R44 5278 Posted February 22, 2009 Share #26 Posted February 22, 2009 The Jamaica line still has R42s. I doubt that they would get CBTC next. The next line could be Broadway Express after the elimination of the W and when the Q gets rid of its R68s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted February 22, 2009 Share #27 Posted February 22, 2009 Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 1.1; en-us; dream) AppleWebKit/525.10+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0.4 Mobile Safari/523.12.2) just a thought, but do you think the controller handle would be moving by itself to control the speed during ATO? No; that's primitive style automation you're thinking of. (I remember in the early 70's seeing an early remote control TV where the dial turned by itself. Of course, remote control technology would eventually do away with the dial altogether).The controller stays in Full Service, I believe. (And if it moved itself, it would have to twist itself out of the dead man feature too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3348 Posted February 22, 2009 Share #28 Posted February 22, 2009 The Jamaica line still has R42s. I doubt that they would get CBTC next. The next line could be Broadway Express after the elimination of the W and when the Q gets rid of its R68s. The Queens Blvd. line expresses, the and will get CBTC after the does. The will be all R160 by the fall of 2009, and the will have a few R160s by then too. The may become all R160 as well. I'd like to believe that, but the has buku issues with signal and switch reliability, i can't imagine the problems if you put yet another system in. - A I think adding CBTC will fix the problems with the signals, since you're adding the new signaling system. The current signal system malfunctions a lot I think because the ATS system still has bugs in it. BTW, when ATO starts on the , will the use CBTC, ATO and ATS at the same time? Also, I think I got confused after reading this article about the difference between CBTC and ATO. I'd also assume that they fixed the OOS R143s with CBTC failure. Since the R160s don't have CBTC, and only run on the when there are R143s OOS, they need those extra R143s to run without ATO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted February 22, 2009 Share #29 Posted February 22, 2009 The Jamaica line still has R42s. I doubt that they would get CBTC next. The next line could be Broadway Express after the elimination of the W and when the Q gets rid of its R68s. Those R42's will be gone by Summer 2009, when the R160A option order 2 comes in, with some R160A-1's to replace them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted February 22, 2009 Share #30 Posted February 22, 2009 The Queens Blvd. line expresses, the and will get CBTC after the does. Proof? The will be all R160 by the fall of 2009, and the will have a few R160s by then too. The may become all R160 as well Actually, the will be mostly R160 by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted February 22, 2009 Share #31 Posted February 22, 2009 The Queens Blvd. line expresses, the and will get CBTC after the does. The will be all R160 by the fall of 2009, and the will have a few R160s by then too. The may become all R160 as well. I think adding CBTC will fix the problems with the signals, since you're adding the new signaling system. The current signal system malfunctions a lot I think because the ATS system still has bugs in it. BTW, when ATO starts on the , will the use CBTC, ATO and ATS at the same time? Also, I think I got confused after reading this article about the difference between CBTC and ATO. I'd also assume that they fixed the OOS R143s with CBTC failure. Since the R160s don't have CBTC, and only run on the when there are R143s OOS, they need those extra R143s to run without ATO. CBTC is the technology that allows ATO. ATO and ATS are functions that are enabled by CBTC. To put it in more simpler terms, CBTC would be Windows while ATO and ATS is a program that runs due to it, like Officer or Internet Explorer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex L. Posted February 22, 2009 Share #32 Posted February 22, 2009 CBTC is the technology that allows ATO. ATO and ATS are functions that are enabled by CBTC. ATS has nothing to do with CBTC. ATS is currently running all of the IRT (except north of 149/Grand Concourse & the Flushing Line) as well as the . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted February 22, 2009 Share #33 Posted February 22, 2009 ATS has nothing to do with CBTC. ATS is currently running all of the IRT (except north of 149/Grand Concourse & the Flushing Line) as well as the . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication-based_train_control There are multiple generations of CBTC systems based on multiple variations and configurations depending on the providers and operators. A CBTC can provide different levels of railway automation, grouped in the following major functionalities: - ATP: Automatic Train Protection; - ATO: Automatic Train Operation; - ATS: Automatic Train Supervision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted February 22, 2009 Share #34 Posted February 22, 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication-based_train_control before you guys start spazzing, normally i wouldn't cite wikipedia, but this information is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak7 Posted February 22, 2009 Share #35 Posted February 22, 2009 Keep in mind that when you have CBTC, all trains that run on the route have to be CBTC-equipped. If you were to have the run CBTC, then the would also have to be CBTC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted February 22, 2009 Share #36 Posted February 22, 2009 before you guys start spazzing, normally i wouldn't cite wikipedia, but this information is true. I have other sources as well: http://www.ansaldo-sts.com/AnsaldoSTS/EN/Business/MassTransit/CBTC_based/args/detail/details~projects~project_detail_0000048.shtml/type/web_project/index.sdo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forest Glen Posted February 23, 2009 Share #37 Posted February 23, 2009 CBTC is the technology that allows ATO. ATO and ATS are functions that are enabled by CBTC. To put it in more simpler terms, CBTC would be Windows while ATO and ATS is a program that runs due to it, like Officer or Internet Explorer. Simply put, CBTC involves computer controlled signals. ATO involves computer controlled trains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelham Bay Dave Posted February 23, 2009 Share #38 Posted February 23, 2009 ATS and CBTC are two diffrent systerms but do work together. Some trains will be operating in CBTC ATO come Tuesday but not all trains they got R143 with CBTC issues may be operating on CBTC Bypass and all R160 running on Bypass. So some will have a T/O operating while others the T/O will just sit there and hit a button. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted February 23, 2009 Share #39 Posted February 23, 2009 ATS has nothing to do with CBTC. ATS is currently running all of the IRT (except north of 149/Grand Concourse & the Flushing Line) as well as the . ATS is RUINING most of the IRT as it has severe glitches in it's implementation. CBTC has it's own issues on the line because all rolling stock must be properly equipped for it to run properly. The idea is to have the system to be totally set up to have CBTC and/or ATS manage the movement of trains and signals system-wide. From where I stand the corporation behind it hasn't shown me that it can successfully implement it. IIRC the whole system, CBTC and ATS was supposed to up and running around 2003 or 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex L. Posted February 23, 2009 Share #40 Posted February 23, 2009 I have other sources as well:http://www.ansaldo-sts.com/AnsaldoSTS/EN/Business/MassTransit/CBTC_based/args/detail/details~projects~project_detail_0000048.shtml/type/web_project/index.sdo I'll see your two links and raise you three (and none of them are wikipedia articles). You'll see that while all five talk of ATS in the IRT, only the last one even mentions CBTC. Now, I'll try again - ATS is operating in all of the IRT (except where previously noted). CBTC is not operating anywhere in the IRT. Therefore, ATS is not a subsystem of CBTC. http://www.railworks.com/node/99 http://references.transportation.siemens.com/refdb/showReference.do?r=1430&div=2&l=en http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/cadiv/segb/views/document/Sections/Section8/8_5_1.htm http://retiree.nyct.com/newsletrs/cpm_fall04.pdf http://www.parsons.com/transport/systems/projects/project09.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted February 23, 2009 Share #41 Posted February 23, 2009 Keep in mind that when you have CBTC, all trains that run on the route have to be CBTC-equipped. If you were to have the run CBTC, then the would also have to be CBTC. False. When the E and F go CBTC, most likely it will be the Queens Boulevard Line express tracks. So your quoted lines won't be using CBTC, unless the system goes on those lines as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted February 24, 2009 Share #42 Posted February 24, 2009 I'll see your two links and raise you three (and none of them are wikipedia articles). You'll see that while all five talk of ATS in the IRT, only the last one even mentions CBTC. Now, I'll try again - ATS is operating in all of the IRT (except where previously noted). CBTC is not operating anywhere in the IRT. Therefore, ATS is not a subsystem of CBTC. http://www.railworks.com/node/99 http://references.transportation.siemens.com/refdb/showReference.do?r=1430&div=2&l=en http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/cadiv/segb/views/document/Sections/Section8/8_5_1.htm http://retiree.nyct.com/newsletrs/cpm_fall04.pdf http://www.parsons.com/transport/systems/projects/project09.asp I bow gracefully to your knowledge. Maybe one day I'll see you in school car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak7 Posted February 24, 2009 Share #43 Posted February 24, 2009 False. When the E and F go CBTC, most likely it will be the Queens Boulevard Line express tracks. So your quoted lines won't be using CBTC, unless the system goes on those lines as well. Is it possible to switch off the CBTC once in Manhattan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted February 24, 2009 Share #44 Posted February 24, 2009 Is it possible to switch off the CBTC once in Manhattan? Presumably yes... remember, the CBTC for the QBL express lines is still a plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted February 24, 2009 Share #45 Posted February 24, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted February 24, 2009 Share #46 Posted February 24, 2009 Under clarity and truth of statement... I would say the is already CBTC and the Queens Blvd. and Flushing/Corona is getting CBTC soon. Since it is in the Capital Program, B)! AFAIK, only QBL express is getting CBTC. Not sure about the locals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted February 24, 2009 Share #47 Posted February 24, 2009 I'll see your two links and raise you three (and none of them are wikipedia articles). You'll see that while all five talk of ATS in the IRT, only the last one even mentions CBTC. Now, I'll try again - ATS is operating in all of the IRT (except where previously noted). CBTC is not operating anywhere in the IRT. Therefore, ATS is not a subsystem of CBTC. http://www.railworks.com/node/99 http://references.transportation.siemens.com/refdb/showReference.do?r=1430&div=2&l=en http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/cadiv/segb/views/document/Sections/Section8/8_5_1.htm http://retiree.nyct.com/newsletrs/cpm_fall04.pdf http://www.parsons.com/transport/systems/projects/project09.asp Since you mentioned the company behind the two systems, their proposal was to use the somewhat connected technologies (ATS and CBTC) to allow better spacing of trains and speed up the movement of those trains, correct ?. Since the and lines as a rule do not share trackage with other lines they were to be the test platforms for CBTC. The IRT, being the smallest division, was given the dubious honor of being the test area for ATS. A few years ago the powers that be recognized that the whole Lexington Ave corridor as well as the Queens Blvd corridor were operating at capacity during the rush hours. Simple physics 101 should have shown that NO technology could increase the capacity on these lines but the capital was already in the budget and had to be used. So first thing is to strut it (CBTC) out on the line, which had the room to add trains, and declare it a success. Queens Blvd is a horse of a different color. Why not shorten the line so it won't get in the way? That'll work, right ? If the ran to it's original terminal, along with the and , the system wouldn't work would it ? On the Lexington Ave corridor with the ATS system you have problems at Bowling Green station where the terminates. Solution, send all trains to Flatbush Ave during the midday hours so the Central Business District doesn't see the back-ups ,and then call that system a success too. Never mind that all the Brooklyn riders on the IRT can see through the smoke and mirrors and know that this ploy is a gimmick too. Perhaps someone on this forum realizes that both systems were supposed to be up and running years ago yet they're still in the testing phase in most locations. The people who signed off on these ideas have retired or been sent to the boondocks of land so they won't be heard from again. This technology may be the future of rapid transit but it's not ready for prime time in the Big Apple yet. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelham Bay Dave Posted February 24, 2009 Share #48 Posted February 24, 2009 The is being cut back because of all the conjustion coming into Continenal. During Wkend nights when you have service its backed up to Woodheaven and beyond sometimes. Don't let a person refuse to leave the train at continenal there is never a Police officer around and all service just stops with no reroutes since they afraid of delaying Express service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted February 24, 2009 Share #49 Posted February 24, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1447 Posted February 24, 2009 Share #50 Posted February 24, 2009 The is being cut back because of all the conjustion coming into Continenal. During Wkend nights when you have service its backed up to Woodheaven and beyond sometimes. Don't let a person refuse to leave the train at continenal there is never a Police officer around and all service just stops with no reroutes since they afraid of delaying Express service. Would it be better to extend the to 179th? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.