Currently many train stop based systems such as “Bernauer-Fahrsperre” and “CTS/M” (used by many subway systems, like Berlin, Hamburg or Monterrey) aren’t properly tagged. The Wiki also doesn’t mention how to tag them, so I wanted to use this thread to discuss what tags we want to use to do so. I have two proposals:
- Use a common tag for these systems, since they aren’t highly sophisticated and all only serve the purpose to prevent running over a red signal. (railway:mmts = Mechanical and Magnetic train stop)
- Tag each system with it’s own tag. (railway:befs, railway:ctsm, etc.)
More on train-stop based systems: Train stop - Wikipedia
CTS/M (around the middle of the page): Conventional Train Control (CTC) - Automatic Train Control - Global
Can you explain where does “MMTS” come from? I still don’t get it. Let’s not make up abbreviations.
While signalling is quite a mess, to follow the existing status quo, it’s safer to choose 2 first.
railway:atc= are rather the minority.
railway:aws= refers to the British system, and
railway:atp= is somehow defined for a specific implementation of ATP there too.
railway:ptc= are in between, as standards or specifications.
Another example of the scale of the issue can be seen in
railway:ctsm= . I had thought it should be
railway:trainguard_ctsm= , but realized
railway:zsi127= is not using it yet. The problem will arise when Seltrac etc is added, with inconsistency caused by the need to use
railway:seltrac_*= due to incomprehensibility of the systems. Interestingly, this had not been thought of after
railway:selcab . The lack of careful consideration, and the big picture between mainline train and metro or CBTC is evident, when Trainguard MT is an obvious offender. Would it be
railway:mt= ??? Also there is Trainguard MT Zub now. Of course, there may be complications from renaming and rebranding. But the limited extensibility and adaptability are apparent.
Using the abbreviation MMTS to group all train stop systems together was just an idea because of how similar most of these work and usually just differ in how a switch is activated inside the train. Also it seems like we already have
railway:trainguard_ctsm from your message. Where would that be? I checked a few lines in Hamburg and Berlin but they lack the tag.
That’s what I want to ask. I thought about adding some Trainguard MT before, but can’t decide whether
railway:trainguard_mt= fits in with other Trainguard brand systems not using this format.
Well Trainguard MT has it in it’s name so
railway:trainguard_mt seems fitting, but CTS/M has it’s abbreviation, so I think
railway:ctsm fits better. I hope that answers your question?