i also hate it... start-stop train... once.. i took this train which stopped once in-between 2 stations, and even got twice in-between stations.. peak hours lah...
then when the trains stop in-between, they always come to an abrupt.. making many people stumble and fall or awaken..
cant they calculate the train-to-traqin distance and adjust the speed or at least brake smoothly like whn they stop at stations?
also, the drivers also keep opening and closing the doors a 2-3 times at every station then move off.. imagine u take train fr say yishun to town.. start-stop 25times, door-closing 24times, uneven accelerating/ braking/ cruising speed...
the infrastructure really cannot support the peak period traffic
Today, I rode 343-344, and almost between every station the train stops, most of the time TO brake very hard and the wheel got something like a fireworks sound.
Well there's no choice, there must be a balance between safety and comfort. You can't simply have both unless...
The purpose of the ATO is to maximize the efficency of the travelling times. They do not take passenger comfort as a major factor.
How to balance both safety and comfort?
Originally posted by Bus and Train LoVuR:How to balance both safety and comfort?
Reprogramme the ATO or switch to full manual.
Ok, why not you guys drive the train, improve the system for the comfort of all passengers. Tough ain't it?
Originally posted by Rooney9:
then do away with the driver lar to save costs. since he is not driving the train.
driver takes over during emergencies, construction near tracks and also during rainy conditions when tracks are more slippery.
If we take away drivers, no point. They will still be deployed to the trains, just like the CCL and NEL. They are still there to drive the train manually incase of any breakdown, or maybe they are required to drive it.
Originally posted by Interception_7:If we take away drivers, no point. They will still be deployed to the trains, just like the CCL and NEL. They are still there to drive the train manually incase of any breakdown, or maybe they are required to drive it.
SMRT should just replace the whole fleet with Alstom metropolis automated trains like those in SBST.
then at least make them stop smoothly and not brake SO hard.. braking a few meters after the target point wont make any difference to the train..
Originally posted by Larryteo:SMRT should just replace the whole fleet with Alstom metropolis automated trains like those in SBST.
You have to take note, SMRT NSL and EWL line are not fully underground. During rainy days, the trains are required to be driven manually. This is because the braking distance is twice than of normal days. If the trains are operated in Auto mode during rainy days, heavy thunderstorms and rains, the trains when stopped at the station will get overshot.
Originally posted by 105090:then at least make them stop smoothly and not brake SO hard.. braking a few meters after the target point wont make any difference to the train..
Well no one have tried it since everyone only want ultra high frequency and minimum travelling time, all this at the cost of comfort. Hence it is ATO's characteristics to brake and accelerate at its max. Braking a few meters after the target point does make a difference, in fact it can make a difference between life and death.
The best hope to fixed this problem is hope for someone to make something that is able to calculate average speed of the train infront and brake and accelerate accordingly smoothly.
Anyway I thought NEL and CCL's ATO has more powerful brakes.
063/064 has an unusual shaky movement, it can cause passengers with motion sickness
Well we can give it a thought that local train officers/drivers are not that well trained in driving a train smoothly. As long as they don't overshoot, I guess its pass from the lessons of driving a train. Little talk about accuracy in stopping, timing to use what notch of brake and so on.
Also, the master controller of local trains make the job more difficult. First, the deadman's button, a hard hat, well I hate the feeling of pressing onto it while concentrating on the tracks ahead. I have not drove a real train before, but using fully built up simulators, the absence of the switch is really more convenient than with the it. Then again, no windows to look into the cab; once the driver sleeps/slumps over, no one can know it and wake him up/take control from inside the train.
Second, the unique power and brake notches of the master controller. Power 4 notches, brake 3 notches. So its more easy to move off than brake, agree? Three notches for brake is really too little. Not only the speed, but by dividing your maximum brake power into three notches will make every part stronger than say, seven notches.
Equipment reliability and man-machine trust is important. An automatic machine when operated by a human will often give more trouble than help.
Maybe trains nowadays should inherit the technology from civillian airliners, the autobrake can be set before landing to match the requirements of the runway =D so maybe there should be a control centre for the trains to set the power of the brakes used during different weather conditions.
Originally posted by SBSTransport:Well no one have tried it since everyone only want ultra high frequency and minimum travelling time, all this at the cost of comfort. Hence it is ATO's characteristics to brake and accelerate at its max. Braking a few meters after the target point does make a difference, in fact it can make a difference between life and death.
The best hope to fixed this problem is hope for someone to make something that is able to calculate average speed of the train infront and brake and accelerate accordingly smoothly.
Anyway I thought NEL and CCL's ATO has more powerful brakes.
overshooting the "target" is ok if its in-between stations right?? theres nothing dangerous than braking over a longer distance and giving everyone comfort.. unless you say the train MUST brake by the target spot, if-not there will be collision, wich there isn;t
Originally posted by 105090:overshooting the "target" is ok if its in-between stations right?? theres nothing dangerous than braking over a longer distance and giving everyone comfort.. unless you say the train MUST brake by the target spot, if-not there will be collision, wich there isn;t
No, apart of peak hour times where the train's distance is barely 2 minutes, overshooting is a real problem such that if you have overshot by a door's distance, is it going to open a door (Nearest to HW TO cabin) that is in the restricted zone (At the end of the station do have such place) or even .... in the tracks?
Originally posted by 105090:overshooting the "target" is ok if its in-between stations right?? theres nothing dangerous than braking over a longer distance and giving everyone comfort.. unless you say the train MUST brake by the target spot, if-not there will be collision, wich there isn;t
You never know anything can happen, there was once, one of the forumer saw a train coming towards Yishun almost hit into the train at Yishun because the train somehow didn't stop at its target and overshoot. Actually ATO is already quite ok considering it do not have the ability to stop the train if the track is really really slippery like oil leak (clementi incident).
Originally posted by Larryteo:SMRT should just replace the whole fleet with Alstom metropolis automated trains like those in SBST.
Some people never learn their lesson...... People tell you nice nice that somethings are not meant to be, you object and side SBST. This kind of people are outrageous. Too bad we have to put up with them in our society. Get a life dude.
Trains usually have an accidental overshot esp when there is a rain where i can hear the gas release sound
Originally posted by SBSTransport:Well no one have tried it since everyone only want ultra high frequency and minimum travelling time, all this at the cost of comfort. Hence it is ATO's characteristics to brake and accelerate at its max. Braking a few meters after the target point does make a difference, in fact it can make a difference between life and death.
The best hope to fixed this problem is hope for someone to make something that is able to calculate average speed of the train infront and brake and accelerate accordingly smoothly.
Anyway I thought NEL and CCL's ATO has more powerful brakes.
How can you account for max brake and acceleration curve when we have normal and fast mode when in Auto mode? This is only true if our train operate in fast mode at all times which is not the case here. Anyway we're using the ancient ATC block system on the NSL and EWL, which means that train behind can't move until the train 1~2 block infront has cleared the ATC block. Also, are you aware that the Yamanote Line D-ATC works in such a way that if the train have to come to a complete stop due to a train infront, the train will automatically applies B1 before the train comes to a complete stop, accomplishing the comfort part of commuting.
The technology is already present in the real world but sadly, NSL and EWL is still using the old signalling system.
ATO does not have brakes, it's the train that have the brake, so I suppose you are trying to say that the 70000 series and 8000 series have more powerful brakes?
Originally posted by TIB1224Y:Well we can give it a thought that local train officers/drivers are not that well trained in driving a train smoothly. As long as they don't overshoot, I guess its pass from the lessons of driving a train. Little talk about accuracy in stopping, timing to use what notch of brake and so on.
Also, the master controller of local trains make the job more difficult. First, the deadman's button, a hard hat, well I hate the feeling of pressing onto it while concentrating on the tracks ahead. I have not drove a real train before, but using fully built up simulators, the absence of the switch is really more convenient than with the it. Then again, no windows to look into the cab; once the driver sleeps/slumps over, no one can know it and wake him up/take control from inside the train.
Second, the unique power and brake notches of the master controller. Power 4 notches, brake 3 notches. So its more easy to move off than brake, agree? Three notches for brake is really too little. Not only the speed, but by dividing your maximum brake power into three notches will make every part stronger than say, seven notches.
Equipment reliability and man-machine trust is important. An automatic machine when operated by a human will often give more trouble than help.
It's the way they're trained to stop. They are taught to lookout for "checkpoints" like at a particular part of the station, train must be at X km/h etc, which is why there's is this frequent intermittent brake engage and disengage symtoms during CM mode. The way NEL train work is abit worst IMHO as the master controller is not exactly a notch but a slider and plus the way I see the CSO handles the brake is like;
Enter station at 60km/h using N>B3>N>B3>N>B3 and continues until the train stop at the correct position. Do correct me if I am wrong.
To add, the position where the CSP was place is not "driver friendly" as it does not really allows the driver to see where the exact CSP is until he/she is very near it as it is placed at the wall of the station, not to mention that each different station has different layout and CSP. Adding the HHPSD, it's going to restrict the judgement even more, which in turn "encourage" the driver to brake in a more unpredictable and "violent" way.
Agreed with this. The way the deadman button is implemented make the job "not-so-easy" for manual operation. But B1 to B3 is still okay for manual operation, just that better judgement is required.
Agreed with this but it all depends who is the driver isn't it?
Originally posted by Samuel Lee:No, apart of peak hour times where the train's distance is barely 2 minutes, overshooting is a real problem such that if you have overshot by a door's distance, is it going to open a door (Nearest to HW TO cabin) that is in the restricted zone (At the end of the station do have such place) or even .... in the tracks?
Our train tolerance for overrun and underrun is about 1 metre, which is around half to 3/4 the door width.
Originally posted by SBSTransport:You never know anything can happen, there was once, one of the forumer saw a train coming towards Yishun almost hit into the train at Yishun because the train somehow didn't stop at its target and overshoot. Actually ATO is already quite ok considering it do not have the ability to stop the train if the track is really really slippery like oil leak (clementi incident).
When did the Yishun thing happen?
Originally posted by smrt3099:Trains usually have an accidental overshot esp when there is a rain where i can hear the gas release sound
Most likely is that driver has applied EB while stopping.
My apologies for my lengthy post and feel free to correct me if I am wrong in any of the points made.
Originally posted by E5:How can you account for max brake and acceleration curve when we have normal and fast mode when in Auto mode? This is only true if our train operate in fast mode at all times which is not the case here. Anyway we're using the ancient ATC block system on the NSL and EWL, which means that train behind can't move until the train 1~2 block infront has cleared the ATC block. Also, are you aware that the Yamanote Line D-ATC works in such a way that if the train have to come to a complete stop due to a train infront, the train will automatically applies B1 before the train comes to a complete stop, accomplishing the comfort part of commuting.
The technology is already present in the real world but sadly, NSL and EWL is still using the old signalling system.
ATO does not have brakes, it's the train that have the brake, so I suppose you are trying to say that the 70000 series and 8000 series have more powerful brakes?
When did the Yishun thing happen?
The first point you have make does have a point but many times, I have taken train in normal mode and it still brake at its max from time to time (I know the difference between fast and normal, it's pretty obvious from Admiralty to Yishun). Yes our system is ancient but with SMRT we will be forever stuck with this unless LTA wants to upgrade or we will have problems like LU is facing now soon. Yes I felt that the C751A & C830 have stronger brakes but I may be wrong.
The Yishun thing was posted by one of the forumers but I forgotten where is it now, the truth of it however it is still questionable however I chose to believe since there is a possible chance of ATO failing as always.
Originally posted by Rooney9:man a time I am so sick and tired of riding an mrt train, then train stop suddenly and I and many passengers nearly fell or move forwards. I rememebered a train stop suddenly, start then stop, then start wtf. if the train needed to be stopped, stop it, but why then start then stop again zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
also when they stop suddenly and remained there for a good 1-2 mins on the track, the driver did not made an annoucement. I think SMRT should train its drivers to drive properly on the track and to make announcement where the train needed to remain there for a few mins. this is basic customer service.
This problem occur a few times when im inside tunnels under NSL, due to a train in front and stopped at the station for long, TO have to apply a sudden brake to stop the motion immediately..To prevent a crush