Signalling and Automation

[colinw]

Railway Gazette International -> click here

9 May 2012

AUSTRALIA: Queensland Rail requested expressions of interest on May 9 for the supply of European Train Control System Level 2 lineside and onboard equipment for its South East Queensland electrified suburban network.

According to the tender documents, QR is seeking 'to improve operational safety, improve the capacity of the existing network and to use the opportunity to simplify and re-write the operating principles, safety rules and procedures'.

Successful respondents would be asked to participate in a Collaborative Development Group to develop 'interoperability rules for the possible future implementation of ETCS Level 2', prior to contracts being let. Responses are required by May 30.

Tender documents here:
https://secure.publicworks.qld.gov.au/etender/tender/display/tender-details.do?id=6465&action=display-tender-details

[ozbob]

   good that this is now out in the public domain ..

[colinw]

I can see very few downsides with ETCS Level 2, other than the cost of the initial rollout.

My only concern is that the Newman Government sees high capacity signalling and shoehorning more trains across Merivale as an alternative to CRR, which is most emphatically is NOT.

[somebody]

What would it take us to?  24tph mains 27.5tph suburbans?

[colinw]

Its no silver bullet, but depending on the configuration should be able to get you to high 20s to perhaps 30 trains per hour per track.

The Swiss Railways (SBB) reported about a 15% increase in capacity with Level 2 signalling, best case was about 110 second headways or roughly 32 TPH on their installation. Around 28 seems more typical for conventional speed lines in Europe.  High speed lines are lower capacity (in TPH), due to the longer section lengths and greater braking distances - best case seems to be about 5 minute headways (12 TPH) on the Rome to Naples high speed line.

You do not go "bung in ETCS Level 2 then see how many trains per hour we can run".

Rather you specify the desired capacity (e.g. 28 TPH), then perform modelling based on the performance characteristics of typical trains (length, brake delay, service braking rate, emergency braking rate) and design an installation which will support the desired capacity with some margin.  Higher capacity = higher system cost.

Mixed traffic railways also cannot do as well as railways with a more uniform traffic, due to the longer braking distances of freight trains. E.g. you might have an installation that could handle EMUs at 30 TPH, but as soon as you put a freight train through its longer braking distance will cause it to "eat up" several slots that could be occupied by the better performing suburban trains.

Note also that there is an inverse relationship between capacity (in TPH) and train speed.

All of the above is of course grossly over simplified.

[somebody]

Hmm, I'd have thought it would know the braking performance of each train and authorise based on that, rather than the worst train.

[colinw]

Hmm, I'd have thought it would know the braking performance of each train and authorise based on that, rather than the worst train.

Yes, it does know the performance of each train.  However if you put a "worst case" train through it eats capacity because it cannot follow as closely.

It doesn't restrict all trains to the performance of the worst train (unless it is a really badly designed deployment with conservative assumptions).

The actual braking curve calculations occur on board each train, i.e. each train gets a movement authority and calculates its own target speed limits (advising the driver via in-cab signalling).

Clearly I've failed to convey something here :-)

[Fares_Fair]

Railway Gazette International -> click here

9 May 2012

AUSTRALIA: Queensland Rail requested expressions of interest on May 9 for the supply of European Train Control System Level 2 lineside and onboard equipment for its South East Queensland electrified suburban network.

According to the tender documents, QR is seeking 'to improve operational safety, improve the capacity of the existing network and to use the opportunity to simplify and re-write the operating principles, safety rules and procedures'.

Successful respondents would be asked to participate in a Collaborative Development Group to develop 'interoperability rules for the possible future implementation of ETCS Level 2', prior to contracts being let. Responses are required by May 30.

Tender documents here:
https://secure.publicworks.qld.gov.au/etender/tender/display/tender-details.do?id=6465&action=display-tender-details

Wonder if this includes up to the Sunshine Coast, probably not.
It's interurban.
Still good to see the points raised re: op's, safety etc.

[colinw]

There's no reason it couldn't extend to Nambour, Rosewood, etc.  I'd say the priority corridor for it is likely to be Gold Coast and the inner city, where the capacity constraints are most severe.  There are no technical reasons why two different ATP systems cannot co-exist, provided their communications mediums don't interfere. It is done in many places overseas, e.g. the Marmaray project in Turkey where ETCS Level 2 and CBTC will co-exist on the same line.

For that matter, the current ATP system used by QR co-existed with the old ATC system (used by the ICE & 3900 locos) for some years.

The ETCS standard also permit creating a special mode called ETCS-STM (Specific Transmission Module), where the ETCS system will get its authorities & track information from a legacy signalling system. Therefore to run ETCS equipped trains over Caboolture to Nambour, a STM could be created to read & translate the existing ATP radio signals & transponders for use by the ETCS system on the train.  Again, this is done a lot in Europe where ETCS rollouts interface with existing national ATP systems.

This paper gives some idea of the mass of different national systems they had to contend with in Europe:
http://www.ertms-conference.com/conferences/2006/docs/c2_camurri.pdf

[Fares_Fair]

Sunshine Coast line capacity constraints (single line track) are more severe based upon reports and studies I have read.
Not saying they don't have issues, as they do.
Merivale bridge crisis due in 2016.

Sunshine Coast crisis in the past, here and now until somewhere in the future, 2021 to Landsborough, 2031 to Nambour, unless the current government acts before then.
None of the areas mentioned have to use 26 rail buses to supplement their trains.

[colinw]

Sunshine Coast line capacity constraints (single line track) are more severe based upon reports and studies I have read.

That is true, but there is NOTHING an ETCS level 2 system or any other signalling system can do to remove the physical constraints imposed by section running times between loops on a single track. High capacity signalling can give you an increment in capacity only if the latent capacity is present via double or multiple tracks.  Even then, it can do very little if the constraints are physical in nature (flat junctions, low speed turnouts, etc.).

When it comes to the Sunshine Coast line, it won't help at all, unless combined with other measures like passing lanes / duplication, or fleeting (running multiple trains through in the one direction).

ETCS level 2 is NOT a silver bullet. It will incrementally increase capacity on the existing system, and allow us to squeeze every last bit of capacity out of bottlenecks like Merivale Bridge.  It should also create the discontinuity in operating practices that will allow DOO to be introduced, hence efficiency gains.

It will not stave off the inevitable much beyond 2016 (if indeed it can even be commissioned by then - a system wide level 2 rollout by 2016 would be a brave thing to attempt).

It certainly is not a substitute for CRR, and if the Government thinks it is then they are even dumber than I already suspect them of being.

[petey3801]

I have heard on the grapevine that the Gold Coast will be the next section to recieve ATP, so it may actually be a test section for ETCS instead of the current ATP used on the Sunshine Coast/West. (Note: This is pure speculation, and it is certainly possible the current QR ATP system will be implemented on the Gold Coast instead, especailly considering the 100/120 series IMUs are supposedly recieving ATP - But once again, they could upgraded to use ETCS and be the testers of this? Who knows!?!)

[Stillwater]

It will probably be the same old story for the SCL - the new duplicated line to Nambour will have ETCS Level 2, just wait until 2031.

[Arnz]

ATP I would assume should already be installed on most if not all IMU100/120s, considering the contract for ATP installation was made public 2 years ago iirc

I would assume the ATPs on the older IMUs are not operational yet? Considering they still have to train staff first.

[colinw]

AFAIK the IMU fitout with ATP is for operation north of Caboolture. I am not aware of any plans to extend the current ATP to the Gold Coast line.

[petey3801]

ATP I would assume should already be installed on most if not all IMU100/120s, considering the contract for ATP installation was made public 2 years ago iirc

I would assume the ATPs on the older IMUs are not operational yet? Considering they still have to train staff first.

It was installed from new(?) on the older IMUs, so all the wiring is already in place. By what I was told from one of the EDi Engineers the other day though, qr are wanting it installed in a different way. Currently all the wiring goes toward the 8 cab, but the new method wants it going to the 5 cab apparently. Will be interesting to see how it pans out.

Regarding the Gold Coast ATP, it was something I heard from tutor drivers while on a refresher course at some point not too long ago.

[ozbob]

Automatic Train Protection (ATP)

From http://www.railsafe.org.au/section.jsp?id=8684

Automatic Train Protection (ATP) is a system that relays signal information, track speed information and other track information to trains, and can automatically slow or stop trains if they exceed the track speeds or approach signals at STOP at too high a speed. It will also stop trains that pass a signal at STOP unless a specific procedure is followed.  Its implementation in the RailCorp Network was a recommendation of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Waterfall accident.

[ozbob]

European Train Control System

--> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Train_Control_System

[somebody]

In spite of the lack of ATP, QR have a better safety record than Cityrail.

[colinw]

We need an open tender for bog standard ERTMS level 2.  No silly bespoke ATP systems, go with the standard, that way there is no 'vendor lockin'.

[ozbob]

We need an open tender for bog standard ERTMS level 2.  No silly bespoke ATP systems, go with the standard, that way there is no 'vendor lockin'.

Seems the way to go ... 

What is ERTMS/ETCS ? --> http://www.irse.org.hk/eNewsletter/issue06/Technical-Articles/ETCS/ETCS.htm

[BrizCommuter]

Simple answer - yes!

Obviously standards based signalling with ATP incorporated should be used, such as ERTMS level 2.

[longboi]

ETCS seems like a good way to go.

Are we talking about just the City network or statewide? If it were to go statewide, then presumably all rollingstock given access to the QR Network (e.g. XPT) would require in cab signalling systems. Or could there be a mix of level 1 & 2?

[Golliwog]

ETCS seems like a good way to go.

Are we talking about just the City network or statewide? If it were to go statewide, then presumably all rollingstock given access to the QR Network (e.g. XPT) would require in cab signalling systems. Or could there be a mix of level 1 & 2?

Not sure where it sits on the scale of ATP-ETCS (looks like it might have the vendor locked in?), but this is what the ARTC is doing: http://atms.artc.com.au/
In their FAQ they talk about trains not equipped with their in cab system can still use it.

[petey3801]

Going by the recently opened line in The Netherlands (Lelystad Centrum to Zwolle), trains can run on ETCS track whether they're fitted with it or not.

The new line is built for 200km/h running, with both the normal Dutch Railways ATB system (their version of ATP) and ETCS. Speeds are limited to 160km/h on ATB, 200km/h on ETCS.

Basically, (there is a video on youtube... I will see if I can find it..), when an ETCS fitted train uses the tracks (beacons are in the same place for ETCS and ATB), the signal blacks out for a short time when the loco/train runs over the beacons. When a non-ETCS train goes across, it runs as normal (on signals).

So, if it's desiged correctly, ETCS and non-ETCS trains can run on the same tracks.

Edit: Video is here:

[SurfRail]

I think we should be following this up with them directly for answers about why this has never been progressed.  Colin will already know some of the story from his professional involvement, but we are still plugged into the people running the joint and I think it is worth pushing.

[ozbob]

I think we should be following this up with them directly for answers about why this has never been progressed.  Colin will already know some of the story from his professional involvement, but we are still plugged into the people running the joint and I think it is worth pushing.

Anyone know if anything is happening with ATP? 

[petey3801]

I think we should be following this up with them directly for answers about why this has never been progressed.  Colin will already know some of the story from his professional involvement, but we are still plugged into the people running the joint and I think it is worth pushing.

Anyone know if anything is happening with ATP?

Nothing that i've heard of, but then again, we don't get told too much 

[colinw]

Nothing I can report either. Its real quiet ...

[#Metro]

ATP = Automatic Tony Protection   

[petey3801]

ATP = Automatic Tony Protection   

[ozbob]

Media release 9th April 2013



SEQ: Suburban rail network needs Automatic Train Protection too!

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers has said the introduction of Automatic Train Protection (ATP) which incorporates improved signalling is well overdue on the suburban rail network in SEQ (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Automatic Train Protection (ATP) is a system that relays signal information, track speed information and other track information to trains, and can automatically slow or stop trains if they exceed the track speeds or approach signals at STOP at too high a speed. It will also stop trains that pass a signal at STOP unless a specific procedure is followed."

"There are concerns with rail safety generally and it is time that ATP was introduced on the suburban rail network."

ATP is needed because:

Safety - the current Automatic Warning System installed on Queensland Rail's suburban network will not prevent crashes or derailments caused by:

1) Excessive speed around corners or through switches.
2) Excessive speed through red signals compromising the safe stopping distance.
3) Excessive speed through yellow signals, again compromising the safe stopping distance.
4) Excessive speed on approach to dead end tracks, such as at termini.

ATP will prevent the majority of crashes caused by the above.

Capacity - ATP in conjunction with a high capacity signalling system such as European Railway Traffic Management System - ERTMS - level 2 allows for higher train frequencies and/or higher reliability.  This is important as we approach maximum capacity limits on the Merivale Bridge.

Cost savings - ERTMS level 2 has less track wayside equipment, reducing equipment maintenance costs.  Longer term significant cost savings.

Open market - as ERTMS is standards based, multiple manufacturers can bid for contracts. Multiple manufacturers can also be involved in a contract. Leads times may be faster, and approval processes may be simplified.

"It appears that moves to implement ATP have stalled (3).  We can really afford to wait any longer?"

References:

1. Automatic Train Protection (ATP) http://www.railsafe.org.au/section.jsp?id=8684

2. The European Railway Traffic Management System (ERTMS)  http://www.ertms.net/ertms/ertms-in-brief.aspx

3. Rail Safety Systems Assessment of the South East Queensland Rail Network http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/Safety/railsafety/rail%20safety%20systems%20assessment%20of%20seq%20rail%20network%20update%202.pdf

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[HappyTrainGuy]

The hell are switches???  *puts on my yankie hat * Oh those switches 

[ozbob]

The hell are switches???  *puts on my yankie hat * Oh those switches 

Goddam points ... media remember ... they understand switches, switch tracks, you say points and the hand goes up to point ...

[mufreight]

The hell are switches???  *puts on my yankie hat * Oh those switches 

Yes switches, those things that are used to turn lights on or off.   

[HappyTrainGuy]

The hell are switches???  *puts on my yankie hat * Oh those switches 

Yes switches, those things that are used to turn lights on or off.   

Ah the signal light switches. I should stop turning them off when I leave the room then 

[ozbob]

ATP is an important issue, but check this out

Derailed: Brisbane's train network in disrepair with 100km of 'high risk' track

" ... In a letter to DTMR dated March 30, 2012, Queensland Rail's Network Business Group manager Tim Ripper flagged the possibility of closing tracks if the work was not undertaken.

"The purpose of the project is to address assets that have been identified to have degraded to a point where there is significant risk of failure on the network," he wrote.

A summary of the assessments obtained by The Courier-Mail noted the switches - which enable trains to move from one track to another - had degraded to "a high state of risk" and needed to be replaced.

"These turnouts (switches) present a high likelihood of impact on network operations and passenger safety should a failure and subsequent derailment occur," read the summary ... "

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

11th April 2013

Re: SEQ: Suburban rail network needs Automatic Train Protection too!

Greetings,

Be nice to know what has happened to the ATP project?  Anyone got a clue??  Thanks ....

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Media release 9th April 2013



SEQ: Suburban rail network needs Automatic Train Protection too!

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers has said the introduction of Automatic Train Protection (ATP) which incorporates improved signalling is well overdue on the suburban rail network in SEQ (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Automatic Train Protection (ATP) is a system that relays signal information, track speed information and other track information to trains, and can automatically slow or stop trains if they exceed the track speeds or approach signals at STOP at too high a speed. It will also stop trains that pass a signal at STOP unless a specific procedure is followed."

"There are concerns with rail safety generally and it is time that ATP was introduced on the suburban rail network."

ATP is needed because:

Safety - the current Automatic Warning System installed on Queensland Rail's suburban network will not prevent crashes or derailments caused by:

1) Excessive speed around corners or through switches.
2) Excessive speed through red signals compromising the safe stopping distance.
3) Excessive speed through yellow signals, again compromising the safe stopping distance.
4) Excessive speed on approach to dead end tracks, such as at termini.

ATP will prevent the majority of crashes caused by the above.

Capacity - ATP in conjunction with a high capacity signalling system such as European Railway Traffic Management System - ERTMS - level 2 allows for higher train frequencies and/or higher reliability.  This is important as we approach maximum capacity limits on the Merivale Bridge.

Cost savings - ERTMS level 2 has less track wayside equipment, reducing equipment maintenance costs.  Longer term significant cost savings.

Open market - as ERTMS is standards based, multiple manufacturers can bid for contracts. Multiple manufacturers can also be involved in a contract. Leads times may be faster, and approval processes may be simplified.

"It appears that moves to implement ATP have stalled (3).  We can really afford to wait any longer?"

References:

1. Automatic Train Protection (ATP) http://www.railsafe.org.au/section.jsp?id=8684

2. The European Railway Traffic Management System (ERTMS)  http://www.ertms.net/ertms/ertms-in-brief.aspx

3. Rail Safety Systems Assessment of the South East Queensland Rail Network http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/Safety/railsafety/rail%20safety%20systems%20assessment%20of%20seq%20rail%20network%20update%202.pdf

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[colinw]

Interesting expression of interest on QTenders ->    
Expression of Interest for Design, Development, Certification and Rollout of an ETCS/STM System for IMU160 Class Trains

In ETCS, an STM is a Special Transmission Module - an extension to the on-board ETCS system that allows it to operate with a legacy non-ETCS signalling system.  In Europe, STMs have been deployed to allow ETCS equipped trains to run over track equipped for existing ATP systems like LZB/PZB (Germany), ASFA (Spain) or Ebicab (Sweden/Finlandl).

What we can infer from this EOI is that Queensland Rail's technical direction is to go to ETCS within the Brisbane Suburban Area, and fit an ETCS/STM to  trains that have to operate over the existing ATP equipped track. This avoid dual fitting of ATP systems.  The STM would extend the ETCS system to add hardware to read the existing ATP transponders and the ATP radio broadcast, plus software to communicate that data to the ETCS system, and to implement any ATP rules that are QR specific and vary from ETCS.  This would be a non-trivial development for anyone awarded the job.

What I find very strange about this EOI is that they seem to want to go for an ETCS+STM fitout on the IMUs ahead of rolling out any ETCS infrastructure in the Brisbane Suburban Area - an odd thing to do given that Government funding for ETCS is not secured (that we know of), so they could end up with a stranded investment that can only operate in STM mode over the existing ATP equipped track.

Interesting times ... 

[ozbob]

Still, seems a positive move in the right direction ...  might be more going on behind the scenes not public at this time?