Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

OETCS/WP2/D2.3 – 02/00, Page 8, Figure 1. OpenETCS process #20

Open
KlausRuedigerHase opened this issue Aug 25, 2013 · 1 comment
Open

Comments

@KlausRuedigerHase
Copy link
Member

Picture 8 reduces the "formalization" to the vehicle side SSRS only. The FPP V.2.2, approve by ITEA2, as well the updated version of the FPP V.3.02 (being in the process of a official change request) are requesting a formalization of the entire "System Requirement Specification" (and not just a subset as described in this document at many places), therefore the tools chain and processes in question should cover the entire SRS and additional requirements needed to define a complete System, covering at least ERTMS Subset026 and supporting Subsets. Therefore this picture needs to be changed: The "box" described with "Sub-System Requirement Specification (SSRS)" needs to be renamed as "Extended System Requirement Specification (ESRS)" in order to express that additional ERTMS Subsets and further information (from operational rules, supplier's and operator's experience) need to be considered in order to create a working model.

In the further course of this document all remarks that limit the tools chain and processes to the vehicle related Sub-System Requirement Specification SSRS need to be eliminated, since also the the way-side related SSRS elements need to be covered. The (formal or semi-formal) model needs to cover especially interaction between vehicle and wayside equipment, while the focus of code generation in this project is on the vehicle side. Never the less, also way side code needs to be generated in order to cover the driving simulator (TCSim) software part for being able to operate the TCSim within the "proof of concept" with industrial use cases (track side).

Proposal: All wordings with "SSRS" or "Sub-System Requirement Specification" should be substituted by "ESRS" or "Extended System Requirement Specification"

201308251652_oetcsprocess_krh

New Figure 1. openETCS Process

This is considered a bug, since limiting the tools chain to the vehicle side SSRS is not justifiable by the openETCS FPP as approved by ITEA2. Also ERA, as one of the major stake holders represented in the openETCS Advisory Board, has indicated that it has special interest in modeling of real-time interaction between vehicle OBU and infrastructure communication. This cannot be demonstrated by limiting the model to the vehicle SSRS only.

@MerlinPokam
Copy link
Contributor

Can someone will tell me which modules in the picture below are part of the SSRS or ESRS, if you prefer?

etcs

Thanks in advance

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants