Re: Computer Question - DTC

["Switched On" <yaropolk@hotmail.com>]

Notagunzel <notagunzel@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
hpt44.154$eF6.7185@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net">news:hpt44.154$eF6.7185@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net...
> Switched On <yaropolk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> MM744.194$Kr6.8729@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net">news:MM744.194$Kr6.8729@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net...
> > Notagunzel wrote in message ...
>
> > >It did seen an unusual way to do things, but I gather that without the
> > >correct version database, the startup codes given by the driver to the
> > >controller would have been rejected by the office computer.
>
> > Everything on the DTC is password based so that it can be verified
correct
> > by the controller. This is one of its strong selling points - short of a
> > driver going psycho or a train failing mechanically, nothing can happen
> > without controller confirmation - including an upgrade to the database.
> > Imagine if drivers updated to a new database before they were authorized
> > to - ie before the controller had updated his dBase. What chaotic
> mysteries
> > would be unleashed then, I shudder to think, but fortunately we don't
have
> > to find out. DTC has it covered.
>
> > >Several locos didn't have the V1.0.7 database installed, so they had to
> be
> > >worked with manual forms.
>
> > I guess these must have missed out on that particular day because they
> were
> > unavailable (ie out in the field), but they'll get around to it. Rome
> wasn't
> > built in a day.
>
> Ahh yes... I could point out that changing the Database in the ASW system
> didn't require installing new software in all the locomotives. |-) |-)

That's not a situation which will last long, let me assure you. :-)

> > >I think the change had something to do with integrating GPS with the
DTC
> > >computer in the loco, AFAIK the GPS co-ordinates aren't sent back to
> > >Control.  How is the GPS co-ords sent to the DTC computer?
>
> > This is a good question. In the words of the great Joh Bjelke-Petersen..
> you
> > just wait and see... you notagunzels are a curious breed... and so...
> > anonymous... who knows, you could be working for those socialists down
> south
> > there... :-)
>
> Us southerners aren't interested in modern systems anymore... in the last
6
> months we've removed ASW in lieu of Train Orders, and removed Train Orders
> in lieu of Staff & Ticket |-)

So I hear..

> > Was it the shiny metal box with a flip-top lid kind of computer or the
> > bolted-to-the-roof ultra-industrial space-age indestrucible variety? All
> > depends on what kind of loco it came from...
>
> This one was in a *timber* box, which the driver mounted on a removeable
> stand next to him.  The power was plugged into the box with a three(?) pin
> connector.  I gather the 2800's have fixed DTC computers?

Yup.. they have a bit less room so a special space-age version was prepared
to meet the need.

> > >I have seen the recent IRSE paper on all the QR computer systems, but
it
> > >didn't really get into the guts of the DTC system.
>
> > No, it didn't - probably because the new version of the DTC system is
> still
> > under development and is very interesting to a lot of other rail
operators
> > around the world because it leaves paper-based safeworking for dead. It
> > would be hoped that other operators might purchase this technology off
QR,
> > since it is unique and highly innovative, and much much better than
> anything
> > in the ballpark.
>
> Just to think, V/Line had similar high hopes with the ASW once upon a
time.
> |-)

But is ASW  a form of true block working like DTC is, or was it simply
another form of train order (albeit electronic, not manual)? From what I
understand that's part of its problem, while the other part was the way it
was engineered.... overly and poorly. Really, a system like this should be
as simple as possible because the whole idea is that it should be extremely
cheap because it's used (comparitively with track circuited systems) fairly
rarely and in remote areas. Updating loco computers in such locations isn't
really that expensive an exercise because the things have to come in for
maintenance (restocking, refuelling etc) at the end of their run anyway.
However, if you have money to burn, then you can certainly do things like
remote updating of software and databases etc.. but then, if you have money
to burn, why not just put an interlocking in? Hence the feeding frenzy
surrounding DTC has been rather intense, of late because companies which run
long, remote, dark-territory lines _don't_ have money to burn.

> However, gazing into my crystal ball, methinks the ARTC will have to move
to
> something other than their current 100% manual train orders beyond Pt
Pirie
> one day, who knows - the airwaves on the nullabour might be filled with
> "Command Code 387 563 643..."  "proceed to Block Limit Board CK23..."

or perhaps those Southern Africans over in Zimbabwe might be using it
sometime soon too..  I've heard they're pretty interested.

> > It's nice to see something run smoothly for a change, isn't it?
>
> Except when the axle counters near Proserpine die, during a 'Road Closure'
> as you Northerners call it, delaying the Spirit of the Tropics by
1hr20ish.
> |-)

Better than being delayed by 4 hours on the Sydney XPT for good reason at
all except waiting for other trains, wouldn't you say? :-)

> (Signal Electrician: "I want to reset the axle counter" - Train
Controller:
> "No - the Road is under Closure", mind you there were track machines in
the
> section at the time...)

That's what a road closure is for, isn't it? Major works involving track
machines etc.. mind you, the only major works you'll find down south outside
of Sydney would be all the closures of regional centres... those are real
artful major works.

S