|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 7, 2012 16:34:29 GMT -8
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. Agreed. It doesn't convey any information.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 7, 2012 20:00:03 GMT -8
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).
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 7, 2012 21:28:29 GMT -8
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
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 7, 2012 21:58:48 GMT -8
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... RT Sent from my DROID RAZR using ProBoards
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 7, 2012 23:04:24 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 8, 2012 12:25:33 GMT -8
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.)
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 8, 2012 19:34:40 GMT -8
Ha! Now, after all these years, we know why it's called the Expo Line!
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Mar 8, 2012 22:34:24 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 8, 2012 23:16:27 GMT -8
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."
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 9, 2012 5:57:15 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 9, 2012 8:22:44 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 9, 2012 11:59:49 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 11, 2012 17:32:00 GMT -8
There are rumors that Expo may open to La Cienega on April 15. This was my old guess of the opening day. Festival of Books is the next weekend.
Take it with a grain of salt. Hopefully train testing in Culver City will start this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Mar 12, 2012 1:33:00 GMT -8
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?
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Mar 12, 2012 9:36:09 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 12, 2012 11:47:46 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Mar 12, 2012 13:40:01 GMT -8
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?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 12, 2012 14:33:01 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 12, 2012 16:14:43 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 12, 2012 17:37:57 GMT -8
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.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 12, 2012 18:35:13 GMT -8
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. I'm sure that all of the trains now have ATS, but that's not why the trains would be incompatible with the other line. And it may be a hardware issue, but if so why does the junction work flawlessly for the blue line? I'm convinced that it's not the junction (hardware), but a software/design issue. Unless of course I'm completely wrong, in which case I would have to reconsider.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 12, 2012 20:29:28 GMT -8
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. I'm sure that all of the trains now have ATS, but that's not why the trains would be incompatible with the other line. And it may be a hardware issue, but if so why does the junction work flawlessly for the blue line? I'm convinced that it's not the junction (hardware), but a software/design issue. Unless of course I'm completely wrong, in which case I would have to reconsider. The old ATP equipment on the Nippon Sharyo's were replaced with new ATP equipment to be compatible with the equipment at the junction. Why does the ATP at the junction work flawlessly for the Blue Line? It doesn't. The ATP at the junction has never been turned on yet. It's still all manual. The only times they turn it on is when they test it late at night. When they do that, it turns out that the Siemens trains do better than the Nippon Sharyo's in picking up the signal. Of course, when you only have the Blue Line, you don't really need ATP. The only train - train interference results between the northbound Expo Line trains and the westbound or eastbound Blue Line trains. If you only ran the southbound Expo Line and westbound and eastbound Blue Line trains, you wouldn't need ATP.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 13, 2012 16:48:08 GMT -8
From this month's project-status update: Gramercy (Exposition/Rodeo) Crossing • CPUC approved the grade crossing as a street running/traffic signal protected crossing • Staff subsequently evaluated the use of grade crossing gates along with traffic preemption, but the configuration of the intersection along with limited right-of-way made the installation of gates very difficult • LADOT was not in favor of the installation of preemptive gates I find it hard to believe that there was not enough space to install crossing gates. Of course, LADOT always opposesthe trains.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 13, 2012 17:14:32 GMT -8
I'm sure that all of the trains now have ATS, but that's not why the trains would be incompatible with the other line. And it may be a hardware issue, but if so why does the junction work flawlessly for the blue line? I'm convinced that it's not the junction (hardware), but a software/design issue. Unless of course I'm completely wrong, in which case I would have to reconsider. The old ATP equipment on the Nippon Sharyo's were replaced with new ATP equipment to be compatible with the equipment at the junction. Why does the ATP at the junction work flawlessly for the Blue Line? It doesn't. The ATP at the junction has never been turned on yet. It's still all manual. The only times they turn it on is when they test it late at night. When they do that, it turns out that the Siemens trains do better than the Nippon Sharyo's in picking up the signal. Of course, when you only have the Blue Line, you don't really need ATP. The only train - train interference results between the northbound Expo Line trains and the westbound or eastbound Blue Line trains. If you only ran the southbound Expo Line and westbound and eastbound Blue Line trains, you wouldn't need ATP. Maybe I'm not clear on what the issue is. Are you saying that the problems only appear with late night testing because that's when the ATP is turned on? So the Expo trains work well the rest of the time?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 13, 2012 17:43:51 GMT -8
The old ATP equipment on the Nippon Sharyo's were replaced with new ATP equipment to be compatible with the equipment at the junction. Why does the ATP at the junction work flawlessly for the Blue Line? It doesn't. The ATP at the junction has never been turned on yet. It's still all manual. The only times they turn it on is when they test it late at night. When they do that, it turns out that the Siemens trains do better than the Nippon Sharyo's in picking up the signal. Of course, when you only have the Blue Line, you don't really need ATP. The only train - train interference results between the northbound Expo Line trains and the westbound or eastbound Blue Line trains. If you only ran the southbound Expo Line and westbound and eastbound Blue Line trains, you wouldn't need ATP. Maybe I'm not clear on what the issue is. Are you saying that the problems only appear with late night testing because that's when the ATP is turned on? So the Expo trains work well the rest of the time? You can run the junction either manually (without ATP) or automatically (with ATP). So far, the ATP (or the automatic junction) has never been turned on during the ongoing prerevenue operations except when they work on fixing the junction at wee hours. They haven't been able to fix the ATP at the junction yet, which is the reason why the automatic junction (ATP) has never been turned on during the prerevenue operations to date. All prerevenue operations through the junction have been manual so far -- meaning some human being positions the rail switches for the Expo and Blue Line trains accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 13, 2012 17:47:08 GMT -8
This evening the hi-rail truck in Culver City was at the very west end of the tracks. There is a coil of thick orange cable on it. I don't know what it is for but there is obviously work still going on. Hopefully they will finish it on March 15 as they aimed.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 13, 2012 20:50:06 GMT -8
Orange cable may be a protective "duct" for fiber optic cable. (bringing back memories of my "day job" in telecommunications.)
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Mar 13, 2012 22:41:02 GMT -8
[All prerevenue operations through the junction have been manual so far -- meaning some human being positions the rail switches for the Expo and Blue Line trains accordingly. if the switch is the only thing holding up service, why not start revenue service with the switch in manual mode, and continue troubleshooting the ATP after hours?
|
|
|
Post by simonla on Mar 14, 2012 7:43:22 GMT -8
Because the CPUC won't allow the line to open until the ATP is functioning properly. Everything changed after the horrible Chatsworth Metrolink crash.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 14, 2012 10:36:33 GMT -8
|
|