Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Union Tpke

Systemwide CBTC - Planning and Implementation

Recommended Posts

The (N) and (Q) are notably missing. Any they currently do not run on any track with CBTC. The (E), (F), (M), and (R), I can understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully the IRT style countdown clocks will come with it. The countdown clock system in the IRT is tied into ATS IIRC, and IMO the IRT countdown clocks are far superior to the B div clocks.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LGA Link N train said:

This is about ATS not CBTC

"Siemens designs and furnishes CBTC/ATS software for the QBL portion of Subway B Division (comprised of the E, F, M, N, Q and R lines)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So am I finally going to hear at Fulton St (A)(C) station: "There is a Brooklyn-bound express (A) train to Far Rockaway- Mott Av approaching the station. Please move away from the platform edge."?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So "CBTC Equipment Supplier Interoperability" contract was an utter failure and this contract mod seals the deal that Div B is owned by Siemens for next 50 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is Funny to me!... they can't even get it fully right on the (7) and (L) but want to put it on the whole B Division. They better off putting Cbtc in the entire A first.

Get ATS in the B First! LoL... i don't get (MTA). Thinking to far ahead of themselves!

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, I Run Trains said:

This is Funny to me!... they can't even get it fully right on the (7) and (L) but want to put it on the whole B Division. They better off putting Cbtc in the entire A first.

Get ATS in the B First! LoL... i don't get (MTA). Thinking to far ahead of themselves!

This is ATS in the B division... It's just gonna be designed to be CBTC ready.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

This is ATS in the B division... It's just gonna be designed to be CBTC ready.

There is NOT ATS in the B Division . If that was the Case there wouldn't be anymore Tower Operators. RCC would control the Whole system like the Do the A Division!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know that. The plan according to this post is to install ATS across the B Division and make the system CBTC ready for whenever they decide to switch over.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lance said:

We know that. The plan according to this post is to install ATS across the B Division and make the system CBTC ready for whenever they decide to switch over.

Somebody’s didn’t know. I was letting them know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, I Run Trains said:

Somebody’s didn’t know. I was letting them know. 

You literally rephrased what I said. Let me be more specific: This plan is for ATS across the B-division, which will also be CBTC ready

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is this still based on ISIM-B in some capacity? How much changed with this revision?

cjfd1GL.png

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

You literally rephrased what I said. Let me be more specific: This plan is for ATS across the B-division, which will also be CBTC ready

You know what. When I’m wrong with m wrong and I’m not gonna argue like a certain somebody will.  You said “ This is ATS in the B division... It's just gonna be designed to be CBTC ready”  and I misread. Thought you said THERE IS!  . My bad!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2018 at 12:23 PM, Around the Horn said:

"Siemens designs and furnishes CBTC/ATS software for the QBL portion of Subway B Division (comprised of the E, F, M, N, Q and R lines)"

Read it carefully. It says nothing about the N and Q getting CBTC. The new ATS signals will be CBTC ready if they decide to go that route in the future. The R160's that run on the N/Q are already CBTC ready.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Centralization is one of the biggest benefits I can think of right now. While they have been consolidated significantly over the years, there still are a number of tower operations in place across the B-Division compared to the numbered lines, where everything is controlled from Grand Central master. Putting ATS operations in place along the lettered lines will allow for more streamlined operations and reduce the number of times where certain short-turns that are physically possible do not happen due to a lack of tower operators at the time (looking at you perennially suspended (G) when there's an incident on one end of the Crosstown line).

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2018 at 8:10 PM, trainfan22 said:

Hopefully the IRT style countdown clocks will come with it. The countdown clock system in the IRT is tied into ATS IIRC, and IMO the IRT countdown clocks are far superior to the B div clocks.

Does everyone feel this way? I feel like the B-div countdown clocks are a little more accurate, it's just that there's only one screen usually on a given platform that's not great - but you can always get the data on your phone so, eh. 

 

1 hour ago, Lance said:

Centralization is one of the biggest benefits I can think of right now. While they have been consolidated significantly over the years, there still are a number of tower operations in place across the B-Division compared to the numbered lines, where everything is controlled from Grand Central master. Putting ATS operations in place along the lettered lines will allow for more streamlined operations and reduce the number of times where certain short-turns that are physically possible do not happen due to a lack of tower operators at the time (looking at you perennially suspended (G) when there's an incident on one end of the Crosstown line).

Even in places with light-centralization - e.g. master towers - I've seen problems where two master towers aren't talking to each other properly or RCC is saying one thing QB master is saying another thing. 

If done right, there can be huge improvements from centralized tower operations, especially in the case or reroutes. Conversely, well, "central point of failure" if not done right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, itmaybeokay said:

If done right, there can be huge improvements from centralized tower operations, especially in the case or reroutes. Conversely, well, "central point of failure" if not done right. 

Nothing a sufficient backup can't fix. If I'm not mistaken, the ATS system for the A-DIvision is backed up somewhere at MTA HQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2018 at 3:05 PM, itmaybeokay said:

Does everyone feel this way? I feel like the B-div countdown clocks are a little more accurate, it's just that there's only one screen usually on a given platform that's not great - but you can always get the data on your phone so, eh. 

 

Even in places with light-centralization - e.g. master towers - I've seen problems where two master towers aren't talking to each other properly or RCC is saying one thing QB master is saying another thing. 

If done right, there can be huge improvements from centralized tower operations, especially in the case or reroutes. Conversely, well, "central point of failure" if not done right. 

The B division system is a LOT less reliable than the A division. The data feed is much more limited- the transponders are only at stations, and it also cannot tell the difference between local and express tracks. Unless somebody reprograms what a train is doing in the system, a local diverted to the express tracks still shows up on the displays on local tracks. An express running local does not show up on the displays, unless somebody tells the system it is local. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Art Vandelay said:

The B division system is a LOT less reliable than the A division. The data feed is much more limited- the transponders are only at stations, and it also cannot tell the difference between local and express tracks. Unless somebody reprograms what a train is doing in the system, a local diverted to the express tracks still shows up on the displays on local tracks. An express running local does not show up on the displays, unless somebody tells the system it is local. 

And it's still glitchy as heck. Last night at DeKalb, this was the order of trains displayed:

1. (N) 3 mins

2. (R) 20 mins

3. (D) 2 mins

4. (Q) 4 mins.

5. (D) 16 mins.

My guess is that the computer doesn't dynamically update the order of incoming trains.

Edited by P3F
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, P3F said:

And it's still glitchy as heck. Last night at DeKalb, this was the order of trains displayed:

1. (N) 3 mins

2. (R) 20 mins

3. (D) 2 mins

4. (Q) 4 mins.

5. (D) 16 mins.

My guess is that the computer doesn't dynamically update the order of incoming trains.

Unless these things are being coded in an assembly language, the fact that such a trivial feature is unimplemented is rather shocking. Does the MTA not have tech-savvy interns to do this kind of work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

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