Railroad Forums 

  • WMATA Automatic Train Control

  • Discussion related to DC area passenger rail services from Northern Virginia to Baltimore, MD. Includes Light Rail and Baltimore Subway.
Discussion related to DC area passenger rail services from Northern Virginia to Baltimore, MD. Includes Light Rail and Baltimore Subway.

Moderators: mtuandrew, therock, Robert Paniagua

 #1611578  by STrRedWolf
 
Going through the report...
  • Alstom Gen2 track circuits were replaced (hopefully not with "newer" Gen2's)
  • Automatic operation classified "GoA2" (Automated enter/leave station, automated door opening, operator required) is set to return only on Red line during rush hour in Q4 Fiscal Year 2023.
  • All other lines estimated launch Q2 FY 2023.
  • WMATA is looking at switching to CBTC after the return.
 #1611873  by Sand Box John
 
STrRedWolf]
Going through the report...

  • Alstom Gen2 track circuits were replaced (hopefully not with "newer" Gen2's)
  • Automatic operation classified "GoA2" (Automated enter/leave station, automated door opening, operator required) is set to return only on Red line during rush hour in Q4 Fiscal Year 2023.
4th quarter 2023 runs from April 1 to June 30 2023.

  • All other lines estimated launch Q2 FY 2023.
Actually it says Q2 FY 2024. 2nd quarter 2024 runs from October 1 to December 31 2023

  • WMATA is looking at switching to CBTC after the return.
WMATA has been looking into implement Communication Base Train Control sense the late 1990s.

When you consider WMATA has spent tens of millions of dollars replacing the signaling hardware on the original 103 mile part of the system which makes all of the hardware on the entire 129 mile system less the 20 years old, it makes no sense to even begin to start rolling out Communication Base Train Control until at least 25 years from now. It should also be noted that Communication Base Train Control is not the do all and be all to allow shorter headways. The single thing right now that controls the length of headways is station dwell times.
 #1611920  by Sand Box John
 
west point
DThat makes sense. What is the high average station dwell times and which stations?


Ballston, Bethesda, Columbia Heights, Crystal City, Dupont Circle, Farragut North, Farragut West, Foggy Bottom, Gallery Place, L'Enfant Plaza, Metro Center, McPherson Square, Pentagon, Pentagon City, Silver Spring and Union Station can be between of 30 and 45 seconds. To get headway under 2 minute you need dwell time that are 20 seconds or less.

The length of time there is no speed commands when a train is stopped at a platform is the minimum length of the dwell time.
 #1611950  by STrRedWolf
 
Sand Box John wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 7:09 pm Ballston, Bethesda, Columbia Heights, Crystal City, Dupont Circle, Farragut North, Farragut West, Foggy Bottom, Gallery Place, L'Enfant Plaza, Metro Center, McPherson Square, Pentagon, Pentagon City, Silver Spring and Union Station can be between of 30 and 45 seconds. To get headway under 2 minute you need dwell time that are 20 seconds or less.
Given that it can take 5-10 seconds for the operator to move, open the control panel for the doors on the opposite side of the car, and push the button... yeah, I'd like that cut out with some auto-opening.
 #1613045  by farecard
 
I've wondered if dwell could be reduced by designating the end doors as enter only, and the center as exit only.

Difficult to retrain the ridership, but as close to the Spanish solution as possible.
 #1613049  by KTHW
 
Good luck getting people to enter/exit through the designated doors. People already try to get in the train before letting everyone off, and can’t even stand on the correct side of the escalator.
 #1613063  by RandallW
 
Only allowing certain doors for entry/exit is a guarantee of longer dwell times--those trains can easily be too crowded to move a wheelchair or bicycle between doors like that.
 #1613090  by octr202
 
Wouldn't the best bet (long term) be to switch to a four-door car design? Or are there reasons (other than maximizing seating versus standing capacity) why WMATA doesn't want to go this route?

Given how massive Metro cars are (compared to many other RT systems) I'm still surprised they stuck with the three-door layout.
 #1613124  by west point
 
Well if automatic train control had been working then the drunk train operator would not passed out.
The train would have at least gotten the train to next station.
 #1613145  by STrRedWolf
 
west point wrote: Thu Jan 05, 2023 11:21 pm Well if automatic train control had been working then the drunk train operator would not passed out.
The train would have at least gotten the train to next station.
It would of stopped the same way. They have to hold a deadman switch in position, regardless of automatic or manual operation. The operator would of passed out, slipped off the deadman, and stopped the train.

This is where in-cab cameras are needed.
 #1615946  by Sand Box John
 
octr202
Wouldn't the best bet (long term) be to switch to a four-door car design? Or are there reasons (other than maximizing seating versus standing capacity) why WMATA doesn't want to go this route?

Given how massive Metro cars are (compared to many other RT systems) I'm still surprised they stuck with the three-door layout.


When the specifications for the 5k contract was being drawn up back in the 1990s the idea of designing them with 4 doors was looked at. It was decided to retain the 3 door design as it would have lessened the structure strength of the monocoque car body. To maintain equal or greater structure strength, the 4 door designed monocoque car body was found to exceeded the maximum dry weight.

The primary reason why WMATA went to stainless steel with the 7k cars was to increase their structure strength as pound for pound stainless steel is stronger then aluminum.
 #1636816  by tommyboy6181
 
Sand Box John wrote:octr202
Wouldn't the best bet (long term) be to switch to a four-door car design? Or are there reasons (other than maximizing seating versus standing capacity) why WMATA doesn't want to go this route?

Given how massive Metro cars are (compared to many other RT systems) I'm still surprised they stuck with the three-door layout.


When the specifications for the 5k contract was being drawn up back in the 1990s the idea of designing them with 4 doors was looked at. It was decided to retain the 3 door design as it would have lessened the structure strength of the monocoque car body. To maintain equal or greater structure strength, the 4 door designed monocoque car body was found to exceeded the maximum dry weight.

The primary reason why WMATA went to stainless steel with the 7k cars was to increase their structure strength as pound for pound stainless steel is stronger then aluminum.
The interesting thing is that WMATA is switchign back to monocoque Aluminum bodies on the new Hitachi 8000 series cars instead of stainless steel that Kawasaki used on the 7000 series.

As for the track circuits, as far as I know Ansaldo STS (now Hitachi STS) was responsible for most of tne replacements. I do think that Alstom circuits was used on phase 1 of the Silver Line.
 #1638937  by Windstorm
 
There’s discussion of going back to aluminum, the problem they have is they may have to legally re-bid it if they make such a major design change