On 24 Oct 2011 15:58:00 GMT
Denis McMahon wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 06:10:54 -0700, David F wrote:

Is there skill to driving a train? Or, is it more a case of being
equipped and qualified to deal with emergencies?

Will these automated trains be able to run non-stop at maximum line
speeds when a failed unbraked rail grinder being recovered wrong-line
breaks away from the towing train on a rising gradient?

A rail grinder wouldn't be allowed on an automated line while its running
in automatic mode.

B2003

In message , at
15:58:00 on Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Denis McMahon
remarked:
Will these automated trains be able to run non-stop at maximum line
speeds when a failed unbraked rail grinder being recovered wrong-line
breaks away from the towing train on a rising gradient?

Maybe that depends on whether the unbraked rail grinder is also being
automatically driven?

--
Roland Perry

On 24/10/2011 18:01, Paul Corfield wrote:



I'm not sure how Hong Kong MTR is proceeding but the new South Island
line will probably be fully automatic given it is physically separate
from other MTR lines. I'd expect the MTR will make the move to full
automation at some point when control system and rolling stock renewal
permit it.

"CNR Changchun has announced a HK$1·4bn contract to supply driverless
metro trains for Hong Kong MTR's future West Island and South Island
lines", according to
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/new...ss-trains.html




--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Oct 24, 6:01*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 01:19:15 -0700 (PDT), Paul
wrote:

Just came across this on BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15422882
The only "fully remote" metro I have used is the VAL system in Lille,
and the trains there are far too small to be able to cope with the
crowds in London. *"Fully remote" operation would require platform
edge doors at every station, and I would be very surprised if that
could be achieved in 9 years, given current budget constraints.

There are other examples of driverless automated metros. The North
East line and recently completed Circle line in Singapore are fully
automated and many trains run without any staff on board. *The
Singapore MRT is not exactly a backwater system and carries high
volumes. *I would expect the next MRT line - the Downtown Line - will
also be fully automated and it will have a high level of patronage
given its route. The stations are designed with platform edge doors to
provide full segregation from the track. *On the older MRT lines half
height platform edge gates are being fitted at open air stations while
underground stations have platform edge doors.

I'm not sure how Hong Kong MTR is proceeding but the new South Island
line will probably be fully automatic given it is physically separate
from other MTR lines. *I'd expect the MTR will make the move to full
automation at some point when control system and rolling stock renewal
permit it. *Underground stations have had PEDs retrofitted while the
few open air stations on the older lines don't yet have doors or gates
at the platform edge. Newer lines have had PEDs from opening.

I suspect there may also be other fully automated lines in Asia but
I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about those systems.
--
Paul C

I didn't realise the Singapore system was automated. I was there last
year and used the MRT quite a bit.

However, is it not much easier to build an automated system from
scratch rather than convert an existing system? Think of the testing
that would be involved, not to mention the considerable cost of
converting existing infrastructure.

I would suspect that lines, or sections of lines, will be considered
for conversion to ATO as their track and rolling stock comes up for
renewal. Would you not have to do certain lines as a group as well? It
would be difficult to imagine an automated Circle Line and a non
automated District Line running side by side.

Paul wrote on 24 October 2011 19:11:21 ...
On Oct 24, 6:01 pm, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 01:19:15 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Just came across this on BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15422882
The only "fully remote" metro I have used is the VAL system in Lille,
and the trains there are far too small to be able to cope with the
crowds in London. "Fully remote" operation would require platform
edge doors at every station, and I would be very surprised if that
could be achieved in 9 years, given current budget constraints.

There are other examples of driverless automated metros. The North
East line and recently completed Circle line in Singapore are fully
automated and many trains run without any staff on board. The
Singapore MRT is not exactly a backwater system and carries high
volumes. I would expect the next MRT line - the Downtown Line - will
also be fully automated and it will have a high level of patronage
given its route. The stations are designed with platform edge doors to
provide full segregation from the track. On the older MRT lines half
height platform edge gates are being fitted at open air stations while
underground stations have platform edge doors.

I'm not sure how Hong Kong MTR is proceeding but the new South Island
line will probably be fully automatic given it is physically separate
from other MTR lines. I'd expect the MTR will make the move to full
automation at some point when control system and rolling stock renewal
permit it. Underground stations have had PEDs retrofitted while the
few open air stations on the older lines don't yet have doors or gates
at the platform edge. Newer lines have had PEDs from opening.

I suspect there may also be other fully automated lines in Asia but
I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about those systems.
--
Paul C

I didn't realise the Singapore system was automated. I was there last
year and used the MRT quite a bit.

However, is it not much easier to build an automated system from
scratch rather than convert an existing system?

Yes, but converting an existing system is certainly not impossible. The
RATP in Paris are doing just that with Métro line 1 at present, having
installed platform-edge doors at all stations. Currently it works with
ATO like the Central/Victoria/Jubilee lines in London. Note that Paris
retrofitted ATO to most lines starting in the 1970s. Some of the
converted 1959-vintage stock is still running.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On 24/10/2011 19:11, Paul wrote:


It
would be difficult to imagine an automated Circle Line and a non
automated District Line running side by side.

Nuremberg has automatic and conventionally-driven trains sharing tracks
for part of their route.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 01:19:15AM -0700, Paul wrote:

Ticket office closures, reductions in hours and job losses are more
likely though (I would have thought) However given TfL's recent
experience with the unions, this is more likely to happen gradually
over a number of years rather than in one fell swoop.

Or perhaps it's better to just get all Crowism out of the way in one go.

And it's gonna suck for people wanting to sort out Oystery problems.

--
David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice

If I could read only one thing it would be the future, in the
entrails of the ******* denying me access to anything else.

On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:27:50 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 01:19:15AM -0700, Paul wrote:

Ticket office closures, reductions in hours and job losses are more
likely though (I would have thought) However given TfL's recent
experience with the unions, this is more likely to happen gradually
over a number of years rather than in one fell swoop.

Or perhaps it's better to just get all Crowism out of the way in one go.

I wonder if Bob Crow realises that ultimately he's going to be responsible
not only for the underground being a more intrusive system (thanks, but I
don't want to give LU my bank details just for occasional PAYG use) but also
for the loss of a lot of his members jobs in the long run.

B2003

On 24/10/2011 16:14, Paul Scott wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message
...

Yes, that's pretty much what it says. I think the operator will still
be in charge of closing the doors, but won't normally sit in the cab
(in fact, future trains may not have a cab as such).

OTOH all the trains currently being introduced check the doors by using
a bank of CCTV monitors in the cab, with the pictures provided by fixed
cameras all the way down the platform. They aren't likely to replicate
that feature at a number of positions all the way down the train, so
even with full ATO, I expect the proposed DLR style 'door closer' is
still going to sit in the cab.

IIRC the DLR operators often use the front seat and observe the platform
mirrors when the platforms are at their most crowded anyway...

Paul S

DLR operators also have to drive trains on occasion, in order to stay in
practice.

On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 08:01:26 +0100, Arthur Figgis
wrote:

On 24/10/2011 19:11, Paul wrote:
It
would be difficult to imagine an automated Circle Line and a non
automated District Line running side by side.

Nuremberg has automatic and conventionally-driven trains sharing tracks
for part of their route.

A little easier for them given the lack of platform-edge doors I
suppose - I find that a bit odd.

As ATO and ATP are usually separate systems these days (so trains can
be driven manually at full speed) it should be possible here if the
"manual" train has the right ATP. I wonder how we got, or rather
kept, the situation where different ex-infracos are installing
different systems.

Richard.