Re: ARTC Communications Based Safeworking System

[mauried@tpg.com.au (Maurie Daly)]

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:25:32 +1100, "B."
<gunzel412@dingoblue.gunzel.net.au> wrote:

>http://216.87.179.125/
>
>Hmmm........
>
>--
>B.
>
>Email - gunzel412 at dingoblue dot net dot au
>ICQ#  - eight two three two nine seven three four
>Phone - long, short, long, long.
>
>
Yes , Hmmm indeed.
I really get depressed when I read these sorts of specifications.
It seems that ARTC ,having learned nothing from Vlines failed attempts
to introduce ASW ,are hell bent on doing the same thing.

Its phrases like this one that really are amazing.



           Overview: The nature
           of the Australian rail
           network is such that
           there are economies
           in placing equipment
           on trains wherever
           possible rather than
           trackside. ARTC has
           therefore
           commenced a
           process of
           consultation with
           interstate operators
           to understand the opportunities and constraints that may
affect them.
------------------------------------------------
Sorry for the formatting problem.

The above is code for 
"We would much rather see most of the infrastructure needed being
installed in the locomotives rather than trackside.

This of course means that the poor struggling rail operator has to
pick up a considerable part of the costs of ARTCs new scheme.

We already have far more incompatible requirements now for radios /
VDUs etc in locomotives .
The last thing rail operators now need is yet another unique loco
based safeworking system.

MD