Wikipedia

Talk:European Train Control System

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Mariupolo in topic Deployment
Learn more about this page

Merger proposal

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There doesn't seem to be any consensus to go through with the merger after more than 3 months. Is it time to close the merger proposal? HamTin (talk) 15:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes. I'll stick a hatnote on both articles.Sf5xeplus (talk) 01:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

EDGE

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Is the proposal for EDGE or Evolved EDGE? I canot find a ref for either?--Kitchen Knife (talk) 16:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Its actual reference is GPRS/EGPRS or "(enhanced) GPRS" in the documents. No "evolved" can be found. So it should be plain EDGE. Guidod (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
So upgrade to a 13 year old technology rather than a 7 year old. Says a lot about ERA.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
Actually, the Eirene FRS 8 / SRS 16 is a brand new update to the GSM-R FRS 7 / SRS 15 being ten years old. Which shows how slow the railway standardization is. The E-EDGE variant is basically just a software update, so they may think about it in the future but so far, if it is unsure whether the technology meets the SIL-4 level then they just play it safe. Guidod (talk) 20:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
By the way, I have just read up on GSM-R evolution and they are investigating to introduce LTE-R as the next step. While GRPS increases capacity by a factor of 5 (or 7 with EDGE but only in shunting stations), it could be as much as a factor of 15 with LTE. Apart from capacity they seem to expect less interferences when using LTE-R - current allocation of GSM-R frequencies in Europe may be a bit too close to the public GSM and LTE mobile networks. Guidod (talk) 10:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
THE Frequency is ideal from other points of view. Being low it has good travel characteristics, the higher the frequency the closer the base stations need to be and the greater the expense. One of the big changes if they move from GSM to LTE will be the move from TDMA to CDMA. I suspect the very long term will mean moving away from dedicated systems and incorporating a high reliability option in public satellite/stratolite systems systems with a degree of Peer 2 Peer comms, this would save a fortune in dev costs and infrastructure.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 11:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
There was an idea for a BOS-GSM in Germany with Advanced Speech Call Items for emergency services.... but it is dead by now. Most services have switched to TETRA by now and a number of railway companies do use TETRA mobiles for its railway workers as well (including the vast network of Russia). Even though frequencies are a scarce resource, Germany extended the GSM-R band by some more dedicated channels and that was it. I have not heard of any attempt to try again extending something like LTE to cope with constant telemetry characteristics ... but what I did hear about is that railways want to create an IP-based core network similar to the public mobile networks which would allow to smoothly switch from one radio technology to the next. That way they could follow the evolution process more closely. In fact, the base stations of todays mobile networks can switch between GSM, UMTS and LTE quite easily also reusing channels .... including to use GSM 900 channels for LTE with an increased coverage in the lower frequency range. Guidod (talk) 23:17, 9 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Deployment

edit
Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Regarding the deployment of ETCS in Switzerland: There are three operational lines with ETCS level 2 in Switzerland right now.
- The Mattstetten-Rothrist "new line" (Since 2004)
- The Lötschberg base tunnel (Since 2007)
- The Gotthard base tunnel (December 2016)
The Gotthard line also includes Stations within ETCS level 2 and incorporates controversial ETCS shunting signals.
Copykill (talk) 01:32, 25 November 2016 (UTC)Reply


This page states confusing and probably wrong information about ETCS deployment in Spain.

For the Córdoba-Málaga line, in a bullet point beginning with "December 2007:Córdoba-Málaga High speed line in Spain opens with ETCS Level 1", it says "Also, the line has been equipped with level 2." When? Surely not also in December 2007. Since the whole list is in chronological order, this is a bit misleading.

For the Madrid-Segovia-Valladolid line, the article says it "has also been equipped to update to Level 2 in the future." I find this confusing; does this mean it was later updated to Level 2 (when)? Or is it still operating at Level 1?

And most egregiously, the article says "December 2009: Madrid-Zaragoza-Barcelona High speed line fully opens with ETCS level 2. First line in the world to run ETCS level 2." However, as noted elsewhere in the article, the first line in the world to run ETCS Level 2 was the Rome-Naples high-speed line in Italy in 2005, and according to at least one article all high-speed lines in Spain were operating on Level 1 as of May 2010, with Level 2 being "validated". And the Madrid–Barcelona line was inaugurated in 2008, per its Wikipedia article. So it's not clear where either the date or the claim of being first are coming from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariupolo (talk • contribs) 17:44, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on European Train Control System. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:34, 25 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on European Train Control System. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:50, 25 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your contributions but...

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Rushlie Indeed there is a lack of a good explanation of what is ETCS L3, thus what you added would be better in the first lines of the L3 section. I actually realised there are inaccuracies in this part as train positioning in level 3 is not relying on beacons (balises) as a continuous positioning solution is required. I will change it if no one gets to it before. Botatao (talk) 10:58, 21 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Rushlie The stuff about CSRE seems to be out of context here without further explanation... Why is a CRSE needed? Is it part of some system? What does it do? Botatao (talk) 10:59, 21 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

UK section: excessive trivial detail

edit
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The UK section is long, and most of it is about one, not very important line. Would it be better to create an article about the Cambrian line, or an article about implementing ETCS in the UK, rather than clog up this page with trivial details? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.77.164.64 (talk) 03:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I agree with you. I'd say it would be more relevant for a page about ETCS & UK. Likely visitors of the Cambrian Line are not so much into all the technicalities. Botatao (talk) 21:31, 10 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

ETCS is now enabled from Airport Junction on the Great Western Main Line out of London Paddington to the Heathrow Airport stations. The 9-car ETCS enabled Class 345 trains are now running on this branch, though it might not yet be in use. [1]

ETCS with automatic train operation is in use on the Thameslink core in London.

These are certainly not trivial! 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjt1949 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ https://www.londonreconnections.com/2020/crossrail-finally-reaches-stage-2-of-opening/

23 April 2023

edit

Firstname and lastname sections in citation templates

edit
Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments2 people in discussion
  Moved to User talk:Egeymi
 – XAM2175 (T) 13:17, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please don't force the names of corporate authors into human name fields in templates, like you did in this edit at European Train Control System, where you inserted |title=ETCS goes live to Haparanda|first=Railway Gazette|last=International2014-01-17T05:00:00|website=Railway Gazette International. This is obviously wrong. Either use the |author= parameter, or leave it out entirely (which is the better choice if the author will be the same as the publisher).

Additionally, it is totally unhelpful to "fix" an empty title by adding "Archived copy", like you did in this edit. XAM2175 (T) 13:08, 23 April 2023 (UTC) Egeymi (talk) 13:13, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

@XAM2175 first what are you talking about the filling of authors parameter, in the link you provided there is no such action. Please look carefully. Secondly, "archived copy" is a term which is also used by the bots. I couldn't understand your motive but please be kind and try to be positive instead of attacking editors.--Egeymi (talk) 13:16, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
This message is for you personally. Reply at you talkpage, please. XAM2175 (T) 13:17, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:European_Train_Control_System&oldid=1201848903"