Jump to content

MTA's Robotrains prove to have a mind of their own as some go rogue on L line


Queens Surface

Recommended Posts

Probably not, but when its connected to an infected MTA machine, somethings gonna be on the move.... and viruses today usually change system settings, block certain things from running and some might just completely f**k up the OS

 

To prevent this, anything that comes into contact with a CBTC/ATO computer should not have Internet. Simple as that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


You forgot to quote the next three paragraphs of that Wikipedia article.

 

"CBTC systems range in complexity based on the functionality provided from CBTC systems that provide only the ATP functions to CBTC that provide both the ATP and ATO functions and CBTC that on top of that provide also the ATS functions.

 

All CBTC systems operate in the same basic way. An off board computer can track all trains operating on track linked to the computer. This allows trains to be spaced closer together than on a manually controlled line. The computer sends information to the computers aboard the train.

 

This differs from normal Automatic Train Operation (ATO) systems in that the train is actually controlled by the on board computers. Older ATO systems, such as San Francisco’s BART, use a system where the off board computers control the train."

 

And the MTA's system provides both the ATP and ATO functions. When CBTC is on, you don't see the T/O moving the lever do you? It's still ATO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys all forgot that computers are easily hacked, because many companies don't install antiviruses on their computers, servers etc, and if a CBTC train gets hacked.... bad things will happen

 

Seriously what up with some people believing hackers & viruses don't exists? Go to a school, turn on a laptop and there are about 30 different pieces of shit in there

 

*facepalm* No. These trains are not school laptops.

 

CBTC systems would be closed systems and not run on conventional OSes. They are designed to work exactly for their purpose, to run trains. Its not like they're running a Windows program on their servers. A system like this would be designed so it is entirely system is off-line and thus be completely closed to any Internet exposure or hackers. The only network the trains would be connected to is the Main (NYCT) transit network, which, again, is highly specialized and customized for their needs. No one without extreme expertise in the programming of that system would be able to even access it, let alone mess around with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*facepalm* No. These trains are not school laptops.

 

CBTC systems would be closed systems and not run on conventional OSes. They are designed to work exactly for their purpose, to run trains. Its not like they're running a Windows program on their servers. A system like this would be designed so it is entirely system is off-line and thus be completely closed to any Internet exposure or hackers. The only network the trains would be connected to is the Main (NYCT) transit network, which, again, is highly specialized and customized for their needs. No one without extreme expertise in the programming of that system would be able to even access it, let alone mess around with it.

 

Correct. ATS/CBTC/ATO have and will continue to have their problems, but getting common internet viruses and spyware are not part of them. Unfortunately with some of the children on this board when you say something like "computer systems have proven unreliable and problematic" they assume that means they'll get virused. shaking my head...

 

You can have CBTC available and not have ATO available...

 

Yes it appears many in the "hobby" still don't know the difference between ATS, CBTC, OPTO, and ATO yet...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct. ATS/CBTC/ATO have and will continue to have their problems, but getting common internet viruses and spyware are not part of them. Unfortunately with some of the children on this board when you say something like "computer systems have proven unreliable and problematic" they assume that means they'll get virused. shaking my head...

Yeah, when did viruses become an issue? It's not like anyone can access the system, let alone do anything to it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the MTA's system provides both the ATP and ATO functions. When CBTC is on, you don't see the T/O moving the lever do you? It's still ATO.

Doesn't mean they're the same though. You need CBTC to run ATO but trains can run using just CBTC.

Yes, I know, but usually when CBTC is on (for the MTA), ATO is on with it.

Yes, but I was implying what RTOman posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some Robotrains have been going rogue on the L line, prompting NYC Transit to temporarily suspend the high-tech operation, the Daily News has learned.

 

In one incident, a train that was stopped at a Brooklyn platform took off on its own - traveling three to five feet before a crew member on board hit the emergency brakes, NYC Transit confirmed yesterday.

 

With two other similar incidents recently on the Brooklyn-to-Manhattan line, the agency suspended use of the computerized train control system on Aug. 16, NYC Transit said in a statement yesterday.

 

Train service continued the old-fashioned way - with motormen doing the driving, not computers - until software fixes were finished last weekend, the agency said.

 

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/08/27/2010-08-27_robotrains_proving_to_have_minds_of_their_own.html#ixzz0xpZmdoxP

 

Wait, the trains drive themselves and not the driver??

 

o.o

 

I guess the next thing trains would be doing is extending the wheels to make 2 legs and arms and destroy humanity. Imagine a two legged (D) train running down the Avenue of the Americas eating people. Anybody here get the joke. ;)

 

XD, that would be cool, sad, and scary at the same time.

 

...it may have multiple legs though, to carry all those cars...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, the trains drive themselves and not the driver??

 

o.o

 

You didn't know that? It's been that way for a while.

 

The T/O is only there to react to a situation immediately, something the train itself is not capable of doing (e.g. 12-9).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow , I can't belive this! this is terrible. I hiope it's the R143 that did this crap! Not the 160!

 

Well , at least R143s/R160s are still on the (L) line! But they are being manually driven by conducters until further notice! Thank god!

 

The other lines with R160s should be safe , like my beloved (F) train!

I hope...:cry:

 

Duhhhhhhhhhh......... Since when have C/R's operated trains? Get your facts str8 b 4 u post. U sound like the Daily News & Post when they write stories about transit. :)

TA will never get CBTC/ATO to work 100% on the (L). You can dress a whore up, but it's still a whore. I refuse to work on the (L) as long as TA insists on operating CBTC/ATO. Did it once and I'll never make that mistake again. The (L) hade several station overuns right after that. Makes u wonder what would happen if C/R's were permanantly removed from the trains. Why does it take a major disaster to occur (death) to get TA to have something corrected . Oh yeah, $$$$$ caaa...ching. Hey who am I to stop progress?

The London Tubes just got their 1st order of A/C equipped cars so I guess we all have to come out of the stone age eventually.

 

(M) (NJT) :nec:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duhhhhhhhhhh......... Since when have C/R's operated trains? Get your facts str8 b 4 u post. U sound like the Daily News & Post when they write stories about transit. :)

In a foamer's mind, ANYTHING can happen B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.