|
|
Post by vic09 on Apr 5, 2012 8:53:27 GMT
Hi
I really dont agree with TBTC being installed on the Northern Line. It just wont work and why TBTC? Is it cheaper? Why cant they install some sort of copy-cat system of the central lines ATO, what allows for manual driving. A lot of the 1995 stock drivers seem quite happy with manual driving. I would of thought that TFL would have learnt there lesson from the nightmare of the Jubilee line but looks like they havent .
What do you think, a complete mess or a well managed upgrade, I know what im going with!
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Apr 5, 2012 9:26:19 GMT
Whilst I am not the most technical person to ask about Signaling systems i dont agree either.
I very much dowbt that TBTC is cheaper to install as with most signaling systems which cost several millions of pounds to install. TBTC does allow manual driving however its more complicated than the central as you have to look at the tod all the time rather than the road ahead. Yet other metro's around the world use TBTC and they are more reliable take Hong Kong MTR which uses TBTC. I much prefer a victoria line signaling system DTG miles better than TBTC how often does the victoria have non communicating trains? A complete mess or managed upgrade, probally a mess! What does everybody else think?
|
|
|
|
Post by vic09 on Apr 5, 2012 9:41:20 GMT
Indeed, i have an ESim on my computer which simulates TBTC on the Jubilee line, when driving manually if you go over the limit coming into platforms, the emergency brakes will apply.Im sure that drivers dont like driving maunally anymore. If they are driving manually as you said, your eyes are on the tod the whole time. What if a one under occurs!! No wonder you very rarely see a manual train on the jubilee line. The Vics system i agree is far better. And the best thing is you have not worrys when driving manually on the vic e.g sidings, because of the limiter on the 09ts
|
|
|
|
Post by londonstuff on Apr 5, 2012 9:46:59 GMT
Hi I really dont agree with TBTC being installed on the Northern Line. It just wont work and why TBTC? Is it cheaper? Why cant they install some sort of copy-cat system of the central lines ATO, what allows for manual driving. A lot of the 1995 stock drivers seem quite happy with manual driving. I would of thought that TFL would have learnt there lesson from the nightmare of the Jubilee line but looks like they havent . What do you think, a complete mess or a well managed upgrade, I know what im going with! As far as I'm aware the Jubilee and Northern lines were linked during the PPP era and when the upgrade was in the planning stage it was always the intention to give both lines the same upgrade, it's just at the time they didn't know how problematic it was going to be installing it. LU were very critical of the huge numbers of closures but in effect their hands were tied. If you compare the number of closures for Tube Lines to install the upgrade as opposed to the really relatively few planned for the same system on a much more complicated line, I'd say it was being managed well by LU. So, respectfully, I'd disagree with your 'complete mess' phrase - it's easy to say that but why not wait to say that with some information to back up your point? Surely they must teach you that in school nowadays?  Indeed, i have an ESim on my computer which simulates TBTC on the Jubilee line, when driving manually if you go over the limit coming into platforms, the emergency brakes will apply.Im sure that drivers dont like driving maunally anymore. Now you're basing your experiences based on a computer sim - I'm not being funny but I'm sure the people who work for LU must love hearing a 14 year old's negative comments based on playing with some trains on a screen. You're dealing with a lot of clever people who work for LU on here - please try to lift your comments above the banal and uninformed. |
|
|
|
Post by vic09 on Apr 5, 2012 10:27:46 GMT
Actully, im talking how hard it is for trainops to drive in manual mode.Not anything to do with what you have stated. If you want evidence about the complete mess, maybe have a look at the BBCs you've been deleyed, report showing why the upgrade of the Jubilee line is a mess. Even TFL's mike brown said that it had not gone to there expectations at all. Youre intitled to your own opinion but im only stating what I have learnt.
|
|
|
|
Post by racka on Apr 5, 2012 10:38:55 GMT
I much prefer a victoria line signaling system DTG miles better than TBTC how often does the victoria have non communicating trains? Probably a once or twice a week, though as the blocks and signalling areas on the Vic are pretty small, the impact of a train loosing communications is not so great, so you don't notice it. Indeed, i have an ESim on my computer which simulates TBTC on the Jubilee line, when driving manually if you go over the limit coming into platforms, the emergency brakes will apply. Which is exactly why, on a high capacity railway, ATO is the way to go. This is not a go at train operators, but proven studies show that an average human will make such a mistake (such as invoking the ATP) whilst doing a repetitive manual task which they are trained to do in the region of once every hundred or once every thousand attempts. A well developed ATO would make the same mistake in the order of once every 100,000 or more attempts. This is not withstanding the consistency improvements whilst driving between stations. Where an ATO can be consistent to within a second on a interstation run, train operators would struggle to be within 3 or 4 seconds. And don't forget, the closer that you try to get train operators to drive to the limit (i.e. not defensive driving), the more frequently mistakes will be made. I too am getting a little tired of every other thread here being: Trains should be driven manually Trains should be able to go faster etc. The decisions for line upgrades being as they are are all backed by well reasoned engineering decisions, with things such as future capacity increases in mind. Unless you have facts and reasoning to back up your theories, please don't state them. |
|
|
|
Post by jmm on Apr 5, 2012 11:48:49 GMT
Indeed, i have an ESim on my computer which simulates TBTC on the Jubilee line, when driving manually if you go over the limit coming into platforms, the emergency brakes will apply.Im sure that drivers dont like driving maunally anymore. If they are driving manually as you said, your eyes are on the tod the whole time. What if a one under occurs!! No wonder you very rarely see a manual train on the jubilee line. The Vics system i agree is far better. And the best thing is you have not worrys when driving manually on the vic e.g sidings, because of the limiter on the 09ts Going a bit OT...how did you get that simulator? Looking at their webpage, it doesn't seem to be available for the public... Were you refering to this?: www.3dvsl.com/rail-training |
|
|
|
Post by ducatisti on Apr 5, 2012 11:51:59 GMT
"The decisions for line upgrades being as they are are all backed by well reasoned engineering decisions, with things such as future capacity increases in mind. Unless you have facts and reasoning to back up your theories, please don't state them."
So why was the jubilee line such a foul-up?
Why is it still not delivering?
Why is work being done on the northern line until the jubilee line is proven to be working robustly?
What actual steps have been taken to prevent the same foul-ups occurring?
What additional resources are being deployed?
Decisions of this nature are rarely made for pure engineering reasons - and even if they are, the question asked of the engineering team may not be the right ones.
As an interesting metric on the jubilee line - how many train services have been lost to possesions/unscheduled failures etc related to the conversion? How many additional train services have *actually* been delivered since it started operating? How long until the latter is greater than the former?
|
|
|
|
Post by londonstuff on Apr 5, 2012 12:37:43 GMT
Actully, im talking how hard it is for trainops to drive in manual mode.Not anything to do with what you have stated. If you want evidence about the complete mess, maybe have a look at the BBCs you've been deleyed, report showing why the upgrade of the Jubilee line is a mess. Even TFL's mike brown said that it had not gone to there expectations at all. Youre intitled to your own opinion but im only stating what I have learnt. Difficulties in driving in manual mode is not really related to what you said in your original post, which is about the Northern line TBTC installation so it looks like you've contradicted yourself there. No doubt that the Jubilee installation didn't go according to plan, as I said myself in my post. I was also stating that rather than giving your self-acknowledged limited knowledge (understandable for a teenager) maybe it's better to listen to others' informed posts rather than speak about things as though you know them better than anyone. Like many others I'm getting fed up of these constant uninformed posts about signalling capacity with seemingly no regard for the wealth of knowledge from the people who contribute here. A crash-course on how to use the spellchecker might not go down badly either. |
|
|
|
Post by racka on Apr 5, 2012 13:07:07 GMT
"The decisions for line upgrades being as they are are all backed by well reasoned engineering decisions, with things such as future capacity increases in mind. Unless you have facts and reasoning to back up your theories, please don't state them." So why was the jubilee line such a foul-up? Why is it still not delivering? Why is work being done on the northern line until the jubilee line is proven to be working robustly? What actual steps have been taken to prevent the same foul-ups occurring? What additional resources are being deployed? Decisions of this nature are rarely made for pure engineering reasons - and even if they are, the question asked of the engineering team may not be the right ones. As an interesting metric on the jubilee line - how many train services have been lost to possesions/unscheduled failures etc related to the conversion? How many additional train services have *actually* been delivered since it started operating? How long until the latter is greater than the former? Not working for London Underground or on the Jubilee Line project, I wouldn't like to theorise as to the real answers to the questions above. I would imagine one factor was that the original contract was let by Tubelines, who were then bought back in house, causing management/contractual transfer issues. The tender process would have included a technical specification of some sort, which potential bidders would have responded to, and been scored against, along with other factors such as price. The people judging the tender process must have considered that Thales offered the best technical solution against the technical specifcation for the best cost (best value for money). It therefore must have been sold as being the correct solution for the job. |
|
|
|
Post by ducatisti on Apr 5, 2012 14:24:24 GMT
Hmmmm, a number of points
1) If it was let as one contract, that is a non-engineering decision that may have come back to bite everyone
2) the potential bidders would have responded to the technical specification - was that right? also, no contractor is actually going to say "nope, it all works fine, no point changing it" are they? - so the null hypothesis hasn't been tested by competitive tender
3) the magic word "price" - everything has a cost, including robustness. If a bad decision has been taken as to how much reliability has been paid for, that isn't a pure engineering decision
I have done a fair bit of tendering to a variety of organisations, and the quality of decision-making varies enormously. You are making huge assumptions to assume
1) the decision-making was based on the right premises
2) that the ideal solution (as opposed to the best available at the price offered including all faults) was chosen
3) that non-engineering factors did not have a large ammount to play in the final decision.
FWIW, I think ATO is probably a good idea. But until it works on the Jubilee and has done so in real operational conditions for some time to demonstrate robustness, then it shouldn't be started on the Northern. I'd also want to see some pretty hard evidence of a proper enquiry into what went wrong and some clear statements of how things will be done differently complete with mechanisms to make sure that the revised procedures are properly followed.
|
|
|
|
Post by claphammy on Apr 5, 2012 16:13:37 GMT
Trains should be driven manually Trains should be able to go faster etc. I get the impression most of the people who yarn on and on about manual driving are luddites who'd prefer the tube to still be running on steam... or at the very least would love it if the 67ts and A stock were still creaking along the rails... sigh. Some people hate progress. |
|
|
|
Post by stephenk on Apr 7, 2012 0:11:44 GMT
Hi I really dont agree with TBTC being installed on the Northern Line. It just wont work and why TBTC? Is it cheaper? Why cant they install some sort of copy-cat system of the central lines ATO, what allows for manual driving. A lot of the 1995 stock drivers seem quite happy with manual driving. I would of thought that TFL would have learnt there lesson from the nightmare of the Jubilee line but looks like they havent . What do you think, a complete mess or a well managed upgrade, I know what im going with! There is absolutely no safety case for new signalling systems to be designed primarily for manual driving on metro systems. Please stop this uninformed anti-ATO drivel. |
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Apr 7, 2012 4:04:24 GMT
I don't think the idea of TBTC is necessarily a terrible one, though the centralization of everything does make disastrous failures that take out the whole line more likely. But there are definitely a few weak points in the design of the current TBTC system, Seltrac. One problem is that the while the the system as a whole is mostly reliable, it's not quite reliable enough, and when it fails, there's not much that can be done.
I think it's instructive to look at how other metro systems around the world operate. The Moscow Metro has considerably more ridershi than the Tube, and higher service levels on its lines, with a peak service of 39 tph. There are a variety of signalling systems on the various lines, randing from 3-aspect colour light signal with train stops, not unlike what can be found in NYC to an ATP system that's like a simpler version of the Central Line ATP. But the principle is that there is always redundancy. On ATP-equipped lines, there are also traditional signals with train stops, so that a train with an ATP failure can keep going. On newer lines, there are no train stops, but there is an independent backup system that uses track circuit codes transmitted in the "wrong" direction along the track and picked up by the rear end of the train. So if both the primary and backup ATP receivers on the front of the train fail, then there's always the possibility of using the backup equipment in the rear of the train. Note that the track is considerably less likely to break than a cable, and if it doesn, it's not like the train can get very far anyway. But if even the backup system fails, the lines still have colour light signals that can be switched on (they're normally used for engineering trains and the like) and the train can continue, at somewhat reduced speed and with a second person in the cab, to the nearest siding.
|
|
|
|
Post by ajax the warrior on Apr 7, 2012 10:52:23 GMT
Some people hate progress. In recent times since the introduction of the 1995 stock and new timetabling and small adjustments to the current signalling system the northern line has transformed from the "misery line" to one of the best performing lines on LU, that is what I call progress and as someone who uses the line on a daily basis I can testify it is very reliable indeed. Now when the central line was re-signalled it cost a silly amount of money, took years to complete and caused a mountain of problems (i.e. ATO failing on a regular basis, ATO's awful way of not being able to coast causing severe motor defects and was very unreliable in general) and only to produce a service which is doesn’t have the ability to have the same frequency level as the legacy system did. Then as mentioned, the long running joke of the jubilee line that bared similarities with the above. Now as someone who has to use the northern line in its current, reliable state everyday, can you see how the prospect of being put through this saga again might seem a bit like a step back rather than going forward? |
|
