Signalling and Automation

[Arnz]

The only benefit I can think of atm is that it allows the 160s to operate to Gympie North without a second driver?  As far as I'm aware IMU100/120s operating NBR to GYN requires a second driver due to no ATP equipment.

I've also heard a second driver is carried on the ICEs those days due to the (un)reliability of the ICE's ATP equipment, but I'm not sure if that's still the case now.

[colinw]

The ICE remains on the original ATP hardware, not the upgraded system that was fitted to the tilts, so I would not be surprised if there were reliability problems - that gear is getting quite long in the tooth now (like the ICE itself).  On the ICE we're talking late 1980s Motorola 68K based hardware, as compared to a much more modern and reliable PowerPC based system (known as WESTECT II) that is on the tilts.

[colinw]

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

I very much suspect so - it was odd to see a tender for an ETCS on-board system, but nothing out for the trackside infrastructure & signalling upgrades. 

Right now, if you fitted an ETCS on-board computer to a train, it would have nothing to talk to, except the old ATP trackside via an STM.

[#Metro]

Would be interesting to see the rollout of improved signalling and potentially automation (in the distant future) on the QR network.
---

Failure of 'fail safe' systems it seems, train overshot platform and forced up escalator.

In the aftermath of the crash, much of the focus has been on the driver who evidently fell asleep at the helm (for the second time this year). No word yet on why in this case, but broadly speaking, transit agencies would be wise to review their driver work loads on a regular basis. Driver exhaustion is not uncommon on city transit systems; Portland TriMet recently revamped its overtime rules, largely in response to a great investigative piece by the Oregonian's Joseph Rose.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/03/rare-non-tragic-chance-revisit-idea-driverless-trains/8739/

Like a fist to the jaw, Light Rail Vehicle 417 crashed into a barrier at the end of the Yellow Line, sending metal, bolts and glass flying. Three weeks later, after an employee posted an unapproved security video of the wreck on YouTube, TriMet told the public that it was caused by, simply, "operator error."

The error?  Veteran light-rail operator Joel Maunu, who started his shift at 3:45 a.m., nodded off at the controls of the 100-ton train. "He thinks he fell asleep," a TriMet supervisor wrote in a report after interviewing Maunu, "and the crash woke him up."

http://www.oregonlive.com/roadreport/index.ssf/2013/01/trimet_overtime_exhaustion_has.html

Bus Driver Crash on Drugs

[bcasey]

Apologies for my ignorance of how the driver operates a train, but don't most trains come with a dead-man pedal or something, so that if they fall asleep and let off the pedal, it stops the train?

Automation would definitely be very nice, and a lot easier to do with trains than with buses, but I imagine it will probably be a while before we get that here in Queensland. Not so much due to technology, but more a political issue with the driver's union and the risk of drivers losing their jobs.

[SurfRail]

The real fix for QR is ATP so SPADs are automatically caught.

Not 100% sure what vigilance controls are on the G:.

[#Metro]

Apologies for my ignorance of how the driver operates a train, but don't most trains come with a dead-man pedal or something, so that if they fall asleep and let off the pedal, it stops the train?

Yes, however accidents still happen, like the ones above. 'Failsafe' systems not entirely failsafe. There was an incident in Toronto on the TTC subway where slight misinstallation and a combination of perfect storm factors let a train through the ATP system causing a crash.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Russell_Hill_subway_accident

The accident had two direct causes: first the inexperienced driver, Robert Jeffrey, who mistook the signals, and the train stop which failed to protect the train due to a design error.

[ozbob]

European Train Control System ( ETCS ) > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Train_Control_System

[bcasey]

Saw this video posted on the Tested website, thought you guys might want to have a look at it. It provides an interesting insight into the old control technology they use on the NY subway system, as well as an explanation of the new technology that they are putting in to increase capacity, etc.

[ozbob]

Media Statements
Deputy Premier, Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning and Minister for Trade
The Honourable Jackie Trad
Thursday, August 27, 2015

Planning moving forward on rail capacity solution for South East Queensland

The Palaszczuk Government is moving ahead with planning to deliver extra capacity on South-East Queensland's rail network.

Deputy Premier Jackie Trad said the Government was committed to transforming and revitalising the rail network to benefit Queenslanders and provide a more efficient public transport system that can cope with forecast demand.

"Increasing the capacity of our rail network is one of our top priorities, we are working to identify solutions," Ms Trad said.

"Our assessment will include an investigation of elements of the Cross River Rail and Bus and Train projects to identify a preferred solution to address these capacity issues.

"It will also include a detailed assessment of the feasibility of introducing New Generation Signalling to the inner city rail network.

"Improved signalling would allow for a higher frequency of services on our most constrained part of the network, unlocking additional capacity that would benefit the entire region.

"Considerable cost and time savings will be achieved during this evaluation phase by using planning prepared as part of the previous projects – that work will not be wasted."

"However, there will be no combination of buses and trains in the Cross River Rail design going forward.

"Buses and trains play different roles in our transport network and combining them in the same corridor does not make sense," Ms Trad said.

Ms Trad said the project team would deliver an updated business case of a preferred project to be considered by Government.

"The Queensland Government will include a complete business case as part of a funding submission to Infrastructure Australia and the Federal Government for this urgently needed project," she said.

"We will also seek to re-establish the ready-to-proceed status previously applied to the Cross River Rail project."

[Derwan]

https://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/qtenders/tender/display/tender-details.do?id=15890&action=display-tender-details

"Queensland Rail intends to implement a European Train Control System (ETCS) trackside solution between Caboolture and Gympie North. The enhancement of operational safety is expected to be the primary benefit and the solution is anticipated to be ETCS Level 1."

[Stillwater]

Now, why would the Qld Government do this if it does not, at the same time, intend to realign the SCL to Nambour?

Queensland Rail intends to implement a European Train Control System (ETCS) trackside solution between Caboolture and Gympie North. The enhancement of operational safety is expected to be the primary benefit and the solution is anticipated to be ETCS Level 1.

It has been recognised by Queensland Rail that there is a need for an external Technical Advisor(s) with extensive practical experience within ETCS to assist with the following activities:
1.Preparation of Business Requirements;
2.Production of the Options Report;
3.Production of the Systems Assurance and Safety Plans;
4.Production of Output Based Specifications; and
5.Assistance with bidding documentation.

The European Train Control System (ETCS) is a signaling, control and train protection system designed to replace the many incompatible safety systems currently used by European railways, especially on high-speed lines.

ETCS requires standard trackside equipment and a standard controller within the train cab. In its final form, all lineside information is passed to the driver electronically, removing the need for lineside signals which, at high speed, could be almost impossible to see or assimilate.

Level 1: ETCS is installed on lineside (possibly superimposed with legacy systems) and on board; spot transmission of data from track to train via ETCS balises.

A balise is an electronic beacon or transponder placed between the rails of a railway as part of an Automatic Train Protection (ATP) system. The French word "balise" is used to distinguish these beacons from other kinds of beacon.

[red dragin]

Either the various appendages of Government (you decide part which is what appendage  ) aren't talking, or the whole duplication is just smoke and mirrors.

Hard to say which one it is really.

[colinw]

Level 1: ETCS is installed on lineside (possibly superimposed with legacy systems) and on board; spot transmission of data from track to train via ETCS balises.

A balise is an electronic beacon or transponder placed between the rails of a railway as part of an Automatic Train Protection (ATP) system. The French word "balise" is used to distinguish these beacons from other kinds of beacon.

ROFL.  ETCS Level 1 on this corridor will REDUCE capacity compared to the current setup.

The current ATP takes authority via a radio broadcast, so if you are facing a red signal and slowing, and the signal changes to proceed, the ATP within seconds gets the updated authority and stops targetting the red signal.

ETCS level 1, on the other hand, only gets authority updates at discrete points where there is a "dynamic" balise which relays the authority.  If you are facing a red signal, and it changes to a proceed aspect, ETCS level 1 knows NOTHING of the change until the train encounters the next dynamic balise (usually 20 - 80 metres in front of the signal).  I.e. the ATP will continue to "zero target" the train down to a crawl, at which point it must ease up to the balise group, get authority and proceed.

Another case.  You have stopped at a station located on a loop, facing a starter signal that is red.  A train in the opposite direction passes through, then the route is set for you and the signal clears to green.  With the current ATP or an ETCS level 2, the radio (or GSM-R in ETCS case) relays the proceed aspect, and you can proceed.

With ETCS level 1, unless you were lucky enough to do a precision stop with the balise reader over the balise relaying the proceed authority, you must instead creep at low speed toward the  balise in front of the signal, at which point ATP clears you to proceed.  ETCS level 1 CAN be made to work in a more suitable manner by (a) whacking in a lot of extra balises (expensive), or (b) using a device called a "EuroLoop" to extend the balise signal over a larger area, also expensive and not widely used even in Europe.

If QR are planning a LEVEL 1 system on a non-realigned CAB - GYN then QLD is indeed even dumber than I thought.  An ATP system with inferior operational characteristics to what we have now, costing (conservatively) $100 million+, and taking away funds far better spent on simply duplicating and realigning the line.  Heck, it would be better to put the whole lot into realignment and duplication and simply do away with ATP entirely than to put a level 1 system with discontinuous updates in.

It would appear that here in Queensland we have the uncanny knack of making the worst possible decision at all times, while steadfastly ignoring overseas experience or best practice.

As for QR needing "external technical advisors" ... well, that expertise is readily available in Brisbane, as both the Auckland and Adelaide ETCS projects were executed from here.

EPIC FAIL!!!!! 

[ozbob]

Hopefully the ' Technical Advisors ' can give them some wise counsel ?

ETCS L2 must be the minimum surely? 

What about the suburban network ??   

Crikey ... 

[colinw]

Level 2 needs to be the standard for suburban area + Nambour/Gympie and Gold Coast, and also the heavily trafficked coal areas (Goonyella main line, Gladstone - Rocklands - Blackwater).  Rest of NCL level 1 would probably be OK, or even consider a non ETCS system like PTC - although logically if you have ETCS level 2 in the suburban area, you need something interoperable elsewhere, which implies level 1 or else use of a "Specific Transmission Module" (STM) to work with the existing ATP infrastructure.

Suburban network?  Not holding my breath for that one.

Anna v2.0 will take one look at the cost and run away screaming.  Have to convince Tony its for hauling around lumps of coal.

Technical arguments aside, the real issue we need to address is the sheer dysfunction that surrounds infrastructure funding in this country.  Something that the political types, media and voters need to share responsibility for with our habit of reducing all to 3 word slogans.  The pollies are not a class apart, they reflect US as a society - we put 'em there, and we allow this to happen.

[Stillwater]

Thanks for the technical info, Colin.  That needed explaining.  My guess is that someone in government has asked the department this: 'if we can't do the SCL duplication, is there some way we can get more trains operating on the line?'  And back has come the response: 'ETCS is cost-effective at Level 1 and we can always upgrade to Level 2 after that.'  The advertisement calling for 'technical advisors' gives the game away -- the departmental response was given without proper technical advice.  The wrong solution having been decided upon, 'outside technical advisors' will be asked to make magic happen.  They will be blamed with the brown stuff hits the fan.

Maybe we need to teach monosyllabic Tony to say:  Stop the boats.  Fix the economy by paying down debt.  Create new jobs.  Build the infrastructure this country needs to prosper.  And fix the trains.

Do you reckon that five ideas in the PM's head is too much of an ask, or are four his upper limit?

[colinw]

^^^ your first paragraph neatly describes the entire tendering process in this state.

As for T.A., I think four is about the limit.  I think of him as roughly equivalent to my friend's African Grey parrot, which can count a little bit and scream 3 word obscenities.  Should teach it to shriek "Stop the Boats" and "Axe the Tax".

As for ETCS in this state ... the first roll-out will be on the coal fields, under Aurizon's control, long before QR / TMR ever get their act together in SEQ.  Coal is King, and no expense shall be spared to export the black gold.

[Stillwater]

Are there any circumstances under ETCS Level 1 Caboolture-Gympie North for any of the following to happen:

- Capability for more trains on the line, because they could be controlled closer together, safely
- Longer freight trains, more frequently
- Trains travelling faster than at present

On this last point, faster travel times would appear not to be possible, due to the standard and alignment of the track.

If the ETCS is to be applied to the SCL on its current alignment, it would be a signal that the state government has decided to delay B-Nbr duplication yet again.  Why make a significant investment on the current track if, in four or five years, you are going to realign the track and duplicate?

Maybe the new Queensland Infrastructure Plan will give us the answer, when it appears next year.

[colinw]

Taking each of your questions in turn:

- Capability for more trains on the line, because they could be controlled closer together, safely

That is more a function of the spacing of sections / signals and detection of track occupancy (axle counter or track circuit) than any specific technology like ETCS.  ETCS level 1 is really just an overlay over conventional signalling, so trains closer together equals more expense for more signals/track circuits/etc.  At high levels of ETCS the situation starts to change as trains actively report their position (level 2 and higher), at which point you can section the line into "virtual blocks" (level 2) or "moving blocks" (level 3) and run trains in the same direction closer together.

Of course, with single track, the REAL constraint is number of loops and running time between loops.

- Longer freight trains, more frequently

Function of the length of crossing loops primarily.  Hence, duplication in areas of frequent interurban passenger service or heavy coal traffic, and adequately spaced decent length loops (by which I mean 1500 metres +) beyond that. On the single track, the service frequency is purely dictated by the loop to loop running times.

- Trains travelling faster than at present

Track alignment primarily, and also matching the capability of the rollingstock to the quality of the alignment. i.e. there's no point building 160km/h alignment if you're going to run 100km/h EMUs on it!

To me, this gives a picture for the NCL of:

1.  Fix the alignment.  Ease ALL curves with a limit below 80km/h for efficient freight operation, and below 100km/h+ for efficient interurban passenger operation.

2.  Sufficient track capacity for the service density required.  Not necessarily full duplication, but sufficient duplication and loops for the services that need to be run.

3. Match rollingstock capability to the alignment.  If you have track good for 160 km/h then trains need to be capable of 140-160 or its pointless.  If you have 1500+ metre loops then freights need to run to that length.

4. Signalling system needs to be matched to the operational AND safety needs.  Firstly, some form of ATP is increasingly important and a requirement of DOO.  Secondly, just bunging an ETCS/whatever other ATP overlay on conventional RCS signalling isn't going to do anything to boost capacity, and indeed may reduce it if you use the wrong technology (e.g. level 1 with balises) or an ATP system that is inherently conservative and slows trains before a driver who knows the road would (this is a very common problem with ATP systems).

My 10 cents worth. Opinions may vary.

[Stillwater]

Appreciate the explanation, thanks.

[red dragin]

Industry Briefing: Caboolture to Gympie North ATP Upgrade

https://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/qtenders/tender/display/tender-details.do?CSRFNONCE=7BD39D54E8FA3E257312306A998520C7&id=16835&action=display-tender-details&returnUrl=%2Ftender%2Fsearch%2Ftender-search.do%3FCSRFNONCE%3D5A53FDB40813280394DDEC771850EB19%26amp%3Baction%3Dsearch-from-main-page%26amp%3Bkeywords%3Drail

[ozbob]

Building Queensland --> Train Control System Upgrade

Increasing the capacity of our rail network is a key priority. In 2013, Queensland Rail developed analysis of a European Train Control System based on the implementation of lineside and on board equipment across the South East Queensland electrified suburban network.

Building Queensland will prepare a business case to consider options to alleviate congestion, including assessing elements of previous projects. This analysis will also assess the feasibility of introducing new generation signalling to the inner city rail network — known as the Train Control System Upgrade — which may allow for a higher frequency of train services and improve reliability on the most constrained part of the network.

[red dragin]

From about Northgate north, plenty of new signalling huts have been installed. Built off site and just dropped in place.

I assume this is just a maintenance update to the existing system, in line with MBRL using more modern equipment?

[ozbob]

Call for tenders for ETCS between Caboolture & Gympie North

https://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/qtenders/tender/display/tender-details.do?CSRFNONCE=CD3284EA0CB93107BC498D470CCE9D11&id=17661&action=display-tender-details&returnUrl=%2Ftender%2Fsearch%2Ftender-search.do%3FCSRFNONCE%3D8B21844907D038FA6FC5D7400EDED930%26amp%3Baction%3Dsearch-from-main-page%26amp%3Bkeywords%3Drail

[ozbob]

ETCS > http://uic.org/ETCS


ETCS is the European Train Control System promoted by the European Commission for use throughout Europe, and specified for compliance with the High Speed and Conventional Interoperability Directives.

The system aims to remedy the lack of standardization in the area of signalling and train control systems which constitutes one of the major obstacles to the development of international rail traffic. Unifying the multiple signalling systems in use will bring increased competitiveness, better inter-working of freight and passenger rail services, stimulate the European rail equipment market, reduce costs and improve the overall quality of rail transport.

ETCS is in fact an automatic train Protection system, based on cab signalling and spot and/or continuous track to train data transmission. It ensures trains operate safely at all times in providing safe movement authority directly to the driver through the cab display and in continuously monitoring the driver's actions.

[ozbob]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-government/queensland-budget-2016-public-servant-superannuation-raided-for-4-billion/news-story/489d5de4602a8984d02605697b5f6b8e

The Government will also spend $50 million on Cross River Rail planning.

A further $634 million will be spent on a new train control system to delay the crunch point where required services can no longer access Brisbane's inner city.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Queensland Budget 2016 by the numbers

Infrastructure

$50 million for Cross River Rail including establishing delivery authority

$300 million for Priority Economic Works and Productivity Program including Ipswich motorway upgrade and M1- Gateway merge

$180 million Significant Regional Infrastructure Projects Program for projects including pediatrics wing at Townsville Hospital and other projects in Rockhampton, Bundaberg, Maryborough, Cairns, Mackay and Mount Isa

$634 million for European Train Control System for the South East Queensland rail network to ease congestion ahead of Cross River Rail

$4.4 billion building and maintaining roads including Bruce Highway upgrades

$400 million for Toowoomba Second Range Crossing

$250 million for the Gateway Motorway North

Almost $97 million for the Northern Roads Package

Well, this is a win of sorts.  We have long advocated for ATP for the suburban system, finally is going to happen.

> 9 Apr 2013: SEQ: Suburban rail network needs Automatic Train Protection too!

[ozbob]

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-budget-2016-live-coverage-20160614-gpif15.html

Cross River Rail

A new signalling system to make way for Brisbane's long-awaited Cross River Rail project is one of the portfolio's biggest long-term spending commitments.

Over the eight years, the government will allocate $634 million for a new European Train Control System, which Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk described as the "essential first step" to Cross River Rail's delivery.

"The new European Train Control System, subject to final approvals, will boost inner-city rail capacity by 20 per cent and allow an extra 12,000 people through the CBD each peak period," she said.

There is also $50 million in the next financial year to set up the Cross River Rail Delivery Authority.

"This funding is a clear commitment to Queenslanders that we are serious about delivering this crucial infrastructure project to ease congestion and unlock the economic potential of our state," Ms Palaszczuk said.

[#Metro]

$634 million for European Train Control System for the South East Queensland rail network to ease congestion ahead of Cross River Rail

This is great news! Though it only seems between Milton and Northgate, which won't allow for DOO as it is so limited?

[tazzer9]

what is even the point of ETCS if its only going in such a limited area.   It should cover all the main lines.   acacia ridge,caboolture, lindum, ipswich should be the bounds for this.

[ozbob]

It is obviously a ploy to push more trains through the core to cope with the lack of a second rail route in the CBD.

Logic suggests it will expand eventually.  Probably a strategy to at least get it kicked off.  It might have been too difficult to go the full Monty and convince the bean counters, at least it is underway.

But hey Queensland does ' half-baked ' really well though .. 

[#Metro]

what is even the point of ETCS if its only going in such a limited area.   It should cover all the main lines.   acacia ridge,caboolture, lindum, ipswich should be the bounds for this.

It is a good point you raise there. Why not do Park Road to Roma Street as well? That would perhaps relieve some of the bottleneck there, at least until CRR would come on line. Perhaps they think it would be a stranded investment? But would it really be 'stranded' when the end goal is to upgrade the whole network eventually anyway?

Will it be 'MAKroLok'? Will QR be involved in delivering this project this time?

[tazzer9]

If its to relieve pressure off the core of the network why isn't park road included.  Thats where the bottleneck is,outbound between south bank and the junction as this is where the signal spacing increases. 

[ozbob]

Ask Queensland Rail.  I am sure it is has all been modelled.  My guess is they figure CRR will fix it up the end.

[ozbob]

http://buildingqueensland.qld.gov.au/projects/train-control-system-upgrade/

Building Queensland has finalised its first Business Case for the European Train Control System (ETCS)–Inner City project, in conjunction with the Department of Transport and Main Roads and Queensland Rail. ETCS–Inner City consists of an in-cab signalling control and automatic train protection system that guards against train collisions and over-speed derailment.

The initial roll out will cover the area between Northgate and Milton station and will increase capacity of the northern and western main lines—an area that encompasses the key part of the network through which all trains must pass, including Roma Street, Fortitude Valley, Central Station and Bowen Hills.

Bringing international best practice systems to South East Queensland will mean a higher frequency of train services and improved reliability on the most constrained part of the network.

The Queensland Government has accepted Building Queensland's Business Case and committed $634 million to the project over the next eight years. ETCS–Inner City will benefit the government's highest priority infrastructure project—Cross River Rail and is considered the first step to its delivery.

Note ' initial roll out ' ...   

[Stillwater]

So, ETCS provided over next 8 years .... to be followed by CRR?  That puts CRR 12 years away!

[SurfRail]

^ To be fair, if we can get moving block signalling running (30tph) the impetus for CRR will lessen a bit, even if not completely vanish.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Plan to avoid commuter 'choke point'

[BrizCommuter]

Without improved infrastructure (e.g. duplicating outer Cleveland Line), then even with ETCS L2 it will be tough to run more than 24tph reliably vs 22tph unreliably (post-MBRL).