|
G'day BW,
I am composing my response off line, so cannot utilize the forum QUOTE function.
"Broken points, crossings, signals, temporary block working, bridge bashes, animals on the line, and trespassers are just some of the problems we deal with almost EVERY day"
Wonky infrastructure would naturally pose dramas to both crewed and autonomous trains.
Broken Rails where track circuiting exists can be incorporated into the ATC system, not so with dark territory.
But, I would imagine that for autonomous trains to succeed, all track would need to be circuited.
Broken Rails encountered by drivers on non-circuited track usually results in a derailment, unless train speed is extremely slow.
Fencing and or grade separation from conflict would solve unwanted trespass.
The Japanese level crossing protection system when factored into ATC would solve conflict there.
Lasers aimed at the crossing to detect any intrusion will cause specific warning signals to advise the train driver.
OK, currently such signals are not interlocked with main running signals.
But, again such could be incorporated into ATC.
The Chunnel fire, would a driverless train have continued to clear the tunnel as per the regulations ?
The driver stopping inside the chunnel at an emergency evacuation door in contradiction to the then regulations.
Or, would a driverless train have stalled in the middle of nowhere when the overhead melted and traction ceased ?
"Passengers think we just jump in a train and drive it - If only !!!"
Well, an amusing incident in smog hollow Sydney back in the early 1990s could answer this.
The system revolved around The Shortcut.
Drivers being relieved earlier than scheduled where the diagram provided spare time allocated to the relief driver.
This was prior to the mandatory uniform.
A west suburban train continued out to terminate at Emu Plains, but it sat out there and did not return as tabled.
It transpired that a "passenger" had relieved the train driver in town and drove the train out to Emu Plains.
The driver only too happy to get The Shortcut jumped out of the cab, the run west being at the end of his shift.
Stopping at the tabled stations en route, finally arriving at Emu Plains the passenger got off and left it.
OK, this passenger was a train nutter and had managed to get into the cab a number of times, thereby learning to technique.
When questions were asked, the actual driver was discovered at home.
I was involved with the union and had suggested to management that they should offer the bloke a job.
He obviously wouldn't need too much tuition.
Management had no sense of humour.
The uniform became compulsory after that incident, and crew identity had to be worn.
The Shortcut copped banishment, but managed to return for a while.
"Fatigue is starting to be recognised here, which is nice since we've been telling them about it for the last 200 years."
Fatigue management was implemented here some years ago.
No more than three shifts incorporating the 0000 til 0600 period may be rostered without a mandatory rostered day off.
The fatigue score is calculated for each shift in sequence for the fortnight roster period.
This does have a negative impact when overtime is necessary.
Both rostering staff and train crew MUST be aware of their fatigue score before accepting overtime.
Hence a financial penalty is imposed where prior to fatigue management, employees could take advantage of overtime.
Lift Up and Lay Back, due to trains running out of course also now imposes some restrictions.
All of this is ok when sufficient excess staff are available.
I toiled in excess of 30 years under governmental employ, and 5 years under private sector employ.
I definitely know which I prefer.
NO way would I have agreed to work in contravention of the Stable Rostering Code while under government operation.
But, as private sector operations go, I worked a shift comprising 15 hours one time.
This due to a derailment and my being required to go to the derailment to assist with re-railing.
Fatigue management reigns supreme, except when insufficient staff exist.
"Well all trains on the main line here must have vigilance, Dead man's (we call it Driver's Safety Device DSD), AWS, and of course Train Protection & Warning System (DSD). Possibly this is because we're such a small country and our freight trains operate in amongst the passenger ones on the same lines for much of the time."
Here in the Sydney Metrop, freighters travel amongst pas trains, excepting for the specially built freight road on the short south.
The Metrop signal system is designed for pas trains, not the monster length freighters of today.
Hence additional signal indications have been implemented where braking distance is no longer sufficient.
When running within the Inner Metrop region, freight train speed is reduced.
Yes, SPADs occur frequently in the Sydney Metrop.
But, these are mostly pas trains not freighters.
Originally we had the Curfew.
Between the hours of 0600 til 0900, and 1500 til 1800, no freighters were permitted to run within the Metrop.
But, today with privatization, all trains have a PATH.
Some freight paths now exist within those periods.
The train radio system implemented here was a nightmare.
I was involved with testing of the first Countrynet system back in the early 1990s.
The SRA was divided up into four distinct operating segments, this in preparation for the sale of the freight component.
The Countrynet radio system was being implemented for the Countrylink pas and eventually freight operations.
Cityrail then began hunting for a radio system for the Metrop.
The resulting Metronet radio system was not compatible with the Countrynet system.
This incompatibility being a factor in the Glenbrook incident.
The interurban crew were in radio communication with Penrith signal box via Metronet.
But, the Indian Pacific crew did not have radio communication with Penrith, and had to rely on the signal circuit phone system.
The Train Stop apparatus did not extend beyond Emu Plains in those days.
Subsequent to Glenbrook, the Train Stop apparatus was extended to Lithgow and the end of the West Outer Metrop.
Regardless, locomotives are still not fitted with Train Stop apparatus.
So, when rattling through the Metrop on a freighter and espying anything other than Green over Green you had better slam on the brakes.
Sydney Transport are again trialing ATC (ETCS).
But, I do wonder if implemented whether freight locomotives will be required to also implement the system.
I had argued for the introduction of the End Of Train Monitor, after having experienced such on a trip to New Zealand.
But, I was howled down by both management and the union.
Management winced at the cost factor, and the union ranted that such would permit the introduction of Driver Only Operation.
Freighters here continue to operate with just the red flashing tail light.
Tasrail being Driver Only Operation do have the ETU.
Though, with the introduction of ECP brake system, some NSW coalies do have a pseudo ETU.
The Electronically Controlled Pneumatic brake system providing an end of train brake pipe pressure sensor.
The ECP system providing graduated release for freight train brakes does improve the sectional running times.
I would image that for autonomous freight trains to succeed, the ECP system would be necessary.
I am not sure just what brake system is being utilized on the driverless Rio Tinto trains.
But, as the Pilbara iron ore railways were built to provide minimum grades facing loaded trains, dynamic brake is capable of controlling most situations.
EPIC brake system was introduced by Hamersley Iron back in 1995.
This electronic in the cab air brake was supposed to provide more efficient braking performance.
But, there were numerous problems with the EPIC software, and trains failed regularly.
I have been stunned while viewing cab video featuring the DB Automatische Fahr und Bremssteuerung system.
E loks fitted with the dual control throttles.
Select the AFB throttle and set it for the maximum permitted section speed.
The locomotive then automatically adjusting the power or engaging dynamic brake depending upon the circumstances encountered.
OK, I was impressed.
BUT, I transferred into Loco many moons ago to become a train driver and actually DRIVE the thing.
Not to sit there watching some computer.
So, BW, I handed in my keys 10 years ago when I got fed up with privatization.
Driverless trains were not on the horizon here back then.
Steve.
|