Re: NRC <> Brisbane to Sydney safeworking.

["Matthew Smith" <matticue@corplink.com.au>]

David Proctor wrote in message
<72m6n5$q79$1@reader1.reader.news.ozemail.net>...

>So how about a computerised system of train orders, so that the computer
>will not allow an invalid order to be issued? I can see some problems with
>this (in other peoples minds, anyway):
>
QR and Westail currently use a system called CATOS (Computer Assisted Train
Order System) although the similarity ends with the name. I'm not up to
speed with Westrail CATOS but  I do know the ins and outs of QR CATOS (since
I am qualified in it). QR also uses a system called DTC (Direct Traffic
Control) which is similar to ASW. Eventually, CATOS will be phased out in
favour of the more modern DTC system. CATOS does, however, prevent
conflicting TO's from being issued.

>1. What if the computer stuffs up?
>
CATOS - The controller reverts to paper written TO's. The computer is
brought up to speed when it comes back on line by issuing a series of dummy
Train Orders identical to the hand written ones. (These are bound together
immediately for cross referencing and to prevent double issue).
DTC. - The computer has a redundant backup system in case of computer
failure. It is also connected to an absolute power supply. To date, this
computer has never gone offline.

>2. What if the order is misinterpreted?
>
Training of Train Controllers, Station Masters and Drivers in Train Order
system is so intense and the wording procedure is so exact that this should
never be a contentious issue.

>3. What if their is a communications breakdown, and the order cannot be
>transmitted?
>
The conditions of having a Train Order system is to provide 100% radio
coverage however, we have rules and regs to cover a communications failure
(which includes using a phone in a private residence, if necessary).

I personally don't believe that any Train Order system should be used on a
heavily trafficked line. It was only ever intended for light traffic lines
and it should stay that way. This will never be the case however, since the
department heads only seem to see the economical value of the system
regardless of the reduced safety aspect.

Cheers

Matt Smith.