[Canceled due 2 misunderstanding] ICTS Computer Driven Train

Breeze646 · Post by **Breeze646** » 01 May 2006 01:45

I was reading this and they were discussing about a New Canada/US New vehicles. I was wondering. What about the Automatic Train detroit, toronto and vancover all has.

ICTS Specs

Some info about the ICTS when toronto was getting em

Ofcorse if you are canadian you heard about how there trying to get rid of it in Toronto but in Vancouver. It's future is very bright.

Here's some info about the Sky Train in Vancouver.

Here's some more info and loads of pictures about the skytrain. It shows the MK.1 Vehicles which are used in Detroit and Toronto. And the MK.2 Vehicles which are only used in Vancouver.

BTW The ones in Toronto are the only ones to have Driver Cabs.

tydev417 · Post by **tydev417** » 01 May 2006 02:00

Various train lines throughout the world use different variations of computer controlles trains, like the Victoria and Central Lines in London or the L train on New York is in the process of becoming computer controlled. The JFK Airtran is also completely computer controlled.

But one thing I've noticed, the trains are already computer controlled!!

They skipped right over buying staff for the rail companes.

Breeze646 · Post by **Breeze646** » 01 May 2006 02:07

Yeah that's good info but yeah I was requesting a ICTS Vehicle but thanks for the info. Wait a minute can I get some info on this L line in NYC...

Oh ya one thing about these trains if we make em. They should have lowered Running cost because there driverless. The drivers cost the most money. So party in the house!!!

chevyrider · Post by **chevyrider** » 01 May 2006 08:15

Breeze646 wrote:They should have lowered Running cost because there driverless. The drivers cost the most money. So party in the house!!!

......and making me unemployed?

Wait till the thing gets stuck half way the route.
They will call me to bring it back in the station again.

Plastikman · Post by **Plastikman** » 01 May 2006 12:30

Breeze646 wrote: Oh ya one thing about these trains if we make em. They should have lowered Running cost because there driverless. The drivers cost the most money. So party in the house!!!

yeah and a really high purchase price,, i bet the running cost is still high. the electronics and signaling systems take a good deal of maintnence and parts cost. i wonder if some years they dont save as much as having a motorman. i bet it is still a few years to get your purchace cost back. instead of paying one guy to sit in the train, you are paying an army to keep it safe.

G-TANK-G · Post by **G-TANK-G** » 01 May 2006 12:32

well, hasnt a some sort of ICT train been made for loco. already (ie. te robot rail or something like that)

but I must say technology wise, thats smart... just make sure they dont get a virus

Plastikman · Post by **Plastikman** » 01 May 2006 13:05

G-TANK-G wrote:well, hasnt a some sort of ICT train been made for loco. already (ie. te robot rail or something like that)

but I must say technology wise, thats smart... just make sure they dont get a virus

yeah ther are robot railcars for lomo, chicago has a driverless train also, it services ohare airport and its parkinglots. ehh.. not much to brag about. i have only been on it a few times. mostly just to say i have.

Metromaster · Post by **Metromaster** » 01 May 2006 20:43

[quote="Breeze646"]Wait a minute can I get some info on this L line in NYC...quote]

The R-143 cars on the "L" line are set up for what NYC Transit calls CBTC (Computer Based Train Control). The project is already years behind and way over budget. The latest fiasco is that on a few occasions the computer has "lost" trains. (it doesn't know where they are). But it doesn't stop the following train either. Fortunately, the train operators were paying attention and spotted the train ahead of them in time to apply the emergency brake and avoid what could have been a mojor disaster.

tydev417 · Post by **tydev417** » 01 May 2006 20:48

Breeze646 wrote:Yeah that's good info but yeah I was requesting a ICTS Vehicle but thanks for the info. Wait a minute can I get some info on this L line in NYC...

Oh ya one thing about these trains if we make em. They should have lowered Running cost because there driverless. The drivers cost the most money. So party in the house!!!

Well, the MTA ordered a new set of trains, the R143 Subway Cars, which were equipped with CBTC, where the trains can run by themselves throughout the whole route, eliminating the use of Train operators on that line. The L Train, as jsut upgraded, most stations were renovated and equipped with all the CBTC stuff and also next train boards (a first for nyc, and long needed too), all of which is to go into effect over the summer.

Isn't the TTC Scarborough RT line also driven by ICTS trains? I saw a video of one on Google video.

Plastikman · Post by **Plastikman** » 01 May 2006 21:49

Metromaster wrote:
Breeze646 wrote:Wait a minute can I get some info on this L line in NYC...quote]

The R-143 cars on the "L" line are set up for what NYC Transit calls CBTC (Computer Based Train Control). The project is already years behind and way over budget. The latest fiasco is that on a few occasions the computer has "lost" trains. (it doesn't know where they are). But it doesn't stop the following train either. Fortunately, the train operators were paying attention and spotted the train ahead of them in time to apply the emergency brake and avoid what could have been a mojor disaster.

Nice... isnt that just peachy?

remind me not to be the first in line to ride that once it goes "live"

i am starting to think NYC has one of the worst subway saftey records ever. or at least the highest number of accidents and near misses...

i still want to know how a subway train can crash into the roof of the tunnel... and i know it was the roof fell on the train.. conviently happened be right under a spot as the roof caves in..

strongbow · Post by **strongbow** » 01 May 2006 22:08

or this, insane...

Plastikman · Post by **Plastikman** » 01 May 2006 22:12

strongbow wrote:or this, insane...

i wonder if that was the same accident i was thinking of..

G-TANK-G · Post by **G-TANK-G** » 01 May 2006 22:19

so uh.... anyone still up for ICT trains

tydev417 · Post by **tydev417** » 01 May 2006 22:45

Metromaster wrote:Fortunately, the train operators were paying attention and spotted the train ahead of them in time to apply the emergency brake and avoid what could have been a mojor disaster.

Didn't that happen in a train yard as the train was leaving?

Plastikman wrote:
Nice... isnt that just peachy?

remind me not to be the first in line to ride that once it goes "live"

i am starting to think NYC has one of the worst subway saftey records ever. or at least the highest number of accidents and near misses...

i still want to know how a subway train can crash into the roof of the tunnel... and i know it was the roof fell on the train.. conviently happened be right under a spot as the roof caves in..

Well the JFK Airtrain has been running pretty well considering the fact that it's the first automated line in NYC since the test R16s that caught on fire on the 42nd St Shuttle.

Buuutt, the New York Subway System is very safe when it comes to accidents and that kind of stuff, major accidents are very rare. The union square wreck was a result of a drunk motorman, the williamsburg bridge wreck inlvolving the M train, once again the negligance of the motorman not the subway itself. It's pretty slow, fast runs on the system (that can be found on other systems like DC Metro or SEPTA), don't come often over here with all the timers.

Check out these threads (where i learned everything that im explaining now),

http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=246542

http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=247688

Breeze646 · Post by **Breeze646** » 02 May 2006 01:41

Hey have you heard of the Vancouver sky train having a problem??? It's probably the only one that I haven't heard of problems with.

It seems pretty succesful.

BTW Those robo cars were only freight cars.

If there was a problem like Toronto's Scarborough RT (Which uses the same vehicles as the Sky Train). They probably wouldn't be trying to make more automatic trains. There even planning lines they can't build in time for the 2010 Winter Olympics.

As for the Scarborough RT. There trying to ether get rid of it or buy the new MK.2 Vehicles. I dunno what to think is the best. All of em are expensive.

Plastikman · Post by **Plastikman** » 02 May 2006 02:47

ok i tested a CBTC train out, it works exacly as Metromaster described it...

KABOOM!

Metromaster · Post by **Metromaster** » 02 May 2006 21:20

The photo that Strongbow posted with the car 1437 was the 1991 derailment at 14th Street Union Sq. The motorman was drunk when he was tested 20 hours after the accident. Grand Central tower should have been held partially liable in that the switchpoints should not have been set in advance to allow the train to make this move.

Also in the 1995 Williamsburg bridge wreck, the motorman was not the only one at fault. He was simply the last link in a chain of unfortunate events that led up to the crash.

Breeze646 · Post by **Breeze646** » 02 May 2006 23:42

Metromaster wrote:The photo that Strongbow posted with the car 1437 was the 1991 derailment at 14th Street Union Sq. The motorman was drunk when he was tested 20 hours after the accident. Grand Central tower should have been held partially liable in that the switchpoints should not have been set in advance to allow the train to make this move.

Also in the 1995 Williamsburg bridge wreck, the motorman was not the only one at fault. He was simply the last link in a chain of unfortunate events that led up to the crash.

SEE IT WASN'T A COMPUTER DRIVEN TRAIN!!!

Anyway what did you make that go through a signal... It's short of easy to do. (And obvious)

If you hate the computer driven train then stop compaining and just leave.
So what if you hate it I don't so stop wasting my time trying to prevent it from being made. And also some other people may want it. (God damnit)

BTW That is obviously a normal train.

Breeze646 · Post by **Breeze646** » 02 May 2006 23:57

Here why don't you Google Search Vancouver Sky Train Crash... I got nothing about a crash and it's fully computer driven. It's been running since 1986. Which is exactly 20 years and not one single problem. Here's some Wiki Info about the Sky Train.

EDIT: OMFG I just noticed all the Computer Driven Trains are from Canada that are currently running in the World Including the JFK Air Train.

No Kidding there's hasn't been any computer crashes in a long time.

tydev417 · Post by **tydev417** » 03 May 2006 00:21

Breeze646 wrote:EDIT: OMFG I just noticed all the Computer Driven Trains are from Canada that are currently running in the World Including the JFK Air Train.

That's not true at all, there's computer driven trains all over the world like China, Japan, I think Taiwan, the BART jsut to name a few.

I have yet to see metromaster downright disagree with CBTC on the L but I think it's a cool addition. This project will bring along some things never seen before in our subway system like the destination boards, very good headways, computer controlled trains,etc.

Of course there's going to be a few problems beforehand. That's why they're still working on it, as long as the fare doesn't go up because of it I could care less. Computer controlled trains are cool, the JFK Train is running near perfect with no problems since that major crash in 2003 when they were testing the line.

Transport Tycoon Forums

[Canceled due 2 misunderstanding] ICTS Computer Driven Train

[Canceled due 2 misunderstanding] ICTS Computer Driven Train

Who is online