DC Area Transit Zone

Somehow Metro wants to swap out "well over half" of the safety modules before going back to ATO, and the only way they can do that faster is to "get crews more access to the tracks" (http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/dc/2011/06/metro-trains-stay-manual-mode-several-years)


Is it time to retrain all the operators to stop 6 car trains at a "6" mark? Is it also early enough to build the 7000's to be optimized for manual operation since I have doubts that Metro will be back when the enter service and better safe than sorry? I think it may be time to do some weekend-long shutdown of some lines to do this work since lord knows how beat up the cars will be after what could be 5+ years of manual operation. At this point, like the Williamsburg Bridge crash in New York, I doubt there's any faith in ATO in the long run and manual is here to stay.


If only Jeanice McMillian saw she had a train ahead of her and hit the emergency brake...

It depends on what your definition of optimization is.

As it is now the operators get no warning as to what the speed limit will be in the next track circuit. There are no speed limit signs of any kind at track side anywhere on the railroad. The operators are reacting to the change of the speed commands on their consoles displays, not anticipating.

Much of the jerkiness of the ride can be attributed to the practice of assembling trains of different car series.

Janice McMilan saw the train in front of her and reacted as quickly as she could, according to the NTSB.  Let's not make up all sorts of "facts."

It has been explained both on this board and SubChat why comparisons to the Williamsburg Bridge crash are not applicable to Fort Totten.  WMATA had a long period of manual operation in the late 1990s/early 2000s and went back to ATO.  They will go back to ATO again.  If I were a betting man, I'd say the 7000s will spend most of their careers in ATO.

Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on June 03, 2011, 11:00:17 AM
Janice McMilan saw the train in front of her and reacted as quickly as she could, according to the NTSB.  Let's not make up all sorts of "facts."

It has been explained both on this board and SubChat why comparisons to the Williamsburg Bridge crash are not applicable to Fort Totten.  WMATA had a long period of manual operation in the late 1990s/early 2000s and went back to ATO.  They will go back to ATO again.  If I were a betting man, I'd say the 7000s will spend most of their careers in ATO.

I really do think Metro should go back to homogenous trainsets again of the same series (in agreement with Oren). The whole sandwiching thing of the 1000s was mainly a PR thing. However, reassembling trainsets without 1000 series in the middle will be time consuming. Hopefully, when a bulk of the 7000s come in, Metro might go back to homogenous sets.

Quote from: 79MetroExtraMD on June 03, 2011, 02:07:42 PM

Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on June 03, 2011, 11:00:17 AM
Janice McMilan saw the train in front of her and reacted as quickly as she could, according to the NTSB.  Let's not make up all sorts of "facts."

It has been explained both on this board and SubChat why comparisons to the Williamsburg Bridge crash are not applicable to Fort Totten.  WMATA had a long period of manual operation in the late 1990s/early 2000s and went back to ATO.  They will go back to ATO again.  If I were a betting man, I'd say the 7000s will spend most of their careers in ATO.

I really do think Metro should go back to homogenous trainsets again of the same series (in agreement with Oren). The whole sandwiching thing of the 1000s was mainly a PR thing. However, reassembling trainsets without 1000 series in the middle will be time consuming. Hopefully, when a bulk of the 7000s come in, Metro might go back to homogenous sets.

I think a good thing to do in the interim would be to revisit allowing 1000's to lead in the condition that part of the first car is blocked off to be on the safe side (possibly running them as 8-car trains to make up for the lost room). At the same time, put the 4000's solely in solid 8-car consists to get them out of trains. If this is going to be a long-term situation, better to prepare for it rather than stick to the PR pandering of a former regime.

Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on June 03, 2011, 11:00:17 AM
Janice McMilan saw the train in front of her and reacted as quickly as she could, according to the NTSB.  Let's not make up all sorts of "facts."

It has been explained both on this board and SubChat why comparisons to the Williamsburg Bridge crash are not applicable to Fort Totten.  WMATA had a long period of manual operation in the late 1990s/early 2000s and went back to ATO.  They will go back to ATO again.  If I were a betting man, I'd say the 7000s will spend most of their careers in ATO.

Agreed!  While it's sad for all who lost their lives (and those hurt) in the Ft Totten accident... My heart especially goes out for Ms. McMillian as I can't imagine the terror she must've experienced after her train rounded the blind curve and she saw the motionless train ahead.

I also agree about the WillyB accident.  For those who are not familair with the Williamsburg Bridge accident... There was a train (M) train) stopped mid-span on the Manhattan-bound track of the Williamsburg Bridge.  Another train (J) came along and it's believed that the motorman (train operator) suffered either a seizure or heart attact (I forget which one).  The motorman slumped forward with his body on his hand (which was on the controller) which prevented the dead man's feature from activating and stopping the train.  The second train had gained enough momentum that it was able to pass two red signals (which activated the emergency brakes) and hit the rear of the stopped train.  After the investigation the conclusion was that the signaling system was unable to provide adequate protection for newer NYCTA subway cars.  NYCTA then began llimiting the top speed of the trains.   

Also, I agree with John about the bucking of trains.  As a child growing up in NYC, this used to be the norm throughout NYCTA's subway system.  With the exception of the newer cars (and maybe the R-10), it was almost unheard of to find a train that wasn't a mixed consist.     

Wayne,

As I understand it, Layton Gibson fell asleep, there was no sign he ever had a heart attack or seizure (http://www.nytimes.com/1995/06/07/nyregion/crash-subway-overview-unlikely-combination-errors-are-found-crash-subway.html?n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fT%2fTransit%20Systems).  I also read the issue was that the Williamsburg Bridge signals were not spaced properly, such that the blocks were too short so that even though the first red signal he passed was red, there wasn't enough space to come to a complete stop before hitting the train ahead. 

Ken, since the WMATA trains aren't in any sort of permanent trainsets, unmixing the cars to be in solid consists wouldn't be too difficult.  I wouldn't go so far as to say the cars should never be mixed, the advantage of interoperability is that if there are 4 Rohrs and 2 Bredas sitting in the yard and they need a six car train, they can send it out.  But it shouldn't be the norm.

Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on June 04, 2011, 02:50:57 PM
Wayne,

  I also read the issue was that the Williamsburg Bridge signals were not spaced properly, such that the blocks were too short so that even though the first red signal he passed was red, there wasn't enough space to come to a complete stop before hitting the train ahead. 

Ken, since the WMATA trains aren't in any sort of permanent trainsets, unmixing the cars to be in solid consists wouldn't be too difficult.  I wouldn't go so far as to say the cars should never be mixed, the advantage of interoperability is that if there are 4 Rohrs and 2 Bredas sitting in the yard and they need a six car train, they can send it out.  But it shouldn't be the norm.

Oren,

Thanks for posting this.  I totally forgot about them suspecting the T/O had fallen asleep.  I do rememeber that he was making his last trip and I think he would've been done once he reached Broad Street.  Yes, the short blocks is exactly what they had commented on in regards to the signaling system not providing adequate protection.  My understanding was that the idea of the short blocks with timers were intended to control the speed of trains.  The problem is that while ascending the span, the signals are regular automatics and you don't encounter the timers until about mid-span and of course the descent. 

There is a discussion about this over on Subchat with links to the relevant NTSB reports, but the short blocks were designed for older, shorter cars, and were never extended as the rolling stock evolved.  A train running the type of equipment that was used when the bridge signals were installed in 1918 would have stopped in time, the R40Ms in use in 1995 would not.  Also, because of the steep upgrade to get onto the bridge, T/Os put the controller in the parallel position in order to make it up the incline.  Finally, I think he had one more round trip to go, not just a one way, but I'd say it is a fairly minor detail in the larger scheme of things. 

Quote from: Scrabbleship on June 03, 2011, 02:15:12 PMI think a good thing to do in the interim would be to revisit allowing 1000's to lead in the condition that part of the first car is blocked off to be on the safe side (possibly running them as 8-car trains to make up for the lost room). At the same time, put the 4000's solely in solid 8-car consists to get them out of trains. If this is going to be a long-term situation, better to prepare for it rather than stick to the PR pandering of a former regime.

I wouldn't even go that far, because the West Falls Church collision demonstrated that when the Rohr cars are surrounded by other rolling stock, the energy of an accident will go back to those Rohrs, and they'll crush and/or telescope mid-train (and that was a low-speed collision).  I'm all for running Rohrs in the lead position and letting people assume the risk that the car may telescope in a collision.  Most mornings, my morning ride is on a Rohr, and I ride knowing full well that in a collision, the car that I am on will likely be structurally compromised.

Quote from: SchuminWeb on June 05, 2011, 03:02:29 AM

Quote from: Scrabbleship on June 03, 2011, 02:15:12 PMI think a good thing to do in the interim would be to revisit allowing 1000's to lead in the condition that part of the first car is blocked off to be on the safe side (possibly running them as 8-car trains to make up for the lost room). At the same time, put the 4000's solely in solid 8-car consists to get them out of trains. If this is going to be a long-term situation, better to prepare for it rather than stick to the PR pandering of a former regime.

I wouldn't even go that far, because the West Falls Church collision demonstrated that when the Rohr cars are surrounded by other rolling stock, the energy of an accident will go back to those Rohrs, and they'll crush and/or telescope mid-train (and that was a low-speed collision).  I'm all for running Rohrs in the lead position and letting people assume the risk that the car may telescope in a collision.  Most mornings, my morning ride is on a Rohr, and I ride knowing full well that in a collision, the car that I am on will likely be structurally compromised.

Although lets be honest, the likelihood of you (or anyone else) not making it to your intended destination as a result of a collision, derailment, or the like is extremely low.  My guess is that everyone here engages in far more dangerous activity from a statistical standpoint on a regular basis.

It has also been discussed here and/or on SubChat that had the striking train not been 1000 Series cars, it is still likely that at the speed at which the impact was made, the force of the collision would have still caused a derailment, quite possibly in the middle of the train, as well as injuries and maybe some fatalities. 

Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on June 05, 2011, 06:30:07 AMAlthough lets be honest, the likelihood of you (or anyone else) not making it to your intended destination as a result of a collision, derailment, or the like is extremely low.  My guess is that everyone here engages in far more dangerous activity from a statistical standpoint on a regular basis.

Indeed, taking Metro is WAY safer than a lot of activities, like driving, where the chances of being in an accident are much higher (in fact, two cars got in a fender bender right behind me on Saturday on Georgia Avenue).