like the one in San Jose. There are, as far as I know, relatively few accidents as a result of such operations, and very few, if any, of those are fatal. Light rail trains are going slower and have much shorter stopping distances than freight or commuter trains. But still, there's a good chance that over the next severalof decades, there will be a fatal accident at this site, almost certainly due to a collision between a train and a car, which is not something that the ATP system can prevent. In fact, it might even give the train operator a false sense of security (ATP says go, no need to look out for unexpected obstacles) and distract their attention toward the ATP display on the dashboard and away from the tracks ahead.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4838 on Mar 8, 2012, 11:16pm »
Regarding the Space Shuttle: Yes, I was referring specifically to the landing gear. It was always a moving experience to watch the shuttle come in for a landing (on TV--I never made it to Canaveral or Edwards) and see "gear down and locked."
False, and in several different ways too. For one, there are dozens of tram systems operating similar junctions all over the world, almost all of them without ATP systems, including light rail systems like the one in San Jose. There are, as far as I know, relatively few accidents as a result of such operations, and very few, if any, of those are fatal. Light rail trains are going slower and have much shorter stopping distances than freight or commuter trains. But still, there's a good chance that over the next severalof decades, there will be a fatal accident at this site, almost certainly due to a collision between a train and a car, which is not something that the ATP system can prevent. In fact, it might even give the train operator a false sense of security (ATP says go, no need to look out for unexpected obstacles) and distract their attention toward the ATP display on the dashboard and away from the tracks ahead.
I agree with you. The fact of the matter is due to the Chatsworth crash in 2008, Metro was kind of forced into ATP. It became a huge local issue. Now look at the problems involved. Imagine when this starts to be rolled out on a much larger scale.
Without the Chatsworth crash, I don't think ATP would even be a discussion.
False, and in several different ways too. For one, there are dozens of tram systems operating similar junctions all over the world, almost all of them without ATP systems, including light rail systems like the one in San Jose. There are, as far as I know, relatively few accidents as a result of such operations, and very few, if any, of those are fatal. Light rail trains are going slower and have much shorter stopping distances than freight or commuter trains. But still, there's a good chance that over the next severalof decades, there will be a fatal accident at this site, almost certainly due to a collision between a train and a car, which is not something that the ATP system can prevent. In fact, it might even give the train operator a false sense of security (ATP says go, no need to look out for unexpected obstacles) and distract their attention toward the ATP display on the dashboard and away from the tracks ahead.
I agree with you. The fact of the matter is due to the Chatsworth crash in 2008, Metro was kind of forced into ATP. It became a huge local issue. Now look at the problems involved. Imagine when this starts to be rolled out on a much larger scale.
Without the Chatsworth crash, I don't think ATP would even be a discussion.
Well, crzwdjk, Expo Line is not a tram. If it was, such as the Downtown LA Streetcar, I would have no problem. San Jose LRT system has a ridership of only 33,000. Expo and Blue Lines alone will have a combined ridership of 200,000. On top of that, LA is more populated, with more people and cars on the street. Shorter headways and more distractions make the system more prone to accidents.
If it was false, the Chatsworth accident wouldn't happen. Sure, the speed here is a little less and there isn't the blind curve as in Chatsworth, but there is no need to take chances.
LAofAnaheim, this also isn't just about safety. With ATP, the system runs much more faster and efficiently. With manual operation, the trains will be delayed for about two minutes at the junction. I saw a northbound Expo Line train (which has to cross two Blue Line tracks) waiting for five minutes at the junction once.
What you are forgetting is that the problem is not the ATP. The problem is the incompetent subcontractor who was trying to build it, who then quit. They are now trying to figure out what he did wrong. ATP is found everywhere in rail systems -- rapid-transit, light-rail, freight rail, and commuter rail. What they are building here is not something others don't have. It's nothing but standard modern rail technology. This is a fairly simple junction and it will all be fine at the end, as soon as in a couple of months. Don't try to blame the ATP -- who was/is trying to build it is to blame.
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,990 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4841 on Mar 9, 2012, 11:59am »
Some idiot was blocking the tracks today with his pickup truck at Arlington Avenue, where there are crossing gates, because he couldn't clear the crossing before light turned red! Invitation for disaster.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4843 on Mar 12, 2012, 1:33am »
Ill tell you what happened... Some moron probably installed something at the junction wrong, didn't tell management, and now the construction authority is trying to cover it up as long as they can before they can fix it or put a bandaid on it.
The question is, is the best solution possible going to be to have the whole junction torn out and redone again to fix it?
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4844 on Mar 12, 2012, 9:36am »
What I heard last week is that the trains intermittently momentarily lose their CAB signal as they pass over block-boundary rail joints. The older Nippon-Sharyo cars are worse than the Siemens cars. It basically works, but not necessarily well enough for CPUC sign-off.
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,990 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4845 on Mar 12, 2012, 11:47am »
I was hoping that the National Blvd would be repaved but not much happened there during the full closure on Saturday.
Bike path in Culver City is paved but its west end is not tied to the street yet.
We'll see if the train testing will start around March 16 as planned. TPSS is ready, with the blue light on the side on.
Regarding the cab signals being lost, given how long they have been troubleshooting it and how many times they claimed victory, I think it will still take a couple of months to fix. I don't know the source of the April 15 rumors but I will let you know if I find out more. Take everything regarding Expo with a grain of salt for now.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4846 on Mar 12, 2012, 1:40pm »
What I dont get is why this is delaying service.
Start revenue runs ASAP. Post an employee at the junction to "handle" the signal while the troubleshooting people continue their troubleshooting. If the physical switch works, then thats all you need to run service.
Lets imagine for a second that its 2014, lightning hits the junction, and the signals fail. What would metro do? Would they suspend all service for months while troubleshooting, or post someone to do manual operations and put a temporary speed restriction?
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,990 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4847 on Mar 12, 2012, 2:33pm »
I think April 15 to La Cienega is the old goal, which is probably difficult to meet now with the junction issues. I will see if I can find out more about the situation. Hopefully train testing in Culver City will start this weekend. In May to Culver City would be great.
What I heard last week is that the trains intermittently momentarily lose their CAB signal as they pass over block-boundary rail joints. The older Nippon-Sharyo cars are worse than the Siemens cars. It basically works, but not necessarily well enough for CPUC sign-off.
Maybe things are starting to make sense. Maybe it's not the junction that's the problem, it's the design of the junction and/or the trains. If you've observed trains going through the junction from Expo, do they crawl into the junction, stop, and then crawl out?
What some may not know is that trains cannot normally run through from the blue line to the newer lines because of technological issues that I think must be communication related. The Breda trains were originally supposed to fix this issue by having both technologies, but that never happened. My WAG is that they modified some trains to have both communication systems, but they can't get them to switch from one technology to the other correctly and it's only a coincidence that this happens at the junction as it would have happened wherever the switch needed to be made. That's why I ask if trains crawl in and out. It could be that when the train is simultaneously on both technologies (on both sides of the junction) that they are losing communication.
This is all speculation, but it woulds explain why blue line trains are not having any issue with the junction. Because there's nothing wrong with it other than when making that "handoff" and the blue line doesn't do that.
And as long as I'm on a roll...lol..Steve Hymon's "flawless" comment makes a little more sense. It's because the handoff is being made at the most critical point possible. It's maybe the one place where things do need to go right all the time otherwise the ATS isn't really working. In retrospect maybe it would make sense to have that handoff at a less critical spot, like at the 23rd street station. And maybe that's what the fix could end up being.
I could use all of that speculation to speculate even more, but it gets depressing, so I'll stop here.
« Last Edit: Mar 12, 2012, 4:15pm by bluelineshawn »
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,990 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #4849 on Mar 12, 2012, 5:37pm »
I think they put new ATP equipment on all Blue Line trains.
It sounds like a hardware issue. I don't know how it works exactly but it's probably something almost trivial related to electronics. I remember the pick-up coils at the junction when they were building it. Perhaps it has to do with them.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Calendar]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/calendar.gif "[Calendar]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://physics.usc.edu/Undergraduate/temporary/PE_logo.png "[avatar]"){kind=logo}
Logged![[image]](http://thesource.metro.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/DSC_0305-590x390.jpg "[image]")
![[avatar]](http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u157/Blueline_express/IMG_0760-avatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
![[avatar]](http://i882.photobucket.com/albums/ac27/RubberToe420/HSRAvatar_zps5fcac84f.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
![[image]](http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo325/esirgen/Expo%202012-03-07/IMG_3078.jpg "[image]")
![[avatar]](http://chriscrash.com/images-home/crash_symbol.jpg "[avatar]")
