[kEiThZ]

It's all computer/sensor control with...wait for it...pilot eyesight and discretion to intervene.

Ex-pilot. That's not true. IFR.... Controller tells you to land and is responsible for separation.

Also, airplanes can power up and go around if traffic ahead is still on the active. This does happen. What does a train do, when the traffic ahead hasn't cleared?

 

[steveintoronto]

What does a train do, when the traffic ahead hasn't cleared?

It applies the brakes, or rather, the *automatic sensing logic circuits* apply the brakes. It's called "automatic" for a reason. And the driver has the discretion to over-ride, just as in an airliner.

[In aviation, autoland describes a system that fully automates the landing procedure of an aircraft's flight, with the flight crew supervising the process. Such systems enable aircraft to land in weather conditions that would otherwise be dangerous or impossible to operate in.][...]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland

For CBTC:

 

[crs1026]

Ex-pilot. That's not true. IFR.... Controller tells you to land and is responsible for separation.

Also, airplanes can power up and go around if traffic ahead is still on the active. This does happen. What does a train do, when the traffic ahead hasn't cleared?

Comparing air and rail is a bit tenuous. Trains can just come to a stop when needed to maintain separation.

In vanilla PTC, the blocks are discrete and the infrastructure that assures separation simply passes information about block and signal status to the locomotive. The locomotive determines its position, figures out the distance to the next restrictive block limit, and tells the operator where it will be time to apply the brakes (enforcing this if the operator fails to comply). The train has an autopilot (the term on some railways is "Fuel Optimiser") which enables driving to all be hands-off.

In more advanced PTC, the blocks are virtual and dynamic. The infrastructure passes information to the locomotive about where the next block limit is at that moment. The locomotive's technology controls power and braking to move within the dynamic limit of authority.

I don't know much about Air Traffic Control and whether the Traffic Controller's console interfaces directly with the plane's auto pilot, or whether the pilot has to direct the autopilot based on voice instructions from the traffic controller.

- Paul

 

[mdrejhon]

There's a big splash in the international news today about Montreal's $5.5 billion electrified rail system, of which $3bn is funded by Caisse.

Canadian pension fund Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec said on Friday that it would invest $3 billion in a new public transport network in Montreal, the third largest of its kind in the world.

The network will link downtown Montreal, the South Shore, the West Island, the North Shore and Montreal's airport in a 67 km (41.6 miles) light rail transit system comprising 24 stations which will be operating 20 hours a day, seven days a week.

It's apparently a model like a RER system (ala Paris RER, S-Bahn, GO RER, et cetra) and will involve 3-minute headways.

Reuters are calling it a "light rail transit system".
Globe & Mail is calling it "automated".
But this appears to be a heavy-rail corridor.

It sounds much like electrification & an ETC (CBTC) deployment in heavy rail corridors, as that seems the defacto combo to successfully fit the bolded criteria. For those not keeping up, CBTC (...Communications Based Train Control...) provides provisions for automating trains and shortening headways mentioned.

From earlier, it is one of the suggested Transport Canada conditions for permitting lighter-weight trains in heavy-rail corridors, closer to European structural strength rather than massively overbuilt FRA strength (...Federal Railway Assocation...to those readers not reading previous pages of this thread).

The pressure on Transport Canada just got greater, to come up with new rules in a modern ETC era (PTC/CBTC). With GO, VIA, and now Caisse/Montreal, combined, we've got over $20 billion of projects depending on new Transport Canada rules. And we haven't even included other future projects such as future RER expansions and potential London/Kitchener HSR.

At these budget numbers, we're now already in the stratosphere of more than three order of magnitude of ballparks away from little O-Train style exceptions/exemptions to FRA-derived rules.

I imagine we'll hear new general unified ETC-era guidelines from Transport Canada within this government term, that is applied to all brand new ETC-equipped rail networks Canada-wide..

Whatever Montreal adds to Transport Canada's paperwork pile, no doubt affects Toronto and GO RER too.

 

[steveintoronto]

There's a big splash in the international news today about Montreal's $5.5 billion electrified rail system, of which $3bn is funded by Caisse.


It's apparently a model like a RER system (ala Paris RER, S-Bahn, GO RER, et cetra) and will involve 3-minute headways....

It's profound, in many ways. Unfortunately some of the resident naysayers in the VIA string just don't get the many implications of this. So far, *most* of the news stories are pretty good in terms of grasping the precedent this will set. It's supposed to run 20 hours a day with incredible regularity. I'm Googling for an engineering description.

For many reasons, this is an incredible development.

 

[nfitz]

For many reasons, this is an incredible development.

STM has been talking about metro-like service frequencies on this line since the 1960s - back when it was going to be called Line 3 (which is why there is no Metro Line 3).

Forgive my cynicism, but given how many times the same project can be announced in Quebec for decades, without anything actually happen, I'll believe it when I see construction underway.

But if they do build it, perhaps they can also build the planned Line 3 platforms in Metro Édouard-Montpetit (then called Vincent D'Indy) as part of this line, to provide an interchange station.

I fail to understand why we are discussing this, in this thread. Or why mdrejhon posts the same thing to more than one thread.

 

[steveintoronto]

I fail to understand why we are discussing this, in this thread. Or why mdrejhon posts the same thing to more than one thread.

Because the announcement was that it will be "fully automated". Surely you can extrapolate the implications for Train Control from there?

 

[mdrejhon]

nfitz,

Sometimes it's obvious that one piece of major news belongs in multiple threads. This $5.5bn Montreal news is big from an ETC perspective, given the pressure to bail Bombardier out. The Montreal news is highly relevant to VIA and highly relevant to GO, from many perspectives.

Whatever edict Transport Canada releases will also hugely determine GO RER's future. This is also mentioned in Metrolinx documents as being a capital importance that massively affects GO RER budget. As a taxpayer, I want money to be spent efficiently on GO RER.

Obviously, you're not familiar with how huge ETC (CBTC) technologies are in enabling the upgrade of traditional heavy rail systems into metro-like systems (high frequency SmartTrack and/or RER isn't really possible without it).

Example: People have posted hybrid station information (A brand new GO-TTC interchange such as Downsview Park) in both the GO threads and the TTC threads. There are unavoidable overlap on certain topics where siloing the topic is difficult.

I fail to understand your incessant complaining on quite obviously hugely relevant news that I wrote mostly different text about (except a subtle nod, legitimately, in my wordiness, but I intentionally kept the duplicate portions to a small fraction of the above postsize) -- if you look at the two posts, the information below the links has majority substantially different text and continues to covers different points. I only acknowledge blame only on that criteria.

If you're a "read only the first three sentences" reader and determined my post was a 100% duplicate, then obviously nfitz, you've jumped the gun already.

Bottom line, there are separate major news elements that covers both.

 

[nfitz]

nfitz,

Sometimes it's obvious that one piece of major news belongs in multiple threads.

Posting the same long material in two different threads is never obvious.

I fail to understand your incessant complaining on quite obviously hugely relevant news that I wrote mostly different text about

You think all the bold and colouring is a good thing?

I don't see the need to be so utterly rude. I simply noted the frustration seeing the same long post twice, at the end of another post.

And also don't see how Quebec re-announcing the same project they've announced so many times in the last 50 years as having much significance. That this project was called Line 3 ... when they announced Line 7 over 30 years ago, should tell you all you need to know!

I admit they haven't announced it as frequently as the Line 5 extension from St. Michel - which they actually showed on the trains 30 years ago, with black spots ready for them to put white spots on, as the station came into service.

 

[steveintoronto]

And also don't see how Quebec re-announcing the same project they've announced so many times in the last 50 years as having much significance. That this project was called Line 3 ... when they announced Line 7 over 30 years ago, should tell you all you need to know!

I admit they haven't announced it as frequently as the Line 5 extension from St. Michel - which they actually showed on the trains 30 years ago, with black spots ready for them to put white spots on, as the station came into service.

Quebec didn't announce it. Caisse did. Seems some takes 'fits' when they can't read.

MONTREAL/TORONTO (Reuters) - Canadian pension fund Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec said on Friday that it would invest C$3 billion ($2.37 billion) in a new public transport network in Montreal, the third-largest of its kind in the world.

The network will link downtown Montreal with several suburbs and Montreal's airport in a 67 km (41.6 miles) light rail transit system comprising 24 stations which will operate 20 hours a day, seven days a week. The automated system would be the largest after Dubai's at 80 km, and Vancouver's at 68 km.

The C$5.5 billion project, a public-private partnership, would require C$2.5 billion from the province of Quebec and Canada. A spokeswoman for Quebec Transportation Minister Jacques Daoust said Friday the province would invest in the project. A Canadian government spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment.

Quebec's transport minister told Radio Canada that he would be happy to see a Quebec company like train and plane maker Bombardier Inc win the contract.

But a Quebec spokeswoman later said that Caisse would be in charge of the bidding process. [...]

http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKCN0XJ1TN

Note this part:

Caisse, which would start construction in the spring of 2017 to begin train service at the end of 2020, is already discussing plans to operate similar projects in other countries, Sabia said. [...] "We are actively talking to people in the United States and elsewhere to begin the process of exporting the model."

How can some of you be so incredibly misinformed on the subject, and then have the audacity to be rude to others because "they post too much".

Damn details, eh? Ruins your rant, don't it?

 

[nfitz]

Quebec didn't announce it. Caisse did. Seems some takes 'fits' when they can't read.

The CDPQ is a provincial crown corporation. It is as much Quebec as Metrolinx is Ontario.

How can some of you be so incredibly misinformed on the subject, and then have the audacity to be rude to others because "they post too much".

How can you be so incredibly misinformed about what the caisse is? I've been rude to no one in this thread; I simply commented on it not being necessary to post the same long text in 2 different threads.

Damn details, eh? Ruins your rant, don't it?

A one-sentence throw-away line at the end of a post, isn't a rant. Really?

To get back on topic.

I still don't see how this is little more than yet another Line 3 re-announcement.

Perhaps they'll build it this time - perhaps they won't. I'm sure they'll build something sooner or later. But it's hardly ground-breaking. Montreal is far worse at announcing something, and then not doing it, than Toronto.

 

[steveintoronto]

The CDPQ is a provincial crown corporation. It is as much Quebec as Metrolinx is Ontario.

Really? Do some reading:
http://cdpq.com/en/about-us

Metrolinx is a government agency.
Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan: Home is the Ontario equivalent, not Metrolinx. So is OMERS a "provincial crown corporation" too?

 

[mdrejhon]

(Posting this to steer this thread back to civil discussion that doesn't endless criticize each other on the Montreal/Quebec/Caisse related nitpicks.)

I have renamed this thread to mention CBTC, and updated the first post which was formerly obsolete since the March 2016 RER Business Case announcement. CBTC is considered nearly a Holy Grail in railroading circles, is nowadays generally considered a superior option to traditional Positive Train Control (PTC).

Originally, this thread covered only PTC at the beginning.

 

[steveintoronto]

The question arises as to whether MTA are going to keep their present Bombardier MR-90s, or re-equip them with the latest moving block control which will be absolutely essential for running 3 minute headways? The Deux-Montagnes line will be absorbed if la Caisse meet approval for their concept.

If they don't keep them...perhaps Metrolinx might be interested in them? They're heavy and FRA compliant, and use a version of the knuckle couplers, it remains to be seen if Ontario could or would use them. Or perhaps MTA are waiting to see the outcome of the VIA proposal, or wish for a proposal to them to electrify the TorMont Corridor.

 

[TOareaFan]

Really? Do some reading:
http://cdpq.com/en/about-us

Metrolinx is a government agency.
Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan: Home is the Ontario equivalent, not Metrolinx. So is OMERS a "provincial crown corporation" too?

None of those entities are directly analogous to CDPQ.

One of the common misconceptions about La Caisse is that it is a "pension plan"....if it were it would like OMERS and OTPP but it is not. It is a depository for other pension funds (and some non pension funds investors)...it is a collective, if you will, bringing together (I think) 19 different funds under one umbrella to give them power/strength/size that they otherwise could not have on their own. So, they act like a pension plan but they are really a fund of pension plans.

One area where I would think Nfitz is absolutely correct (and that would make you absolutely incorrect, I guess) is that CDPQ is a crown corp. Not sure why that is so hard to understand....what makes a company a crown corp is an act in parliament (or in this case the National Assembly of Quebec) creating the company and describing its rules of engagement and mandate......the Caisse has one (http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=2&file=/C_2/C2_A.html )....OMERS and OTPP do not.