by rail10
Do these signals used can be integrated into a single system?
Railroad Forums
Moderators: sery2831, CRail
diburning wrote:There is a phantom stop code on the Orange line at Tufts (formerly New England) Medical Center for years. I forget which side it's on, it could be both sides, but the train receives a random stop code (or loses signal) and stops just short of entering the station. I've seen them do the same while exiting the station (train stops after about 2 cars go into the tunnel, leaving 4 cars on the platform) where the air just dumps and they sit for a minute before the train can leave.I've definitely seen trains dump upon leaving Tufts northbound and Chinatown northbound. And, most infamously... Between DTX and State, heading northbound. It seems as though trains are more likely receive a penalty between DTX and State than they are to proceed unhindered.
Gerry6309 wrote:The Red line was designed for 45 mph on most sections and 35 on curves, but is limited to 40 and 25 by the codes. Originally the 35 mph sections were protected by time signals, which could be triggered by judicious coasting. Now the slow sections are enforced well in advance of the old time signal locations, causing very noticeable penalty applications at locations like the bottom of the tunnel from Broadway to South Station and around Freeport St. heading for Fields Corner. Another problem is the sharp curve at Harvard which is the equivalent of the old 90 degree curves on the el structures.Why didn't they design the curves and the speed codes to match?
Gerry6309 wrote:Personally I think cab signals and ATO have no place on rapid transit.I'm curious, what do you feel would be a better solution?
Finch wrote:Wayside signaling with automatic train stops would be fine.Gerry6309 wrote:Personally I think cab signals and ATO have no place on rapid transit.I'm curious, what do you feel would be a better solution?
Gerry6309 wrote:Amen!Finch wrote:Wayside signaling with automatic train stops would be fine.Gerry6309 wrote:Personally I think cab signals and ATO have no place on rapid transit.I'm curious, what do you feel would be a better solution?
Gerry6309 wrote:Nobody's going back to old mechanical tech. Even PATH and NYC Subway are accelerating their CBTC rollouts because of how many trip stops and heaters got fried during Sandy. It's too maintenance-intensive, and in addition to the service-enhancing side of CBTC (if it's programmed that way) the large reduction in the amount of trackside hardware and replacement with solid-state electronics and radio frequencies saves money over waysides + train stops over the life of the installation. In addition to not being as easily ruined in a 50-year flood event.Finch wrote:Wayside signaling with automatic train stops would be fine.Gerry6309 wrote:Personally I think cab signals and ATO have no place on rapid transit.I'm curious, what do you feel would be a better solution?
MBTA3247 wrote:What does CBTC stand for, please?Take your choice:
F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:Sadly, the one way to make such electronic equipment reliable is to keep it away from vibration, voltage spikes, steel dust and other things found in subways. The Red Line ran like a top until the ATO Virus started to spread in 1980. The MBTA didn't feel it was fair to keep all the signal failures restricted to Quincy and Braintree Passengers. Even the 1975 pileup outside Park Street was the result of broken rules, not broken equipment. It has never worked right, and it never will give us the smooth ride that a well trained motorman obeying the rules can give without interference by arbitrary slowdowns.Gerry6309 wrote:Nobody's going back to old mechanical tech. Even PATH and NYC Subway are accelerating their CBTC rollouts because of how many trip stops and heaters got fried during Sandy. It's too maintenance-intensive, and in addition to the service-enhancing side of CBTC (if it's programmed that way) the large reduction in the amount of trackside hardware and replacement with solid-state electronics and radio frequencies saves money over waysides + train stops over the life of the installation. In addition to not being as easily ruined in a 50-year flood event.Finch wrote:Wayside signaling with automatic train stops would be fine.Gerry6309 wrote:Personally I think cab signals and ATO have no place on rapid transit.I'm curious, what do you feel would be a better solution?
If the T goes for CBTC, Blue will be the first one to get it even if Red needs it worst to fix the headways. For the same reasons...it's less maint-intensive for sitting out there in a flood plain.