WMATA crash & track circuits

[David Lesher]

In June, DC Metro had a high speed crash when an inbound Red Line train
hit a stopped one. Nine died; about 80 were injuried.

Early on, suspicion has focused on the AC track signals used not just
there but worldwide. Such have been around for >100 years.

Track signals work by applying a current-limited voltage between the
rails at one end of a block, and having a relay across them at the other
end. When a train axle shorts the rails, the relay drops. Outside of very
rusty rails, the system is considered VERY reliable; in the fail safe
direction. [If it rains too hard, or a rail breaks, or....it shows as
occupied. That's OK; but NOT showing a train can be and has been fatal.]

On traction power [third rail or catenary power] systems; the signaling
is low frequency AC, with a "WeeZBond" low pass filter used to pass
the traction power return to the substation but block the signaling
frequencies.

The NTSB has just issued an urgent interim recommendation on such based
on their work to date.

<http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2009/R09_15_16.pdf>

The letter discusses the failure they found:

"Testing found that a spurious high-frequency modulated signal was being
created by parasitic oscillation from the power output transistors in the
track circuit module transmitter. This spurious signal propagated through
the power transistor heat sink, through the metal rack structure, and
through a shared power source into the associated module receiver, thus
establishing an unintended signal path. The spurious signal mimicked a
valid track circuit signal. The peak amplitude of the spurious signal
appeared at the correct time interval and was large enough to be sensed by
the module receiver as a valid track circuit signal, which energized the
track relay. This combination of an alternate signal path between track
circuit modules and a spurious signal capable of exploiting that
path bypassed the rails, and the ability of the track circuit to detect the
train was lost."

It's interesting to look at how even a time-proved, widely used, system
can fail in an unexpected way....and is a cautionary note for designers
of all kinds.

 

[David Lesher]

The original BART system used on-train state-of-the-art (at the time!)
redundant digital controls and safety logic. All nice synchronous
logic, all clocked by a single crystal oscillator.

http://www1.pacific.edu/eng/faculty/jking/engr30/Case-Bart.doc

BART did all kinds of non railroad standard things, such as wider track
gauge, higher voltage [1000 VDC] third rail, and their own track signals,
controls, etc.

While they had valid engineering reasons for many decisions [They needed
wider gauge for stability while crossing the Golden Gate, the 1KV gave
more power and less drop, etc.]; they often came back to bite them. Marin
County opted out; so BART never ran across the GG Bridge. The motor
manufacturers were not prepared to make traction motors that ran at 125%
the voltage others did; and oh yes, the control system.

Learning from that; WMATA is built {mostly} with bog-standard railroad
equipment; that makes this failure all the more scary.

 

[Joerg]

In June, DC Metro had a high speed crash when an inbound Red Line train
hit a stopped one. Nine died; about 80 were injuried.

Early on, suspicion has focused on the AC track signals used not just
there but worldwide. Such have been around for >100 years.

Track signals work by applying a current-limited voltage between the
rails at one end of a block, and having a relay across them at the other
end. When a train axle shorts the rails, the relay drops. Outside of very
rusty rails, the system is considered VERY reliable; in the fail safe
direction. [If it rains too hard, or a rail breaks, or....it shows as
occupied. That's OK; but NOT showing a train can be and has been fatal.]

On traction power [third rail or catenary power] systems; the signaling
is low frequency AC, with a "WeeZBond" low pass filter used to pass
the traction power return to the substation but block the signaling
frequencies.

The NTSB has just issued an urgent interim recommendation on such based
on their work to date.

<http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2009/R09_15_16.pdf>

The letter discusses the failure they found:

"Testing found that a spurious high-frequency modulated signal was being
created by parasitic oscillation from the power output transistors in the
track circuit module transmitter. This spurious signal propagated through
the power transistor heat sink, through the metal rack structure, and
through a shared power source into the associated module receiver, thus
establishing an unintended signal path. The spurious signal mimicked a
valid track circuit signal. The peak amplitude of the spurious signal
appeared at the correct time interval and was large enough to be sensed by
the module receiver as a valid track circuit signal, which energized the
track relay. This combination of an alternate signal path between track
circuit modules and a spurious signal capable of exploiting that
path bypassed the rails, and the ability of the track circuit to detect the
train was lost."

It's interesting to look at how even a time-proved, widely used, system
can fail in an unexpected way....and is a cautionary note for designers
of all kinds.

Why on earth did they never consider a system that has worked reliably
for many decades in Europe, Indusi?

No relays, contacts or stuff that can corrode. There aren't too many
explanations in English about it but this link contains one on page 3:

http://www.ovar.ca/Interchange/nov2001.pdf

It says "new" while in fact my late grandpa (a steam locomotive engineer
in Germany) explained this system to me when I was a kid. If a train
engineer screws up the emergency brakes are automatically applied and
the train comes to a dead stop. It would have saved many lives in the US.

 

[David Lesher]

Why on earth did they never consider a system that has worked reliably
for many decades in Europe, Indusi?

Perhaps because track circuits have been working in the US for well over
100 years? (AC ones for 100+)

 

[Joerg]

Perhaps because track circuits have been working in the US for well over
100 years? (AC ones for 100+)

May I quote from your initial post?

Quote "It's interesting to look at how even a time-proved, widely used,
system can fail in an unexpected way....and is a cautionary note for
designers of all kinds."

On the crash in L.A. there probably wasn't any such system present.
There is no excuse for that, and IIRC that case alone has cost 25 lives.

[...]

 

[Joerg]

The Indusi system as described in the article you cite appears to be a
unidirectional "signal -> train" communication system. It looks to me
as if it depends on each individual signal source (e.g. road crossing,
train detector) working reliably, by itself... if it does, then it
ought to be pretty reliable in doing what it does.

It does not, by itself, seem to deal with the question of the
reliabiliy of the signal sources themselves - e.g. "train still on the
tracks" detection. It doesn't seem to be a detector... just a
communicator.

That latter aspect of the problem (the detector) is apparently what
failed in the WMATA crash. The "is there a train on this section of
the track?" detection process failed, due to the parasitic oscillation
and the undesired signal path within the detection system.

For this reason, it looks to me as if adding the Indusi system would
not have prevented this crash. It would have ensured reliable
communication from the "Is there a train on the track ahead?" sensor
to the train... but since the sensor system was malfunctioning and
"believed" that the track was clear, there would have been no STOP or
EXPECT STOP signal through the Indusi pathway, and the rearmost train
would still have been traveling at full speed.

I only know descriptions in German which won't help here. One component
of the German system is the inductive axle counter. If 28 axles have
entered a track section and any number smaller than 28 has left it then
this section will remain blocked by Indusi. They don't like to rely on
anything with electrical contacts over there, and I certainly wouldn't
either.

It wasn't that an "engineer screwed up" - it's that the detector
screwed up, and gave the engineer wrong (but apparently authoritative)
information.

Not on this one. That was in L.A., IIRC he was text-messaging and then
crashed. A properly installed Indusi system would have saved 25 lives.
Most likely also in DC because the "section occupied" information would
have been inductively picked up and registered.

I guess now they'll investigate whether the transistor stage oscillation
was a one-time fluke or a design error, and (hopefully) why the track
relay circuit was susceptible to a high frequency signal that it
shouldn't be listening to. Hopefully the parties involved have good
insurance.

 

[David Lesher]

On the crash in L.A. there probably wasn't any such system present.
There is no excuse for that, and IIRC that case alone has cost 25 lives.

Chatsworth was a commuter railroad, rather like the German S-Bahn but it
shares trackage with freight.

The Metro is a third-rail subway/surface system with dedicated RoW,
AND a dedicated Automatic Train Operation system; more like U-Bahn.

True, it depends on track circuits not axle counters, but then, so does
every railroad in this country.

 

[Joerg]

The problem was caused by failure to detect the presence of a train.
This Indushi seems to be about approaching a spot
What happens if there is a power failure with those magnets (cut cable for example).
And the train is a diesel-electric or the main power is stil present?
It will keep running at full speed past those magnets,
Even if there is a train standing still ahead.

That's taken care of by a magnet that can then not be deactivated
anymore. Sorry, guys, this one I can only find in German. Jan, you can
probably understand:

http://www.mytranswiki.org/index.php/Punktförmige_Zugbeeinflussung

Also, cut cables and vandalism are easily detectable, most of the
European railroad runs on its own 16-2/3 Hertz power grid and electric
trains will stop when that fails in some area. IIRC they have 100h or so
backup power so they could theoretically keep some Diesel traffic but
there aren't many Diesel locomotives left.

 

[Joerg]

Ok, I see.



I think yo uare abit susty on tha trailroad power picture, may I suggest reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_systems_for_electric_rail_traction
Here and in Germany, Belgium, France, large parts of Europe 50 Hz 25 kV overhead is used as standard:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/25_kV_AC_railway_electrification

Nope. Read up on it (sorry folks, it's in German as well):

http://www.deutschebahn.com/site/ba...hichte/themen/bahnstrom/bahnstrom__teil1.html

Quote: "Deshalb wurde die Frequenz auf ein Drittel, das heißt auf 16 2/3
Hz, reduziert. Diese Frequenz ist in Deutschland bis heute gültig, wenn
sie auch inzwischen auf 16,7 Hz angehoben wurde."

.... which in essence says that they chose a frequency of 1/3rd of line
frequency and that has been kept in place until today, except that they
went from 16.666Hz to 16.7Hz.

With 50Hz they had too much motor damage when accelerating large trains
from zero (when stopped).

As far as frequencies goes, seems US is a bit of a minority with 60 Hz mains:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WorldMap_Voltage&Frequency.png

AFAIK there are no electrified long distance tracks in the US. That's
all Diesel. Commuter trains are sometimes electric.

 

[Joerg]

'gültig' is more like 'in use', available, but not let's say 'for new designs'.
From http://www.eudict.com/?lang=gereng&word=gültig&go=Search:
gültig = valid, valid, validly, available, validated

It is still the standard. Changing it would require _huge_ investments.
Why should they?

Well 50 Hz 25 kV is a European standard, and in Germany used here:
Germany Rübelandbahn Harz

That's a li'l choo-choo train

I am talking real railroad. Long-haul freight, ICE bullet trains and
such. Not some boutique track.

If you look here, and scroll down to 50Hz 25 kV, you see where those systems are in use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_systems_for_electric_rail_traction

Yeah:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:171_005_Die_Rübelandbahn_near_Elbingerode,_Oct_1995..jpg

Not exactly the mainstream German railroad, is it?

Well, that is old stuff, it is all solid state converters and control these days,
In my country you could (can) hear the thyristor switches make the inductors singing
when the trains started from the station.

We now get high speed (line to France) and that is all 25 kV 50 Hz too.
In the modern age there really is no need for a separate frequency.
This is fun, and much of the future:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV#Power_supply

They use 3 phase synchronous motors:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNCF_TGV_Duplex

So, 50 Hz, whatever, is converted to a different frequency to drive the motors.
I am no train expert, but this makes a lot of sense to me.

Keep in mind that locomotives are used for at least as long as aircraft.
30-40 years is nothing, it is very typical. When I was in Germany last
year I saw some of the very same locomotives that I saw when I was a
child, and even then they weren't new. Like this model, in use since the
50's:

http://www.schule.de/bics/son/verkehr/eisenbah/lok/e-lok/e0150_1v.htm

When I have to design for this market I am not at all surprised when the
client tells me that it has to be designed for 30+ year service life.
Meaning no electrolyics etc.

Having a separate power station with a different frequency just for trains
(and at 16.x Hz transformers would be idiotic big) must suck
in so many ways that you wanted to get rid of those immediately.

They are happy with it since many decades. Old rule: If it works, don't
try to fix it.

 

[David Lesher]

It is still the standard. Changing it would require _huge_ investments.
Why should they?

Because modern VFD-AC motors provide better traction, far lower
maintenance, better efficiency, and weigh less then 100 year old DC motor
designs.


Are you sure someone hasn't just rounded things off?

We're still stuck with some leftover 25Hz on the Northeast Corridor but
they'd LOVE to replace that, if you'll send them a check...

Low freq AC is a vestige of the rotary rectifiers and similar antiques era.

That's a li'l choo-choo train

I am talking real railroad. Long-haul freight, ICE bullet trains and
such. Not some boutique track.
&

AFAIK there are no electrified long distance tracks in the US. That's
all Diesel. Commuter trains are sometimes electric.

Do you call the Northeast Corridor a boutique track? I wonder where its
daily traffic would put it vs your "real" railroad examples? [I really
don't know...]


True...

 

[Paul Keinanen]

... which in essence says that they chose a frequency of 1/3rd of line
frequency and that has been kept in place until today, except that they
went from 16.666Hz to 16.7Hz.

With 50Hz they had too much motor damage when accelerating large trains
from zero (when stopped).

In old days various motors with commutators and adjustable field
windings were used for variable speed operation. These worked of
course well on DC and in trains often with the possibility to connect
in parallel or series for even large speed range. Such motors can
also be used on AC with voltage (phase) control e.g. in small hand
tools at 50/60 Hz.

However, large AC/DC motors suitable for train operation did not work
very well on 50/60 Hz and this appears to be the reason for using such
low line frequency as 16.67 Hz in trains in some countries. Compared
to DC feed, in the AC feed, the operating voltage could (instead of a
variable resistor) be varied by selecting a different tap from the on
board transformer.

While it would be impractical to change a railway line voltage or
frequency, building new trains with a variable frequency drive and
induction motors would be more practical these days, possibly even
replacing the heavy 16.67 Hz transformer with a rectifier+inverter and
a high frequency transformer on the 15 kV side.

Paul

 

[Joerg]

Because modern VFD-AC motors provide better traction, far lower
maintenance, better efficiency, and weigh less then 100 year old DC motor
designs.

But when the old one hasn't been amortized yet or the bean counters say
the new investment has no ROI then ye olde motor will remain inside the
locomotives and be repaired over and over again. Very normal in the
railroad business (I knew some guys who worked there). As for efficiency
the difference isn't that smacking and power is fairly cheap.

Are you sure someone hasn't just rounded things off?

AFAIR it was a big thing over there, lots of discussions. Beats me why.

We're still stuck with some leftover 25Hz on the Northeast Corridor but
they'd LOVE to replace that, if you'll send them a check...

Low freq AC is a vestige of the rotary rectifiers and similar antiques era.

Listen to a freight train accelerating over there. Pock ... clonk ...
*POCK* ... tock ... tons of huge contactors inside the locomotive
ratcheting the settings. Yeah, those are sometimes really old
locomotives but they still work so they won't scrap them.

That's a li'l choo-choo train

I am talking real railroad. Long-haul freight, ICE bullet trains and
such. Not some boutique track.
&

AFAIK there are no electrified long distance tracks in the US. That's
all Diesel. Commuter trains are sometimes electric.

Do you call the Northeast Corridor a boutique track? I wonder where its
daily traffic would put it vs your "real" railroad examples? [I really
don't know...]

Ok, there are some locally. But not across the whole country.

True...

There is no need, but there is also no money to buy all new stuff with
marginal or no ROI versus the old stuff.

 

[Joerg]

Paul Keinanen wrote:

[...]

While it would be impractical to change a railway line voltage or
frequency, building new trains with a variable frequency drive and
induction motors would be more practical these days, possibly even
replacing the heavy 16.67 Hz transformer with a rectifier+inverter and
a high frequency transformer on the 15 kV side.

Absolutely. But only if the new stuff shows ROI potential. Otherwise
it'll be shot down by the accounting folks.

 

[Paul Keinanen]

Paul Keinanen wrote:

[...]

While it would be impractical to change a railway line voltage or
frequency, building new trains with a variable frequency drive and
induction motors would be more practical these days, possibly even
replacing the heavy 16.67 Hz transformer with a rectifier+inverter and
a high frequency transformer on the 15 kV side.

Absolutely. But only if the new stuff shows ROI potential. Otherwise
it'll be shot down by the accounting folks.

That assumes that the operating environment does not change during a
few decades.

However, in the real world, passengers demand higher speeds and in
order to be able to compete e.g. with motorways, new trains with
higher speed needs to be acquired.

The old stock that has not reached the end of economical life, is
relegated to less demanding tasks, such as freight trains or
switchyard operations.

Paul

 

[Joerg]

Oh, well, opinions opinions



Hell did you even read the links? All the high speed trains use 25 kV 50 Hz.


No, it is the first to go to 25 kV 50 Hz in Germany.

If it is going to be the first, how then can the statement you made
above (All the high speed trains use 25 kV 50 Hz) be true?

For high power (they move tons of ore it seems) and long distances, you need a high voltage
allowing for lower currents, else you need a power station every few miles.

Germany has indeed invested a lot in that old antiques stuff, and you are right that that stuff lasts many years.
Then have been experimenting with magnetic levitation trains too, and tried to sell one to us in the Netherlands.
too expensive.
The French got it right (Paris Lyon), and that line is now extended all the way to Amsterdam, in December
or January the first trains should run on it, in Dutch:
http://www.telegraaf.nl/dft/nieuws_..._schiet_hogesnelheidstrein_weg__.html?cid=rss

Ok, but what's the big difference to the 16.7Hz system? 300km/h as they
write there isn't that unusual anymore. In the US yes, but not in
Europe. AFAIK the ICE3 track out of Wolfsburg has a speed limit of
330km/h. My wife didn't like riding that fast at all.

BTW, they mentioned 7 Euros more for the ticket. That's a lot for
160km/h (in Germany that isn't even considerd high-speed), are they
going to keep it at that for 300km/h? And what's the ticket base cost
anyhow? I rode that stretch a few times but don't remember. Considering
start and deceleration I don't see much sense in a 300km/h track between
Amsterdam and Rotterdam. The regular Spoorwegen train was fast enough
for me to get to Schiphol.

I got a design request in the sixties for a safety system for the trains here,
it had a 10 year service life specified.

10 years is nothing. I often have to maintain 20 or 30.

No electrolytic cap manufacturer wanted to guarantee their products for 10 years, so gave it back.
Without electrolytics was not easy then, and not easy now.
It is all about risk calculation, things will break down anyways

Actually, many of my recent designs carry no electrolytics. And, of
course, no tantalums. One concern with larger ceramics is thermal stress
fracture so its either L-bracketed stacks if the budget allows or
through-hole parts.

That is true, but we want to go ever faster, 300 km/h and faster.
The old stuff does not have the streamline

Go visit Germany and hop on an ICE

Maybe this will help explain things to you:

http://www.udo-leuschner.de/energie-chronik/030808.htm

 

[Joerg]

Paul Keinanen wrote:

[...]

While it would be impractical to change a railway line voltage or
frequency, building new trains with a variable frequency drive and
induction motors would be more practical these days, possibly even
replacing the heavy 16.67 Hz transformer with a rectifier+inverter and
a high frequency transformer on the 15 kV side.

Absolutely. But only if the new stuff shows ROI potential. Otherwise
it'll be shot down by the accounting folks.

That assumes that the operating environment does not change during a
few decades.

Much of it doesn't. Only the passenger part of it really does and that's
usually not where the big bucks are being earned.

However, in the real world, passengers demand higher speeds and in
order to be able to compete e.g. with motorways, new trains with
higher speed needs to be acquired.

In the US we just hop on a plane, even faster

But of course I wish we had an ICE or similar system for local stuff,
like between here and Silicon Valley. Then I wouldn't have to drive that
boring stretch anymore.

The old stock that has not reached the end of economical life, is
relegated to less demanding tasks, such as freight trains or
switchyard operations.

Sure. But then the old stock still needs to be fed from the power grid.
After all, the 1960's locomotive may have to pull a gasoline tanker
train all the way from the port of Bremen to Munich. And if it doesn't
like 50Hz then that has to be kept at 16.7Hz, which they seem to be
doing (for now) and which makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Joerg]

If it is going to be the first, how then can the statement you made
above (All the high speed trains use 25 kV 50 Hz) be true?


Ok, but what's the big difference to the 16.7Hz system? 300km/h as they
write there isn't that unusual anymore. In the US yes, but not in
Europe. AFAIK the ICE3 track out of Wolfsburg has a speed limit of
330km/h. My wife didn't like riding that fast at all.

[snip]

How'd your wife like to ride with me? I've done just shy of 220km/hr,
for nearly an hour from Frankfurt to Bühlertal... in a car ;-)

Whenever I did that she motioned to me to tune it down a bit

 

[Joerg]

Well I did not know that hose old clunkers could go 330, really.
Felt more like a snail when I was in it, but I have now found a link that says
that it only can go that fast in some very limited places.

Sure didn't feel like a snail when I was in it.

Schiphol is almost in Amsterdam, that only takes a few minutes, and that train
stops everywhere.

Well, I was at a client in Rotterdam.

I dunno about the price, railways get more expensive every year, I prefer a car.
But indeed when flying it may make sense if you are away longer then a few days to use a train,
long parking at the airport can get expensive too.

Same here. Except there is no train :-(

LOL, big comet in 2028?
Times are changing, the old analog TV system lasted maybe 50 years, this one is already
old after 10, investors want quicker return, they are not looking for long time solutions.
So changes will happen faster and faster, and design life will be shorter, until it gets to zero in the next nuke war.
After that you roast squirrel or rats on a wood fire and use animal fat for candles.
Then after a thousand years, perhaps, somebody will want a long term solution, probably horse and carriage.

Well, have you ever worked in industrial electronics, aerospace, oil?
Take a look at the "computer" in the space shuttle. And yeah, while many
wisecrack folks overseas make jokes about it none of them _has_ a space
shuttle.

Same in industrial. There is a reason why you can still buy brand new
ISA-bus computers. Yes, even in the Netherlands. Someone from Europe was
asking a while ago and that's where I found a major dealer for those.

Well, OK, ceramics suck in many ways, but no electrolytics is difficult.
Especially when you need to filter mains or something.
You can do 3 phase rectifiers and have about 5% ripple to work with, OK.
It depends on what it is for.

Throw away trains, throw away electronics,



I have been there, done that.
Like I said, I prefer the car, last time drove from here to Berlin by car, left in
the morning, arrived in the afternoon.
No train stations, no waiting, no tickets, better privacy, and, cheaper too.

That was a joy with the car when I did it last time. Because now after
the dreaded wall is gone they built a real autobahn from Helmstedt to
Berlin.

They say they more and more draw power from the normal 50 Hz net, and then convert it to DC, and then to 16.x Hz.
So that sort of makes it even more practical to do away with all those conversion steps, and upgrade the tracks
and trains to 25 kV 50 Hz,

When WW3 smashes all that stuff a good moment to build a better one.

We'll all have to watch out so there is no WW3.

 

[Joerg]

OK, that takes a bit longer, maybe an hour or so by train.

Exactly, and I can't see a bullet train make much of a difference there
like the article seems to suggest. For commuters, maybe, but only for
lawyers and doctors because it'll be expensive.

Industrial yes, oil yes, aerospace not directly.

Then how on earth did you get away with 10 years service life designs?

Well there are many who have no ulcer, should they be sad about it?
That space ship is a total mishap.

So, do you have a better one?

So is the ISS, it just circles and brings back nothing (but pictures).

You seem to sometimes judge from the hip without looking close enough.
Just the experiments in gravitational biology alone can easily justify
something like the ISS You simply cannot do this stuff on earth.

For stuff to put into space they could have used normal rockets, and for the billions
it has cost to keep that space low orbit plane flying they could have a moon base, mars base even.
Repairing Hubble, for that money you could launch a new one very few years.
Get the right mirror second try ;-)
Politics has completely killed sane science and engineering there.
It is just a social project to keep some techies and managers busy.
NASA.

It generates know-how that can then be used for other things. Also, how
else would you be able to bring large quantities of stuff back to earth
so the effects of cosmic rays and such can be studied back home?

You can buy anything for money, hey my Tyan mobo with PCI in the server ALSO has one ISA slot.
Such a mobo with PCI and ISA was hard to find at that time, 9 years ago.

Hard to find? Piece of cake:
http://www.nixsys.com/products.php?ref=10&cPath=50?ad=google.isa&gclid=CMyS_p-qkJ0CFSYoawodi3au_g

Or contact these guys in Breda, they'll get one for you:
http://www.advantech.nl/contact/

Or these guys, also in Breda:
http://www.micropower.nl/products.php?page=products&scat=2&sscat=29

Still wondering what could have been so difficult back then ...

I needed the ISA for a Philips TV1000 line doubler TV card...



Well, it will all be PCIe, much higher data rates, USB3 too, there is already a newer thing but cannot remember
what it is, Oh, yes, Intel goes optical (again) 10 Gbit/s:
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/IDF-Datentransfers-mit-10-GBit-s-fuer-jedermann--/zoom/145816/0
There is a lot of very low cost embedded stuff available if you search a bit with google.

ISA will be around for a very long time because of all the legacy cards
used in industry.

The scenario I see is this:
Obamama lets Israel bomb Iran, because the multinationals (oil) want control of the Iranian resources, and up the oil price.
Then Iran will react and bomb Israel.
Obamama will then come to the 'rescue of the world' by invading Iran.
A second Iraq.
Everybody (else) in Opec will like the peak in oil prices, Russia needs it too.
So what can go wrong?
Nothing can go wrong, except when US can no longer buy goods.. As it then becomes unimportant as expert area, other countries
will no longer dance to its tune, and do their own thing (export to China, perhaps currency Euro) changing US into a third world like
continent.
Then it can no longer pay it's army, and loses control of its nuclear stockpile, some self named generals, or
warlords if you will, will start launching some stuff from the silos to impress others, that will be misunderstood by
yet others (misunderstood well..), and a lot of fireworks will happen. ...

What have you been smoking? I thought you don't smoke.

[...]