Advanced Train Management System (ATMS)

 
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
May 5, 2005 -- ARTC and Lockheed Martin have entered into an agreement to develop a blueprint for a new Advanced Train Management System (ATMS) which will provide new communications and control technology for ARTC’s national and Hunter Valley rail networks...

http://www.artc.com.au/docs/news/press-release/pdf/ARTC_Lockheed_Martin.pdf

Anyone know how far along this is/got?

Sponsored advertisement

  landmark Station Staff

Is there any news on where this project is up to? ARTC havent released anything new on their website since November 2008.
  MD Chief Commissioner

Location: Canbera
Who foots the bill for the loco side infrastructure?
  raymcd Locomotive Driver

Location: Artarmon NSW
May 5, 2005 -- ARTC and Lockheed Martin have entered into an agreement to develop a blueprint for a new Advanced Train Management System (ATMS) which will provide new communications and control technology for ARTC’s national and Hunter Valley rail networks...

http://www.artc.com.au/docs/news/press-release/pdf/ARTC_Lockheed_Martin.pdf

Anyone know how far along this is/got?
"cootanee"


See (not very user friendly):  http://atms.artc.com.au/

I tried to obtain some info about their proposed system a little while back. ARTC were very reluctant to say anything (typical bureaucratic attitude) but did concede that they would not be using the European ERTMS which is becoming a de facto international standard.

See: http://www.ertms.com/2007v2/what.html
Go to Levels tab

The fundamental difference is that ERTMS uses track mounted balises whereas ATMS relies on GPS. One hopes GPS will be 100% reliable everywhere.  

Ray
  MD Chief Commissioner

Location: Canbera
This brings up another issue which is in part related to the yet to be National Rail regulator.
Who gets to decide if ARTCs ATMs system is safe.
  perwaynut Deputy Commissioner

Location: In the Land of the Mighty Hawks, and our favourite footy President Jeff
This brings up another issue which is in part related to the yet to be National Rail regulator.
Who gets to decide if ARTCs ATMs system is safe.
"MD"


Whichever regulator does decide, they will not be deciding that ATMS is safe, but rather has ARTC demonstrated a safe system of new equipment acceptance and does there adoption of ATMS comply with their acceptance system.

And further to your question, if Adelaide gets the nod, they will be the ones deciding. Taking into consideration though that any national rail regulator will have to be of an acceptable standard for other states to accept it. NSW and Vic in particular.
  landmark Station Staff

Some people at ARTC told me that there were some consultation sessions with network controllers on the new ATMS train control system last week as well as some consultation with drivers on the new trainborne ATMS display. Looks like things are moving along and it is more than just a dream...Apparently the physical testing in South Australia is to start September 2010 on schedule.
  KymN Assistant Commissioner

Location: Sydney

ARTC were very reluctant to say anything (typical bureaucratic attitude) but did concede that they would not be using the European ERTMS which is becoming a de facto international standard.
The fundamental difference is that ERTMS uses track mounted balises whereas ATMS relies on GPS. One hopes GPS will be 100% reliable everywhere.  
"raymcd"

Just noticed this with the recent post.  Sorry for the delay, but ERTMS is not an international standard - it is a European agreement for European conditions.  ARTC has adopted (after a lot of work) a system that suits Australian distances and densities, both for its communications system and train control.  Balises and GSM-R were never going to work west of the Blue Mountains.  ATMS does not rely on GPS. It has other systems (including inertial) fully proven in the aerospace sector and in US railroad trials that supplement it.  I would put my money on ARTC having ATMS up before we see ERTMS in Australia.
  perwaynut Deputy Commissioner

Location: In the Land of the Mighty Hawks, and our favourite footy President Jeff
I would put my money on ARTC having ATMS up before we see ERTMS in Australia.
"KymN"


I would have to agree with your suggestion here. It will be interesting to also see how the trials of ERTMS in the Blue Mountains are going and if RailCorp decides to roll this out on a larger scale.

I believe a large amount of work (as evidenced by documents on the ARA site) has gone into making sure that trains can easily travel from ERTMS controlled territory to ATMS controlled territority, so at least when ERTMS is implemented the interface issues should have been resolved.
  raymcd Locomotive Driver

Location: Artarmon NSW


"raymcd"

----ERTMS is not an international standard - it is a European agreement for European conditions.  ----  Balises and GSM-R were never going to work west of the Blue Mountains.  ---- I would put my money on ARTC having ATMS up before we see ERTMS in Australia.
"KymN"


Actually, I did not say ERTMS IS an International standard, I was suggesting that it is becoming a de facto international standard. As well as 19 European countries, 8 other countries have adopted it including China, India, Turkey.

Why would balises and GSM-R not work west of the Blue Mountains? GSM-R is a subset of GSM which is being used by ARTC. I understand GSM-R requires 4 MHz out of the GSM band which may be a problem.

My understanding is that ATMS uses no overlay track circuits at loops and junctions. One question the not covered by the FAQs on ARTC web site is how is failure of a train to clear fouling points is detected?

I hope you are right about ATMS getting up however there is a history in this country of high-tech (sometimes wheel-reinventing) projects failing or being overtaken by developments elsewhere.
  cascade39 Junior Train Controller

There is a media release/ document - Jany 11, 2010 in the ATMS area in the ARTC website.

It is 4 pages of "graphics" with the heading  " Proposed DMI"

http://atms.artc.com.au/_docs/Proposed%20DMI.pdf

Also noted this in the ARTC 2008 Annual Report ( given discussion above about system auditing & safety regulators)

The prototype system will be managed by a project team based in Adelaide. In addition to this Lockheed Martin has subcontracted Ansaldo STS Pty Ltd. to provide the despatch and trackside controls for the ATMS. Independent verification of the computer programs and algorithms of the systems will be undertaken by Lloyds Register Rail.
  landmark Station Staff

Looks like ARTC have made a further update to their ATMS website with the release of a "Concept of Operations" document. It is quite detailed (286 pages) and contains a range of operational scenarios as well.

See the link http://atms.artc.com.au/media/default.asp?1135
  Hendo Deputy Commissioner

It would seem to a novice like I, that ATMS and ERTMS have slightly different purposes in mind. ATMS seems like it would be most suitable for long range, "low" frequency" systems with low density infrastructure, whilst ERTMS would suite much higher density, higher frequency systems like urban passenger and mixed systems. I would also think that ATMS is a lower cost solution than ERTMS, but that this is relative to the costs of the signalling network currently in place.

In other words the horses for courses situation, ATMS for the long distance "rural" freight and passenger network, ERTMS for urban and high density areas, both would appear in the long term to substantially reduce the signalling infrastructure costs and improve the reliability and safety of the system.
  perwaynut Deputy Commissioner

Location: In the Land of the Mighty Hawks, and our favourite footy President Jeff
Hendo,

I would agree with what you have said, but like you I am no signalling or control expert.

From the documents that have been publised, one good aspect of ATMS, is that it is effectively ETCS Level 3, and requires no track circuits other than near points. The amount of field equipment required is drastically reduced compared to current CTC installations. The ability to adjust the granularity of block sections is also quite a good functionality.
  landmark Station Staff

For those of you interested in some of the more technical details of ATMS, there is a System segment design document posted to the ATMS website at the following address:

http://atms.artc.com.au/media/

It seems to cover all the different parts of the ATMS system in some detail.
  ILS Beginner

The ATMS Concept stage was commissioned in October between Port Germain and Stirling North.

The system uses the Microlok II Object Controller to control the points and has a Castell switch to change between current operation for train working, and the new ATMS system for testing purposes.

The new system operated the points and was able to detect the points as planned, and hopefully after the trial the system will be rolled out over the coming years.

When it rolls out it will be a huge project and will be a huge flagship of signalling technology for ARTC.

I was very pleased to be involved with this first concept stage.
  AM Beginner

Sorry for lifting an old thread, I just thought it would be an appropriate place to post my question.

Would I be correct in saying that the primary differences between ERTMS and ATMS is that ERTMS uses GSM-R/Balises whereas ATMS utilises NextG/GPS, and the rest of the system is close to identical? I’ve personally come to the conclusion that for freight lines (including dense ones), ATMS is the best solution, whereas for passenger/high speed lines, ERTMS is the best solution – would this conclusion be correct?

Appreciate any opinions. Thanks.
  perwaynut Deputy Commissioner

Location: In the Land of the Mighty Hawks, and our favourite footy President Jeff
Sorry for lifting an old thread, I just thought it would be an appropriate place to post my question.

Would I be correct in saying that the primary differences between ERTMS and ATMS is that ERTMS uses GSM-R/Balises whereas ATMS utilises NextG/GPS, and the rest of the system is close to identical? I’ve personally come to the conclusion that for freight lines (including dense ones), ATMS is the best solution, whereas for passenger/high speed lines, ERTMS is the best solution – would this conclusion be correct?

Appreciate any opinions. Thanks.
"AM"


ERTMS is no great technological leap. It really is only a means by which interoperability can be realised for Europe.

The real difference is that ATMS is what would be described at ETCS Level 3, which has not yet been developed yet.

The technological aspects you indicated above are correct, but there are quite a number of other differences.

ATMS does not require track circuits / axle counters to detect trains, ERTMS does, you can reconfigure the granularity of the block sizes through software with ATMS, but you need to physically change infrastructure with ERTMS. Have a look at the ATMS site. Very informative.
  AM Beginner

Sorry for lifting an old thread, I just thought it would be an appropriate place to post my question.

Would I be correct in saying that the primary differences between ERTMS and ATMS is that ERTMS uses GSM-R/Balises whereas ATMS utilises NextG/GPS, and the rest of the system is close to identical? I’ve personally come to the conclusion that for freight lines (including dense ones), ATMS is the best solution, whereas for passenger/high speed lines, ERTMS is the best solution – would this conclusion be correct?

Appreciate any opinions. Thanks.
"AM"


ERTMS is no great technological leap. It really is only a means by which interoperability can be realised for Europe.

The real difference is that ATMS is what would be described at ETCS Level 3, which has not yet been developed yet.

The technological aspects you indicated above are correct, but there are quite a number of other differences.

ATMS does not require track circuits / axle counters to detect trains, ERTMS does, you can reconfigure the granularity of the block sizes through software with ATMS, but you need to physically change infrastructure with ERTMS. Have a look at the ATMS site. Very informative.
"perwaynut"


Thanks for the quick reply! I have been reading up quite a bit on both, and have looked at the media and some of the other documentation on the ATMS website (including other documents on the net, written by Lockheed engineer C. Reibeling).

Are there any other sources you recommend reading up on, with respect to PTC? I’m in the process of doing some feasibility studies, and it seems that ATMS was the correct decision on the part of ARTC – atleast on the freight side of things. Can’t really seem to find many negatives, apart from the accuracy of GPS (which is very good in itself).
  perwaynut Deputy Commissioner

Location: In the Land of the Mighty Hawks, and our favourite footy President Jeff
Are there any other sources you recommend reading up on, with respect to PTC? I’m in the process of doing some feasibility studies, and it seems that ATMS was the correct decision on the part of ARTC – atleast on the freight side of things. Can’t really seem to find many negatives, apart from the accuracy of GPS (which is very good in itself).
"AM"


I believe the US Senate had mandated the installation of PTC for freight roads by sometime this decade (can't remember when exactly), and there may be material on that on the web somewhere, plus the US Class 1's may have some info.

As for more info on ATMS, you could try the Chief Signal Engineer from ARTC, or even try members of the IRSE.
  raymcd Locomotive Driver

Location: Artarmon NSW
Sorry for lifting an old thread, I just thought it would be an appropriate place to post my question.

"AM"



ATMS does not require track circuits / axle counters to detect trains, ERTMS does, you can reconfigure the granularity of the block sizes through software with ATMS, but you need to physically change infrastructure with ERTMS. Have a look at the ATMS site. Very informative.
"perwaynut"


I have not seen an answer to the point raised in my 4 Jan 2010 post on this thread as to how a GPS-only based system can detect that a train is inside fouling points (of a crossing loop) without track circuits
  MD Chief Commissioner

Location: Canbera
Where is this system actually going to be installed.
Will it be installed on lines that already have track circuits and line side signals.
  MD Chief Commissioner

Location: Canbera
Re GPS based systems and no track circuits, a GPS only system cant detect
whether a train is fouling points or not, so there still will need to be some kind of track circuits, which comes back to the previous question, where will this system be used.
  alpdelofte Beginner

Re GPS based systems and no track circuits, a GPS only system cant detect whether a train is fouling points or not, so there still will need to be some kind of track circuits, ...
"AM"


The specification on the ATMS website says that overswitch track circuits are monitored. This is probably how they tell whether a train is fouling points or not.

http://atms.artc.com.au/_docs/ATMS-2008-13-0029_SFS%20Rev%20B.pdf
  perwaynut Deputy Commissioner

Location: In the Land of the Mighty Hawks, and our favourite footy President Jeff
The specification on the ATMS website says that overswitch track circuits are monitored. This is probably how they tell whether a train is fouling points or not.

http://atms.artc.com.au/_docs/ATMS-2008-13-0029_SFS%20Rev%20B.pdf
"alpdelofte"


From what I have read about ATMS, the great thing about it is that it can be configured depending on how you want to use each line.

Foe example, let's say you have a main line with a little use branch off it, the main line will have track circuits on any points with (quasi) moving block, the branch can be configured as train order warling, with manual operation of points, all handled through AMTS. If you get more traffic on the branch and want to have more automatic operation, you wire up the points and reconfigure ATMS, and you are ready to go. EVERYTHING is handled through the one interface, no need for a different interface for each method of operation. The GPS is also augmented by gyro and some such that helps keep the location accurate.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.