Wharton (CP) Upgrades

nick11a wrote:

ApproachMedium wrote:Well its 251 in the one direction because it still has the physical automatic block signals. If you have to make a reverse move in that territory, instead of DCS rules applying to the move, 562 rules apply. So you would have to operate according to that set of instructions to make a reverse move.

So, in other words, that track is both 251 and 562 in that 251 rules apply one direction and 562 rules apply in the other. Interesting...

Correct. Just wait and see how many more track circuits are going to be installed when all this is done.

OportRailfan wrote:

nick11a wrote:

ApproachMedium wrote:Well its 251 in the one direction because it still has the physical automatic block signals. If you have to make a reverse move in that territory, instead of DCS rules applying to the move, 562 rules apply. So you would have to operate according to that set of instructions to make a reverse move.

So, in other words, that track is both 251 and 562 in that 251 rules apply one direction and 562 rules apply in the other. Interesting...

Correct. Just wait and see how many more track circuits are going to be installed when all this is done.

What did Mr. Scott say in Star Trek III? The more you overtake the plumbing, the easier to stop up the drains....

Believe the Quote was:"The more you overTHINK the plumbing,the easier it is to stop up the drains."
as Scotty passed over some TransWarp Drive componets to Dr McCoy.

The same could be said about the microprocessor driven CP's

Backshophoss wrote:Believe the Quote was:"The more you overTHINK the plumbing,the easier it is to stop up the drains."
as Scotty passed over some TransWarp Drive componets to Dr McCoy.

The same could be said about the microprocessor driven CP's

I'm sorry. I was paraphrasting.

And yes, that phrase could easily be applied here. This type of railroad signaling requires a great deal on several technological devices to be working properly for the whole thing to work properly.

Not necessarily. They can actually drive a 562 system using LESS hardware than whats being used for a standard 261 territory, that is, if they are using all standard all electromechanical relays. Places like the High line on amtrak are all ran by PLCs (Programmable Logic Computers) and other more modern nonsense that drives vital relays.

With good old regular electromechanical signaling you can eliminate all of the stuff for bulb out circuits, approach lighting, and the physical signal itself, etc. All that has to be done is the code sent thru the rails based on block occupancy.

ApproachMedium wrote:Not necessarily. They can actually drive a 562 system using LESS hardware than whats being used for a standard 261 territory, that is, if they are using all standard all electromechanical relays. Places like the High line on amtrak are all ran by PLCs (Programmable Logic Computers) and other more modern nonsense that drives vital relays.

With good old regular electromechanical signaling you can eliminate all of the stuff for bulb out circuits, approach lighting, and the physical signal itself, etc. All that has to be done is the code sent thru the rails based on block occupancy.

Good to know. Thanks. The other thing I was considering was if the cab signal system was to fail. Yes, you could get a 563/Form D for that, or a 280a/Clear to the Next Interlocking signal at a home signal, but I think it is safe to say that it is easier to deal with cab signal failures with fixed wayside automatic signals to fall back on.

Seeing how today modern cab signal systems are advanced microprocessors with minimal failure rates, its easier to deal with the 562. And now with the advent of ACSES the new "smart" ADUs have a C light on them so you dont even have to wait till you get to the interlocking to see that you have the C light. Once the system knows you are close and has made contact with the TSR data radio, it will receive a "signal" that your train is allowed to proceed and will show the C light on the ADU. This feature is available and has been tested however, but I am not sure if it is being implemented yet. The only place I know of where it could possibly be used at the moment is New haven to boston anyhow. Its the only place where there is 562 and ACSES

ApproachMedium wrote:Seeing how today modern cab signal systems are advanced microprocessors with minimal failure rates, its easier to deal with the 562. And now with the advent of ACSES the new "smart" ADUs have a C light on them so you dont even have to wait till you get to the interlocking to see that you have the C light. Once the system knows you are close and has made contact with the TSR data radio, it will receive a "signal" that your train is allowed to proceed and will show the C light on the ADU. This feature is available and has been tested however, but I am not sure if it is being implemented yet. The only place I know of where it could possibly be used at the moment is New haven to boston anyhow. Its the only place where there is 562 and ACSES

You are a wealth of knowledge sir. Thank you. I always enjoy learning. That's whay I became a teacher.

Undoubtedly, as the technology improves, NJT will continue to advance their use of 562 to allow the betterment of their train handling. Say whatever bad you want about NJT.... but you do have to admit, their ROW/tracks are beautifully maintained. Also, their use of signaling is top notch and allows for the safe handling of trains. Yes, to some, all of the advances may be "annoying" in that it does control the engineer somewhat on how they should handle his/her train, but it is safe.

ApproachMedium wrote:Seeing how today modern cab signal systems are advanced microprocessors with minimal failure rates, its easier to deal with the 562. And now with the advent of ACSES the new "smart" ADUs have a C light on them so you dont even have to wait till you get to the interlocking to see that you have the C light. Once the system knows you are close and has made contact with the TSR data radio, it will receive a "signal" that your train is allowed to proceed and will show the C light on the ADU. This feature is available and has been tested however, but I am not sure if it is being implemented yet. The only place I know of where it could possibly be used at the moment is New haven to boston anyhow. Its the only place where there is 562 and ACSES

Last I was aware NJT was not going to use data radios on its acses flavor. If you Google there is an NJT presentation on PTC where it lists that as a feature.

Also while microprocessors are reliable their software is not unless you are prepared to spend aerospace levels of $

Crazy money is spent on these systems. A PHW train control card of any flavor goes for $7,000 a piece. US&S cards are about 10-12 grand a piece. Theres about 5 cards in the ACSES portion and 7-8 in the cab signal portion of a PHW system. I believe US&S is about 5-6 cards. Almost all of them have dual vital processors and are insured for mega money.

There really isnt anything running around today on Amtrak, NJT or MTA thats NOT running on some kind of microprocessor cab signal system. The old heavy relay systems are bulky and cant support the integration with things like ACSES/PTC.

Going to be interesting to see how NJT plans to implement acses without a data radio...

ApproachMedium wrote:Crazy money is spent on these systems. A PHW train control card of any flavor goes for $7,000 a piece. US&S cards are about 10-12 grand a piece. Theres about 5 cards in the ACSES portion and 7-8 in the cab signal portion of a PHW system. I believe US&S is about 5-6 cards. Almost all of them have dual vital processors and are insured for mega money.

There really isnt anything running around today on Amtrak, NJT or MTA thats NOT running on some kind of microprocessor cab signal system. The old heavy relay systems are bulky and cant support the integration with things like ACSES/PTC.[/quote]

I'm not saying that relays are an option just that software is the new point of unreliability especially when software is designed to fail safe. Fail safe still means you have a failure. Remember software development in modern aircraft costs more than airframe development.

ApproachMedium wrote:Going to be interesting to see how NJT plans to implement acses without a data radio...

It's called ASES and it works by using transponders to exchange datagrams just like several systems that are already in service in Europe like ETRMS Level 1. Don't forget that ACSES also can function without the data radios being in service, but NJT's plan was to increase the number of verbosity of the transponders to eliminate the ACSES v1 limitations.

In time, methinks that NJT will have to go the extra miles to pay for the more advanced systems. Their dragging their feet with this...... then again, so are most railroads (except for Metrolink; they've apparently got their form of PTC up and running.)

Metrolink is using the I-ETMS system i believe, which is far more advanced than any of this ACSES stuff.

ApproachMedium wrote:Metrolink is using the I-ETMS system i believe, which is far more advanced than any of this ACSES stuff.

Wow, so they are being really cutting edge then. Then again, as they put it, they're trying to make good on the terrible accident a few years back that cost 24 lives and injured many more.

nick11a wrote:

ApproachMedium wrote:Metrolink is using the I-ETMS system i believe, which is far more advanced than any of this ACSES stuff.

Wow, so they are being really cutting edge then. Then again, as they put it, they're trying to make good on the terrible accident a few years back that cost 24 lives and injured many more.

Well i would imagine it has to do with the host railroads who implemented it first, BNSF i think uses the system. It is made by Wabco. NS has also begun installing it in their engines.
http://www.wabtec.com/railroad/etms.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;