From Roger Ford's 'Informed Sources' e-preview:

Quote:

Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.

For example, during a recent run in a Great Western Railway Class 800 the
Universal Access Toilet was all lit up, but the door had lost power and
wouldn’t lock. When I reported this failure to a member of the on-board
staff, she replied that it was a common issue and the toilet needed
re-booting.

Lest you think that this is just a case of hide-bound traction and rolling
stock engineers unable to cope with new fangled technology, in the column I
quote the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter comparison.

Its software has been released in ‘blocks’. The latest block, which will
meet the full military specification, took over 30 iterations of the
software to implement. According to Arriva Rail London, the software for
the Bombardier Class 710 Aventra, which has yet to enter service, has
reached Version 27.


http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archiv...02.archive.txt

On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:
Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.

I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at intervals in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train where some or all of these screens fail, most often going completely blank part-way through the journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to life at City Thameslink or Farringdon when the power source is changed and I guess some parts of the system are rebooted, but not always. I wonder if the train companies are even aware of these problems - there's no obvious way of reporting them.

I was surprised that in most cases when the screens ail the audio announcements of stations continues as normal. I had assumed that the simplest way of providing audio and visual information was to generate them from the same system, but obviously they have at least partially duplicated things.

Modern buses are similarly afflicted: the Arriva 321 bus service (Luton - Watford) until recently had on-board screens giving information on the next stop, as well as audible announcements. That was at times very useful, especially for those travelling at night on unfamiliar routes. These were obviously not generated by a single system as on many bus journeys I found that the audio and video displays were exactly one bus stop out - which was very confusing. I see that ArrivaBus have now solved the problem by switching both systems off, so while the screens are still there, there is no no passenger information at all (unless you speak to the driver).




For example, during a recent run in a Great Western Railway Class 800 the
Universal Access Toilet was all lit up, but the door had lost power and
wouldn’t lock. When I reported this failure to a member of the on-board
staff, she replied that it was a common issue and the toilet needed
re-booting.

Lest you think that this is just a case of hide-bound traction and rolling
stock engineers unable to cope with new fangled technology, in the column I
quote the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter comparison.

Its software has been released in ‘blocks’. The latest block, which will
meet the full military specification, took over 30 iterations of the
software to implement. According to Arriva Rail London, the software for
the Bombardier Class 710 Aventra, which has yet to enter service, has
reached Version 27.


http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archiv...02.archive.txt


--
Clive Page

Clive Page wrote:
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:
Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.

I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on
Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at
intervals in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train
where some or all of these screens fail, most often going completely
blank part-way through the journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to
life at City Thameslink or Farringdon when the power source is changed
and I guess some parts of the system are rebooted, but not always. I
wonder if the train companies are even aware of these problems - there's
no obvious way of reporting them.

I was surprised that in most cases when the screens ail the audio
announcements of stations continues as normal. I had assumed that the
simplest way of providing audio and visual information was to generate
them from the same system, but obviously they have at least partially duplicated things.

Yes, that is surprising. Presumably the same data feeder system is used,
but the computerised visual and audio subsystems are different, maybe even
from different sub-contractors.


Modern buses are similarly afflicted: the Arriva 321 bus service (Luton
- Watford) until recently had on-board screens giving information on
the next stop, as well as audible announcements. That was at times very
useful, especially for those travelling at night on unfamiliar routes.
These were obviously not generated by a single system as on many bus
journeys I found that the audio and video displays were exactly one bus
stop out - which was very confusing. I see that ArrivaBus have now
solved the problem by switching both systems off, so while the screens
are still there, there is no no passenger information at all (unless you
speak to the driver).




For example, during a recent run in a Great Western Railway Class 800 the
Universal Access Toilet was all lit up, but the door had lost power and
wouldn’t lock. When I reported this failure to a member of the on-board
staff, she replied that it was a common issue and the toilet needed
re-booting.

Lest you think that this is just a case of hide-bound traction and rolling
stock engineers unable to cope with new fangled technology, in the column I
quote the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter comparison.

Its software has been released in ‘blocks’. The latest block, which will
meet the full military specification, took over 30 iterations of the
software to implement. According to Arriva Rail London, the software for
the Bombardier Class 710 Aventra, which has yet to enter service, has
reached Version 27.


http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archiv...02.archive.txt

In article ,
Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:
Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.

I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on
Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at
intervals in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train
where some or all of these screens fail, most often going completely
blank part-way through the journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to
life at City Thameslink or Farringdon when the power source is changed
and I guess some parts of the system are rebooted, but not always. I
wonder if the train companies are even aware of these problems - there's
no obvious way of reporting them.

I was surprised that in most cases when the screens ail the audio
announcements of stations continues as normal. I had assumed that the
simplest way of providing audio and visual information was to generate
them from the same system, but obviously they have at least partially duplicated things.

Yes, that is surprising. Presumably the same data feeder system is used,
but the computerised visual and audio subsystems are different, maybe even
from different sub-contractors.

If it's like the train PIS systems I have worked on then they are
almost certainly part of the same system, but the audio playout will
be sent from the PIS controller audio output direct into the train PA,
whereas the displays will be distributed through a separate output via
one or more intermediate controllers which feed the screens. It will
be something in the latter chain that is failing.

Nick
--
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

In uk.transport.london Recliner wrote:
Yes, that is surprising. Presumably the same data feeder system is used,
but the computerised visual and audio subsystems are different, maybe even
from different sub-contractors.

I assume it's like a modern car, which is a distributed system containing
dozens of ECUs (ie computers) flying in loose formation, joined by a
network. In the case of an 8 or 12 coach train there are probably hundreds
of nodes.

Building distributed systems is hard, especially when heterogenous, and when
involving physical inputs which are difficult to simulate in a test
environment (eg the kinematics of the train, doors, toilets, etc).

Theo

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 10:53:47 +0000
Clive Page wrote:
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:
Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.

I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on
Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at intervals
in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train where some or all
of these screens fail, most often going completely blank part-way through the
journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to life at City Thameslink or
Farringdon when the power source is changed and I guess some parts of the
system are rebooted, but not always. I wonder if the train companies are even
aware of these problems - there's no obvious way of reporting them.

At least thats not a show stopper, the trains can still be used. It seems
Siemens seem to have their ducks in line unlike Bombadier when it comes to
the important subsystems.

On 21 Jan 2019 11:38:48 +0000 (GMT)
Theo wrote:
In uk.transport.london Recliner wrote:
Yes, that is surprising. Presumably the same data feeder system is used,
but the computerised visual and audio subsystems are different, maybe even
from different sub-contractors.

I assume it's like a modern car, which is a distributed system containing
dozens of ECUs (ie computers) flying in loose formation, joined by a
network. In the case of an 8 or 12 coach train there are probably hundreds
of nodes.

Building distributed systems is hard, especially when heterogenous, and when

Not really. So long as there is a published API/interface to each subsystem
then the seperate nodes should just be black boxes with internals that the
system intergration team shouldn't have to worry about. The problems arise
when the published interfaces and/or behaviours don't match the actual ones.

involving physical inputs which are difficult to simulate in a test
environment (eg the kinematics of the train, doors, toilets, etc).

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.

In article ,
Clive Page wrote:

I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at intervals in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train where some or all of these screens fail, most often going completely blank part-way through the journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to life at City Thameslink or Farringdon when the power source is changed and I guess some parts of the system are rebooted, but not always. I wonder if the train companies are even aware of these problems - there's no obvious way of reporting them.

I suspect TL twitter have got bored of me sending them tweets showing
displays doing odd things...

--
Jonathan Amery. God says "Who will go for me? Who will extend my reach?
##### And who, when few will listen, will prophecy and preach?
#######__o And who, when few bid welcome, will offer all they know?
#######'/ And who, when few dare follow, will walk the road I show?

On 21/01/2019 12:23, wrote:

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.

But who would want the job of examining the logs?

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
What by Bruce
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtJEAud9vao

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 07:06:09 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 21/01/2019 12:23, wrote:

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.

But who would want the job of examining the logs?

So many obvious toilet joke responses, so hard to resist