Railcar Positioning System

[Busjack]

CTA has a solicitation for a "Precision Rapid Transit Railcar Positioning System at CTA Passenger Station Platforms." Cracking it open, it is for a system on the cars to indicate to the operator if the train is not properly positioned at the platform and make sure that the doors do not open under that condition. There is supposed to be a pilot program, with 10 cars of each series (2600, 3200, and 5000) on the Blue, Orange, and Red Lines, respectively.* 2 stations on each line are to be equipped, on the Blue and Red one subway and one elevated, and on the Orange a Loop and outlying station. If it passes, there would be slow roll-outs, one line at a time.

__________

*Seeming to indicate, don't expect large changes in current series assignments.

[strictures]

CTA has a solicitation for a "Precision Rapid Transit Railcar Positioning System at CTA Passenger Station Platforms." Cracking it open, it is for a system on the cars to indicate to the operator if the train is not properly positioned at the platform and make sure that the doors do not open under that condition. There is supposed to be a pilot program, with 10 cars of each series (2600, 3200, and 5000) on the Blue, Orange, and Red Lines, respectively.* 2 stations on each line are to be equipped, on the Blue and Red one subway and one elevated, and on the Orange a Loop and outlying station. If it passes, there would be slow roll-outs, one line at a time.

__________

*Seeming to indicate, don't expect large changes in current series assignments.

So will it be able to exactly position the train at the same spot every time, so stations will have doors on the platforms that will match the train doors, which some systems in Europe & Asia already have?

[Busjack]

So will it be able to exactly position the train at the same spot every time, so stations will have doors on the platforms that will match the train doors, which some systems in Europe & Asia already have?

On the first part, apparently so, since the specs say that the berthing markers are insufficient.

However, if I read your second point correctly, no, as there isn't a spec to install doors on the platforms. Some sort of equipment is to be installed at the station, but I interpreted that it as the electronic equivalent of the berthing markers. It seems that the function is to avoid the situation where an operator stops at 6 because "I didn't know the yard gave me 8." If that's the goal, an 8 car train would always stop at the same place, but a 4 car train, while stopping at its precise point, would not necessarily have its doors at the 8 car train position.

Anyway, the spec is more for performance goals, as opposed to detailed specifications for specific equipment.

[MTRSP1900-CTA3200]

So will it be able to exactly position the train at the same spot every time, so stations will have doors on the platforms that will match the train doors, which some systems in Europe & Asia already have?

I heard platform doors require more precise equipment than what is being asked for.

I guess this is more "Improving the system by reducing potential errors." more than "Improving the system by adding features to the system."

[briman94]

to indicate to the operator if the train is not properly positioned at the platform and make sure that the doors do not open under that condition.

I wonder if we might see "Selective Door Operation" in the future with 10- and 12-car sets. I hope they don't have the same issues Train Simulator has where the doors simply refuse to open!

So will it be able to exactly position the train at the same spot every time, so stations will have doors on the platforms that will match the train doors, which some systems in Europe & Asia already have?

I'd be really surprised but REALLY pleased and impressed if the CTA had automatic stopping. I've been saying for years that completely automating the system is completely plausible and not that hard to do, but they probably don't want to fire a bunch of drivers all at once.

It seems that the function is to avoid the situation where an operator stops at 6 because "I didn't know the yard gave me 8."

That actually happens? That's hilarious in a terrifying sort of way.

[Busjack]

I wonder if we might see "Selective Door Operation" in the future with 10- and 12-car sets. I hope they don't have the same issues Train Simulator has where the doors simply refuse to open!

I'd be really surprised but REALLY pleased and impressed if the CTA had automatic stopping. I've been saying for years that completely automating the system is completely plausible and not that hard to do, but they probably don't want to fire a bunch of drivers all at once.

That actually happens? That's hilarious in a terrifying sort of way.

• This only provided for 8-6-4 car sets. Doing what you suggest would require (since there are not conductors at the middle of a train) a different control in the cab, and also doing away with the ban on crossing between cars.
• Basically, the only automatic system is WMATA, but it still has operators, to inspect the doors and die if the train doesn't stop. Considering that the transit agencies here can't keep people off the track, I also don't see it for that reason.
• I was on trains when it happened (primarily Saturday). While this is a "precision stop" system, I don't think CTA cares about a car being 2 inches off the marker. But an explicit requirement is that the system know how many cars are in the train.

[MTRSP1900-CTA3200]

...

That actually happens? That's hilarious in a terrifying sort of way.

Busjack's response above makes sense. Last weekend was the first time in a LONG time that I actually saw a four car train on the Blue Line. I'm sure the train operators don't keep track of major events downtown, so they're just as surprised with an 8 car train as I am.

[strictures]

• This only provided for 8-6-4 car sets. Doing what you suggest would require (since there are not conductors at the middle of a train) a different control in the cab, and also doing away with the ban on crossing between cars.
• Basically, the only automatic system is WMATA, but it still has operators, to inspect the doors and die if the train doesn't stop. Considering that the transit agencies here can't keep people off the track, I also don't see it for that reason.
• I was on trains when it happened (primarily Saturday). While this is a "precision stop" system, I don't think CTA cares about a car being 2 inches off the marker. But an explicit requirement is that the system know how many cars are in the train.

WMATA's Red Line, along with the lines that partially share the same tracks, hasn't been on automatic since the last wreck which killed people, including the attendant.

I read about a week ago, they are just about finished replacing all of the defective track sensors & will be returning to automatic control shortly on their Red Line. The comments on the WaPo article indicated the passengers are overjoyed at this, since the automatic control was far smoother & had far fewer stops & starts. Sort of like the CTA from Lawrence to Howard.

[Busjack]

....

That actually happens? That's hilarious in a terrifying sort of way.

Hilkevitch had a column today about Claypool stepping up CTA firings. While my reaction to most of it was "that's a matter of what the collective bargaining agreement says," this portion is relevant to the topic under discussion:

"A lot of cases involve rail operators making an error by not berthing the train properly at the platform," said Robert Kelly, Local 308 president representing CTA rail workers who are members of the Amalgamated Transit Union.

Trains must stop at a certain location along a platform depending on the number of cars on the train, and failing to hit that spot is a safety violation; in some scenarios, it can cause the rail car to line up incorrectly against the platform and put riders at risk. That, union officials said, can lead to firing motormen despite an otherwise good work record.

In one case, Kelly said, a motorman with more than 25 years' experience and a spotless work record was fired in May for stopping a train at the wrong spot, opening the doors, then quickly closing the doors when he realized his mistake.

"We absolutely don't want to see anyone hurt,'' Kelly said. "But how do you go home and tell your wife who you've been married to for 28 years, 'I was fired today. I misberthed the train.' "

[briman94]

"We absolutely don't want to see anyone hurt,'' Kelly said. "But how do you go home and tell your wife who you've been married to for 28 years, 'I was fired today. I misberthed the train.' "

That would indeed suck. Hopefully this new system will prevent anything like that from happening. My proposed solution to these driver errors has always been to automate the trains like in Washington, but they'd need to find jobs for all of the drivers (maybe inspecting the system to make sure it works, like they appear to have not done in Washington? )

[Busjack]

That would indeed suck. Hopefully this new system will prevent anything like that from happening. My proposed solution to these driver errors has always been to automate the trains like in Washington, but they'd need to find jobs for all of the drivers (maybe inspecting the system to make sure it works, like they appear to have not done in Washington? )

As I mentioned before, it does not eliminate the operator,as someone still has to inspect the door and take the death in the case of a collision. WMATA trains are not unmanned.

Also, as strictures pointed out, and the Washington Post article to which I linked indicated, that WMATA line has been off automated control for the past 5 years, Note that the article said "Drivers will remain in the train cabs, Metro officials said,"

[rvwnsd]

Basically, the only automatic system is WMATA, but it still has operators, to inspect the doors and die if the train doesn't stop. Considering that the transit agencies here can't keep people off the track, I also don't see it for that reason.

San Francisco's BART and Atlanta's MARTA both have ATC ,which they still use, but also have train operators.

[artthouwill]

Hilkevitch had a column today about Claypool stepping up CTA firings. While my reaction to most of it was "that's a matter of what the collective bargaining agreement says," this portion is relevant to the topic under discussion:

On certain lines, I noticed a 4 car train would pull up to the marker for a 6 car train or a 6 car train pull up to the 8 car marker. I thought some operators did this purposely to protect themselves from possiblly getting attacked by a passenger on the platform.

Of there is any one place where passenger safety is an issue. it is the State/Lake platform for NB Brown and WB Green Line trains. The 6 car and 8 car markers are very close together. The problem this creates is a lot of foot traffic right at the turnstiles. Passengers in cars 5 and 6 on a Green Line train can barely get out because :

1. People on the east end of the platform now have to walk to the last cars to get on

2. People are huddled around those doors trying to get on

3/ Brown and Green Line passengers are constatntly coming through the turnstiles and there is very ltttle room between the turnstiles and the edge of the platform.

I suppose the setup at STATE/Lake is so to allow another train rounding the Wabash curve to hold short of the station safely and to allow another train to berth at Randolph. But if this can be done when an 8 car Brown Line train is in the station, why can't they move the 6 car marker back closer to the 4 car marker at State?

[Busjack]

San Francisco's BART and Atlanta's MARTA both have ATC ,which they still use, but also have train operators.

I'll add that after the "ghost train" crash in Forest Park, where somehow the "fail safe" cab signal got overridden by an empty train, who is going to tolerate an occupied CTA train running without an operator?

...

I suppose the setup at STATE/Lake is so to allow another train rounding the Wabash curve to hold short of the station safely and to allow another train to berth at Randolph. But if this can be done when an 8 car Brown Line train is in the station, why can't they move the 6 car marker back closer to the 4 car marker at State?

The real problem is that the State-Lake platforms are so narrow that there really isn't any safe way to be on them during the rush hour. That station should have been gone decades ago.

[briman94]

I'll add that after the "ghost train" crash in Forest Park, where somehow the "fail safe" cab signal got overridden by an empty train, who is going to tolerate an occupied CTA train running without an operator?

The general public might not know this right away, but ATO would actually have prevented that if implemented properly. The driver who parked the train left the handle in the "on" position in one of the higher brake settings so it kept resetting the ATC killswitch, instead of moving it to "off" which prevents the brakes from releasing and the override from resetting. ATO would presumably also be implemented with further failsafes that would prevent power to the motors unless another system was turned on. It's all a matter of effectively conveying this to passengers so they don't get needlessly worried about false speculation.

[Busjack]

The general public might not know this right away, but ATO would actually have prevented that if implemented properly. The driver who parked the train left the handle in the "on" position in one of the higher brake settings so it kept resetting the ATC killswitch, instead of moving it to "off" which prevents the brakes from releasing and the override from resetting. ATO would presumably also be implemented with further failsafes that would prevent power to the motors unless another system was turned on. It's all a matter of effectively conveying this to passengers so they don't get needlessly worried about false speculation.

In that these kind of "impossible" accidents continually happen on the CTA (even if the operator at O'Hare fell asleep, the train should have been under sufficient signal control to have stopped on its own), propaganda isn't going to convince anyone.

Especially, since the explanation you give for the Forest Park one indicates to the average rider that CTA personnel are incompetent.

[briman94]

In that these kind of "impossible" accidents continually happen on the CTA (even if the operator at O'Hare fell asleep, the train should have been under sufficient signal control to have stopped on its own), propaganda isn't going to convince anyone.

Especially, since the explanation you give for the Forest Park one indicates to the average rider that CTA personnel are incompetent.

This is true. I'm starting to think that, as much as I hate to say it, new management would probably be the only way to convince people that any new system would be safe.

[Busjack]

I'm talking about the feature specific to the 5000s (and in a few years the 7000s) where the brakes gradually release as it nears a complete stop. It's noted in the 7000s spec as a "smooth-stop feature to reduce jerk while stopping." If the train is heavily loaded, the brakes release too much and the train sort of "coasts" for a few feet before the brakes apply all the way. Some drivers have been somehow bypassing this, making the stops feel more like the older trains.

After ruminating over your post, could it be related to this topic, especially that Claypool has scared the operators that they will get fired if they miss a berthing mark, so they slam on the brakes?

[briman94]

After ruminating over your post, could it be related to this topic, especially that Claypool has scared the operators that they will get fired if they miss a berthing mark, so they slam on the brakes?

It's possible, as I know I've done it in Train Simulator (), but he was doing it at every stop, so I don't think it was to shorten stopping distance. I still think automating the trains like Washington, D.C. does would solve a number of problems.