>
> Hi Tyson,
>
> Here is the issue I have. You say that you can tell whether a
> ETCS-equipped railway line is operating in Level 1, 2, or 3. How do you
> know it is an ETCS-equipped line? Your response would be that, "one can
> affirmatively
> assert that a railway line is ETCS-equipped by pointing out
> Eurobalises/Euroloops." How do you know that? This sounds like special
> knowledge rather than information I can pick up by standing next to it or
> looking directly at it.
> If I may for a moment look at CTC how do I know that that is by looking at
> the signals and shunts. Do I have special knowledge? Yes, I do. Does this
> change your argument? This is what I was asking when I said.
>
> "If we can both assume that we both have extensive working knowledge of
> railroads or railways and that we can identify correctly the system in
> use. Can we assume that we should be allowed to map it if we can look
> at the ground and see that it is what it is? Or do we need to make the
> assumption that we don't have a working knowledge of railroads or
> railways and that we need to assume a role as an outsider when mapping
> railroads and only map what we can see (signals, switches, balises,
> magnets, contacts etc.)?"
>
> I will agree that understanding if you are looking at a CTC line or not
> is a specialized characteristic of a mapper. And I will also assert that
> understanding if you are looking at an ETCS-equipped line and Level 1, 2,
> or 3 is also a specialized characteristic of a mapper.
>
> Be Careful about the use of terminology as it may not be the same. I will
> not assume that the OCS that you are using here means Occupancy Control
> System as I found a completely different meaning on Wikipedia.
>
> I would be the first to agree that Train Protection in this context
> primarily aligns with PTC as I described in my previous email:
> " Here in America what you are describing in train protection is Positive
> Train Control (PTC). Positive train control has GPS based land stations and
> locomotive GPS attachments and hardware. " ACSES is a specialized version
> of PTC and not wide spread here. I had to look this up to find this out.
>
> I think we can both agree that the detail in your statement is too much
> detail for OpenStreetMap "(And the signs don't count, because they could
> simply be overridden in Special Instructions (or the US equivalent).
> Moreover, there are no signs that differentiate -- for example -- siding
> control territory (SCT) from CTC sidings in Canada.)" Your statement is
> like saying we should not map the seasonal roads as they could be closed.
> Seasonal roads here are tagged as "access:conditional" rather than
> leaving it without a tag. Of course those tags are general and not specific
> and the road department can close the road or make it one way at any time.
>
> In your statement: "While signs for these exist (in some locations), they
> are not properties of the railway line itself: rather,
> they are properties of how movements on the railway line are conducted."
> So what is ACSES, ETCS, and LZB?
> These are not descriptors of the line; these are descriptors in your words
> of wayside equipment (Eurobalises/Euroloops, balises, and signals)
> attached to a system of train protection for train moments. I would
> conclude that "they are not properties of the railway line itself:
> rather,they are properties of how movements on the railway line are
> conducted."
>
> Are these two arguments clear?
> OpenStreetMap is not an ideal place for a lot of the railway data we want
> to add to OpenRailwayMap. I would reconsider the use of "Signalling" to
> "Train Protection" on OpenRailwayMap, if your argument stands. Signalling
> is train movement.
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan P
> email: [email protected]
>
> 1.
>
> Reference:
> As*sert
> *verb*
>
> 1. state a fact or belief confidently and forcefully.
> "the company asserts that the cuts will not affect development"
>
>
