Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2009 11:20:40 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by stanmorek on Feb 25, 2009 11:57:06 GMT
Simon Blanchflower of Network Rail explained the reasoning for wanting ATO. NR wanted to cut out the vagaries of differing driver styles to achieve their 24 trains per hour service in the Thameslink core area. The train operator in operating the doors was therefore better placed to manage the platform dwell times and dispatch...
|
|
|
|
Post by geebeezed on Feb 25, 2009 13:56:14 GMT
They've tried this before on the national network though, on the Sinfin branch in Derbyshire 20 or so years ago with a DMU fitted with ATO that was transmitted through a wire in the 4 foot.... Trials were a success and performance was encouraging... Only people wouldn't use a train that had no driver! So they'll neeed to convince people that its safe at 80MPH before anything else, which might be its Achilles Heel...
|
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on Feb 25, 2009 14:21:19 GMT
read the story it says ATO, not Driverless trains ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2009 21:38:06 GMT
read the story it says ATO, not Driverless trains ;D The thread title does say driverless train though  |
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Feb 25, 2009 22:30:21 GMT
I noticed that it says 'Various ATO systems are currently used on the Docklands Light Railway and the Jubilee and Victoria Tube lines'. As the Jubilee isn't finished yet, they should have said Central and Victoria lines.
|
|
|
|
Post by singaporesam on Mar 2, 2009 23:20:47 GMT
Nothing wrong with driverless trains. In Singapore the old lines have ATO, we have one 20km heavy rail line that is driverless and two driverless people movers . Later this year we will begin opening Circle line which will be another 33 Kms of driverless operation and by 2016 we will have added Downtown Line, a further 40 Kms. ATO is sooooo 60s its time for the UK to move into the new millennium.
|
|
|
|
Post by compsci on Mar 3, 2009 8:10:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 10, 2009 3:30:05 GMT
This document has been around on the DfT site for a while, mine are date stamped mid December 2008 when I downloaded them, and they are by no means confidential, they are part of the public tender process. While I think in this thread may have confused ATO through the core with driverless operation, there is nonetheless a driverless mode option on the Thameslink train specification - see item 10.22.2 final sentence - it is proposed to have a facility for remote control of trains between terminals stations and depots using cab outward looking CCTV. See 10.22.3 - this CCTV is also for use during some reversing movements, and I think somewhere else either this or a similar document refers to CCTV for emergency reverse moves in passenger service, but I might be confuding that with something else. -- Nick |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2009 21:15:29 GMT
I want to say that they are NOT driverless trains in the spec for Thameslink. They are self driving trains. The driver will pull into Blackfriars northbound and once its time to leave then he's activate the ATO which will drive the train through the Core until St Pancras International where the driver will take back over. Same thing southbound expect the stations are the other way.
Like the Tube lines, there will always be a driver at the front in his own cab simply because of safety regs. In Thameslink case its only a short jounery under ATO.
The only reason they want it in the core is they believe that drivers cant handle driving a 2min service come 2015. Also note that this wont happen until the whole FCC fleet is replaced with the NXEMU's.
|
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 10, 2009 22:26:44 GMT
I want to say that they are NOT driverless trains in the spec for Thameslink. ''The spec'' does quite clearly state radio remote control - for shunting moves - it is found in the paragraphs I quoted. I agree this is a different feature the ATO trains in passenger service in the TL core ... and is not what was meant when this thread started ... but nonetheless, a form of driverless remote controlled trains *is* in the train spec. -- Nick |
|
|
|
Post by carlovel1 on Mar 11, 2009 17:31:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by singaporesam on Mar 12, 2009 13:00:58 GMT
Actually ATO is called driverless by IEC 62267, and what is commonly called driverless is referred to as unattended operation (UTO).
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Apr 3, 2009 21:30:33 GMT
hmmm, I remember talking with a friend who was a BR signal engineer in the early 70's about driverless trains. They had the technology then. My argument is "what happens when someone's on the line?" His reply "what do you do? you blow the whistle. If they don't move, you run them down." Does the driver in the cab REALLY matter in that scenario?
After all, with Westcode/call it what you will brakes, you never really know where the train will stop anyway, so you might as well blame it on the computer!
|
|
