|
|
Post by eurostarengineer on Dec 18, 2011 2:45:31 GMT
I've heard rumours from someone high up within crossrail that the network will run on TVM signalling.
Is this correct? If so, what are people's opinions on it? Personally I cannot see the point as TVM is normally used on 140mph+ high speed lines.
|
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Dec 18, 2011 7:20:47 GMT
They obviously weren't high enough up to know that the IRSE has an article in the December IRSE News which details the mess that the Crossrail signalling policy is in. It doesn't say that it's a mess of course but that's the way it reads. If it reads that way, it's almost certainly worse on the ground.
The upshot is that because someone has "declared" that Crossrail must be TSI compliant (think running DB ICEs non stop between commuter trains at 2.5 minute intervals?) it should have ETCS. But they also want ATO and PSDs, which ETCS can't do yet. So, they've decided to try CBTC of some sort. They will have to get an EU derogation to do it. It makes you wonder why they decided to go for TSI in the first place.
The system will only be used in the new/tunnel sections. It will have to interface with the GW ETCS west of Paddington (if its ready by then) and with TPWS/AWS east of Pudding Mill. Should be doable, if someone can agree what the ETCS system will look like by then.
The only French connection is that the Crossrail's advisors Systra (joint SNCF/RATP consultants) are linked to the Paris RER resignalling that is specifying CBTC. This is normal French procedure - specify TSIs for everyone in Europe and then go off and do their own thing. Cynique? Moi?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2011 9:43:37 GMT
Why the hell dont they just use normal NR signalling! Standardisation in signalling is virtually non existant in London!
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisvandenkieboom on Dec 18, 2011 11:28:17 GMT
If Crossrail fails as a metro route; I suppose it can always be used to make an end to the Central London terminus.
|
|
|
|
Post by eurostarengineer on Dec 18, 2011 12:00:54 GMT
Tubeprune, fantastic info. Makes it sound like they're going to try and make a mainline TOC run like the underground. I.e many trains in an area bunched up together.
Guess we will hear more as time progresses, I know someone who is working on the commissioning of CrossRail stock so will ask a couple of questions
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by jardine01 on Dec 18, 2011 18:18:55 GMT
I agree with bronzeonion why don't they just use Conventional signaling which is still standard on many railways in England and Europe.
Will Crossrail warrant ATO? Obviously 2.5 min intervals it pritty High Frequency and will need a good signaling system to cope with the amount of trains per hour. Would'nt having more signals between stations just be as good as a moving block signaling? I know the JLE had a problem with few signals between stations which ultametly affected TPH.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisvandenkieboom on Dec 18, 2011 18:32:16 GMT
A signal every 100 metres? (Isn't that prone to failures though)
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 19, 2011 1:23:31 GMT
A signal every 100 metres? (Isn't that prone to failures though) I suggest you investigate balises. We're watching. |
|
|
|
Post by eurostarengineer on Dec 19, 2011 17:12:30 GMT
Bit puzzled as to why ERTMS isn't being used, bearing in mind the millions spent on successful testing/commissioning in the west.
I'm sure I heard that in time, ERTMS would become the industry standard across Europe, Scotland, Wales and UK!
|
|
|
|
Post by jardine01 on Dec 19, 2011 17:25:40 GMT
What signaling system are they going to use Will it be a transmittion based signaling system like on the Jubilee line? From what I have heard ATO will be used in the central sections and probally another signaling system on the rest of the line I think it is a bit silly using ATO on one section of line you will not get the full benifit of ATO!
|
|
|
|
Post by eurostarengineer on Dec 19, 2011 17:27:49 GMT
What signaling system are they going to use Will it be a transmittion based signaling system like on the Jubilee line? From what I have heard ATO will be used in the central sections and probally another signaling system on the rest of the line I think it is a bit silly using ATO on one section of line you will not get the full benifit of ATO! Tubeprune answered your question. |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 19, 2011 17:33:59 GMT
Bit puzzled as to why ERTMS isn't being used, bearing in mind the millions spent on successful testing/commissioning in the west. I'm sure I heard that in time, ERTMS would become the industry standard across Europe, Scotland, Wales and UK! Are you really being serious? |
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Dec 19, 2011 18:10:02 GMT
Bit puzzled as to why ERTMS isn't being used, bearing in mind the millions spent on successful testing/commissioning in the west. I'm sure I heard that in time, ERTMS would become the industry standard across Europe, Scotland, Wales and UK! Are you really being serious? No, I don't think he is.  ERTMS is a an answer looking for a question. The idea was to have a common signalling system across Europe to allow interoperability without the need to equip trains with umpteen different systems like TVM, KVB, LZB, AWS, TPWS, etc. However, many cross-border trains are already equipped like this and most of the leading countries have already spent squillions on doing it and on their own ATP systems. So, they ask, why should we spend more on ERTMS when we have perfectly good systems of our own? UK included. That's the economic issue; then there's the engineering issue. This is mainly driven by each country having its own rules and wanting to incorporate them into the ERTMS software. This makes getting a common system problematic, to say the least. ERTMS is not the universal cure for all signalling ills that the EC would have us believe. It is, however, a long term goal that we should not ignore. |
|
|
|
Post by eurostarengineer on Dec 20, 2011 3:18:42 GMT
Mrfs42, should your comments be that of worth reading then don't comment please. They aren't as knowledge based as tubeprune's and considering how this forum is strictly moderated on things such as spam, I feel it's only fair for you to retract your statement.
Tube prune, I was under the impression that stock in the west had been retrofitted with ERTMS and the testing was going really rather well.
Incorporating European signalling into most UK rolling stock in my opinion isn't worth it unless you're dealing with the trains I work on (373s). It would make depot based testing easier and in the long run be a lot cheaper.
I guess the work load would be a lot easier too, no one likes doing in cab signalling exam when you've got to test TVM430, AWS, TPWS, KVB, BRS and TBL.
Hmm, I do like the debates about signalling as for the mainline it seems to be a bit of a grey area as the way I read it, no one seems really mad on getting ATO/TBTC on this side of the tracks.
|
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Dec 20, 2011 7:28:56 GMT
Actually, mrfs42's knowledge of signalling is better than mine but we don't want to argue about that :-). As for the UK's experiments with ERTMS, they have had a lot of problems but you would expect these with a completely new system. I think the issue is over the cost/benefits.
The issue over ATO on main line railways is simply the variety of stock and the difficulty of designing a system that works on all types of train. That is why ATO is being restricted largely to the in-tunnel sections of Thameslink and Crossrail.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 20, 2011 8:19:50 GMT
Tube prune, I was under the impression that stock in the west had been retrofitted with ERTMS and the testing was going really rather well. Quite simply untrue - it has improved of late in the light of experience, but AFAIAA there is still the need for a technician to travel with a unit at least once a week. This is an improvement on whenever a train is in service. Movement authorities are delayed - there is a incident under investigation by the RAIB about Llanbadarn crossing, I've experienced several times grinding to a halt at what would be the 'advanced starter' - ie quite a way into the section after a crossing because the interrogation of the eurobaliises hasn't registered at the shoebox in Machynlleth. Eurobalises can only be interrogated on the move: did you realise that Pwllheli and Aberystwyth are the first terminii in the world to be signalled under this scheme? The specifications for ERTMS have been rewritten so the source document is vastly different from that as originally envisaged: reversible road working, leading vehicle not ETRMS fitted, degraded mode working derogations... The list goes on. Have you seen ERTMS resignalling? I really don't want to name drop, but written by a good acquaintance of mine - is the impression that 'the testing was going really rather well' perhaps some hyper-positive spin put out to counteract the unusual occasion of a manager being very frank and honest? ERTMS could be a true low-cost signalling system, if it works; I'm sure that it could by now be regarded as intrinsically safe, but only by dint of the fact that it brings everything to a stand when communication is lost. I do not expect it to offer full bidirectional capability for Crossrail (heading back towards the subject) without yet another visit to the specifications. I'm not a huge fan of recommending other fora, but I would suggest that you look at Cambrian ERTMS; there's 17 pages of discussion there - read that and I hope you still have a positive impression of ERTMS. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2011 11:56:37 GMT
did you realise that Pwllheli and Aberystwyth are the first terminii in the world to be signalled under this scheme? Interesting. Considering the UK is relatively late with installing ERTMS, I wonder what is that first the Cambrian Line could claim. - It is not the first ERTMS line in passenger service, that was in Italy in 2005.
- It is not the first in mountainous terrain as the Swiss have been using ERTMS for years.
- It is not the first line to be operated exclusively under ERTMS without a fallback legacy system. The Dutch have a couple of routes that are exclusively ERTMS as they didn't bother to install a legacy system on some newer lines.
- It is not the longest stretch to be used with ERTMS. After a successful pilot in 2002 the Spanish have begun rolling out ERTMS on a frantic pace; now having more than 1500KM signalled with ERTMS and another 3500KM in the planning stage.
- It is not the most ambitious roll-out, Denmark is currently preparing to replace the entire legacy signalling system with ERTMS. They expect to be finished by 2021.
And I am sure there are some records to be found in the ERTMS implementations in Australia, New Zealand, China, Norway, Mexico, Belgium, Poland, Korea, Algeria, Turkey or Croatia. Coldest, hottest, most humid, highest, highest top speed, busiest, fastest roll-out, most remote, most expensive or cheapest for instance. None of which probably held by the Cambrian Line. Perhaps the Cambrian Line is the world's first to retrofit it in such old rolling stock. :-) |
|
|
|
Post by chrisvandenkieboom on Dec 20, 2011 15:37:48 GMT
ERTMS was done in Holland due to patents owned by I think Alcatel on our regular signalling, so we started using ERTMS. Think it's the Betuweroute.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2011 16:27:17 GMT
ERTMS was done in Holland due to patents owned by I think Alcatel on our regular signalling, so we started using ERTMS. Think it's the Betuweroute. Yes, Betuweroute is ERTMS-only, as is the HSL. The 'Hanzelijn' and the stretch Amsterdam - Utrecht use both ERTMS and the old system. However, the case for new signalling systems pops up after each major rail accident. In the UK the case for ERTMS was made after the Paddington Rail Disaster, in Belgium after Buizingen and in the Netherlands there are now plans to speed up replacement of the old system with ERTMS after the Barendrecht crash. |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 20, 2011 16:34:02 GMT
Perhaps the Cambrian Line is the world's first to retrofit it in such old rolling stock. :-) No. I think the Swiss hold that accolade - but still no termini, apart from the two on the Cambrian. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2011 17:24:15 GMT
[..] but still no termini, apart from the two on the Cambrian. How does Aberystwyth differ from for instance Valladolid Campo Grande where the ERTMS 2 line from Madrid terminates? Also, what makes termini so special when it comes to signalling then? The turnback facility? |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Dec 20, 2011 18:06:37 GMT
[..] but still no termini, apart from the two on the Cambrian. How does Aberystwyth differ from for instance Valladolid Campo Grande where the ERTMS 2 line from Madrid terminates? Also, what makes termini so special when it comes to signalling then? The turnback facility? ISTR that Valladolid Campo Grande uses wayside signals - however it isn't me that's making the claim, it is the IRSE! (and they ought to know!). Trmini are interesting because balise interrogation has to be done on the move. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 20, 2011 21:43:56 GMT
network Rail claims Pwllheli/Aberystwyth as the first termini to have ERTMS level 2 installed - an important qualifier. See slide 11 "• First passenger terminus signalled on an ERTMS L2 railway – Pwllheli and Aberystwyth • First train maintenance depot signalled on an ERTMS L2 railway - Machynlleth • Transition from semaphore signalling to ERTMS L2 on the move at Sutton Bridge also a world first" I'm not sure of the exact distinction, but Wikipedia suggests the difference between L1 and L2 is whether fixed signals are still present: L1 uses transponders (balises) to relay the signal aspects to the in-cab equipment, relies on radio messages from a control centre to activate the driver's display, based on the train reporting its own position as determined by odometers, GPS or other means - the balises remain as points of reference to correct the distance measurements. Level 3 will be "moving block". Is that more or less it?
|
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Dec 20, 2011 22:02:25 GMT
I think we should be careful that we understand that there are different types of ERTMS. Level 1 is what could be described as a slightly more sophisticated version of TPWS. It comes in more than 1 version. Level 2 comes in various versions too.
|
|
|
|
Post by eurostarengineer on Dec 21, 2011 15:19:10 GMT
mrfs42, that's much better. Very interesting. Thanks  |
|
|
|
Post by chrisvandenkieboom on Dec 21, 2011 16:02:48 GMT
Why is ERTMS used in Spain while they have a different track gauge? (other than the few standard gauge lines also used by the SNCF, I suppose)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2011 16:35:38 GMT
Why is ERTMS used in Spain while they have a different track gauge? (other than the few standard gauge lines also used by the SNCF, I suppose) Track gauge is not that relevant. It's more a question of convenience and economy. One of the common issues with the older existing signalling systems is that it is not suitable for higher speed operation. In-cab signalling becomes a must as drivers can't see line-side signals anymore. If you are then faced with choosing a new signalling system you might as well pick a relatively off-the-shelf product that can be bought from a multitude of vendors. The alternative is re-inventing the wheel that might also lock you into buying it from one vendor. That is a problem that Belgium is facing at the moment, their plans to overhaul the mishmash of systems are hampered by a supplier that allegedly refuses to provide them with the technology to develop an ' STM' to run conventional and ERTMS alongside each other. Besides, all new lines in Spain are High Speed lines which all use standard gauge, occasionally with gauge changer for extremities where the last stretch is operated on existing lines. The line between Barcelona and Perpignan that is currently being built is standard gauge too making trains from Paris to Madrid an option in the future. Lastly, if a member state applies for EU subsidy towards a new line, one of the conditions is that it uses ERTMS. In other words, why would they not choose ERTMS? |
|
|
|
Post by chrisvandenkieboom on Dec 21, 2011 16:57:19 GMT
So what you're saying is that Spain might opt, at some point, to fully go standard gauge, because they can - without adapting signalling systems a lot?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2011 19:39:34 GMT
I don't think we need ATP on the main lines. TPWS and TPWS+ are enough. Maybe for crossrail we could have a system similar to SACEM as used on the RER ligne A in Paris? I don't think conventional signalling is the answer for tunnel sections and short head ways. Drivers are taught to drive defensively particularly on approach to cautionary signal aspects.
|
|
|
|
Post by eurostarengineer on Dec 23, 2011 12:16:26 GMT
For the way that railways seem to be going, I don't think many companies are looking at AWS, TWPS etc as it severely limits the amount of trains you can have in an area. And let's face it, it seems that companies are trying to follow suit and walk in LUL's boots with regards to having trains much closer together (TBTC, ATC. Etc)
Of course I'm not talking about now, talking about a few years yet. Also I don't think it'll be too long until mainline start jumpin on the ATO/ATC bandwagon which means for the majority of the time drivers won't be driving defensively when looming upon cautionary aspects.
|
|
