Slashdot Mirror


Computer Failure Causes Gridlock In MD County

Uncle Rummy writes "A central traffic control computer in Montgomery County, Maryland failed early Wednesday morning, leading to widespread gridlock across the entire county. The computer, which dates to the 1970s, is the single point of unified control for all traffic signals in the county, which comprises a number of major Washington DC-area suburban communities. When the system failed, it caused all signals to default to stand-alone operation, rather than the highly-tuned synchronization that usually serves to facilitate traffic flow during rush hours. The resulting chaos is a yet another stark reminder of how much modern civilization relies on behind-the-scenes automation to deliver and control basic services and infrastructure. The system remains down Thursday, with no ETA in sight."

12 of 483 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Where's a traffic cop when you need one? by Ritchie70 · · Score: 5, Funny

    That wouldn't make it any better.

    I haven't read the article, but if the summary correctly reflects the situation, the traffic lights are all working - they're just working independently, so rather than being in sync so the main flow of traffic never has to stop (or stops less) they're all just doing their own thing.

    --
    The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
  2. From the 1980s by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to this it was a Data General main frame from the 1980s and not from the 1970s. Anyone know what model?

  3. Re:I live there by dsieburgh · · Score: 5, Informative

    I live here too and it was mayhem last night. It took me 2.5 hours to get home from work which usually takes 25 minutes. (6 miles) Many of my coworkers and friends have also reported major headaches... We were sitting at traffic lights with nowhere to go for sometimes up to 5 cycles of the lights. What I heard is that there is a different timing for rush hours that lets more traffic flow south in the morning and north in the evenings. The worst areas according to news reports are Rockville Pike, which I experienced last night, Connecticut Ave, Georgia Ave and Rt 29. The official word is that some board blew in the main computer and they are unable to find "parts" to replace it. I am not certain about the details. The county website is reporting that all traffic lights are going to have to be manually updated one-by-one. There are 800 intersections.

  4. 70s computer by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Damn! 70s? Talk about Return on Investment.

    The WashPost, in another article touts Fragile Technology.
    I reach for my 70's era calculator and estimate the operational life of 34 years for this system. Some Fragility. Who or what at the Post has been there that long.

    Wonder if its some ancient PDP version or an small IBM mainframe. The article is scarce on details. Parts for either are getting hard to find except in the scrap market.

    Still you have to wonder why it wasn't ported to some other platform if nothing else as an exercise in disaster preparedness. Any commodity computer could do the job.

    There is a lot of stuff like this still in service. I saw a PDP 8 monitoring turbines in a hydro Power station, and asked about where they get that fixed. The reply was it never broke down, but they had stockpiled 6 replacements, tested each yearly, just because they realized how old it was. Nobody knows exactly what it does anymore.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  5. Re:This is reassuring... by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Interesting

        IANATE (I Am Not A Traffic Engineer), but I've had the opportunity to talk to some over the years. From what I recall of those conversations, most, if not all, traffic signals are failsafe. They cannot have colliding greens, and they won't generally just turn off. Even in the event of a power failure, they're suppose to stay up on batteries for a while.

        I have seen their failsafe behavior fail though. I was once driving on a dark foggy night. Visibility was very very poor. I was staying in my lane, but I couldn't see much else. I had a long drive in a rural area, and I was coming into an urban area. I expected to see street lights and traffic lights, but there were none. As I was driving, another car shot across the road just ahead of me, missing me by just a few feet. He didn't see the traffic light that wasn't working either. I called the police, so they could station an officer there. Their response was "Are you crazy? No one can see at that intersection. He'll get hit." Hmmm, good logic. At least no one got killed there that night.

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  6. Re:Report from the field: "Drivers very confused" by scorp1us · · Score: 5, Funny

    The blue is from appraching the light too fast. You're aproximately going 20% the speed of light. SLOW DOWN.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  7. Re:Where's a traffic cop when you need one? by TheLuggage2008 · · Score: 5, Funny

    if the summary correctly reflects the situation

    Please mod parent funny.

  8. And if they had been using roundabouts... by macraig · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... to mediate traffic instead of traffic signals, they wouldn't have needed the aging old single-point-of-failure computer in the first place, because roundabouts (a) require no computers, (b) require no electronics at all, (c) require no electricity, and (d) don't require maintenance. What's more, since they allow motorists to preserve some momentum in all but the most congested traffic, gas consumption from forced arbitrary deceleration and acceleration is reduced. The only intelligence they require isn't of the artificial sort at all, only a smidgen of it from the motorists using them. They are un-powered and self-adjusting to traffic flow.

    Would anyone like to take a stab at how much energy and man-hours is expended on the traffic signal network in the United States every year?

    1. Re:And if they had been using roundabouts... by fridaynightsmoke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As a UK resident and driver in the true home of the roundabout, I wish to tell you that roundabouts are not a panacea.

      Roundabouts work best for light to moderate traffic, where all 4 directions and all movements (left turn, right turn etc) are fairly equal in demand. For heavy traffic, they very quickly congest as traffic builds on the roundabout and blocks all entry. Indeed, round here most busy/large roundabouts have traffic lights on them as well, with varying degrees of success.

      As for "gas consumption from forced arbitrary deceleration and acceleration is reduced" - I strongly disagree. Here roundabouts are used as a form of 'traffic calming', ie a deliberate obstacle to slow traffic. With a traffic light its a 50/50 chance between stopping completely and carrying on at cruising speed. With roundabouts there is always a decelerate/accelerate cycle, which depending on the design of the junction can be quite severe. In Birmingham (UK) and elsewhere. there was even a recent fad among local traffic engineers to plant high vegetation on the sightlines for approaching traffic to force all vehicles entering the roundabout to slow to below 5mph to be able to see traffic on the junction. On some examples here you have maybe 3 ft before the roundabout itself where you can see oncoming vehicles.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that roundabouts are rubbish and traffic lights are good, but theres different solutions to different problems. Replacing non-synchronised traffic lights with roundabouts in a situation with very heavy traffic would have a very much worse result.

      --
      This is a substitute for a clever sig that fits within the maximum number of characters.
  9. Re:Where's a traffic cop when you need one? by nsteinme · · Score: 5, Funny

    A meter maid has no more information about traffic flow at adjacent intersections than an autonomous single light would.

    Then how about a Beowulf cluster of meter maids? (with walkie talkies of course)

    --
    call me FOSS im the boss with the sauce and the source
  10. Re:I've seen this movie as well... by Darth_brooks · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bringing in Bruce Willis is *never* a bad idea. Need an asteroid destroyed in an affront to basic science? Call Willis. Need to remove an East German terrorist that can't speak proper German? Willis. Need someone to have sex with a hot, orange haired diety? Willis. Need Chuck Norris' ass kicked? Willis. Cancer cure? Willis. Making a Jaws Sequel? Have Bruce Willis play the shark.

    --
    There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
  11. Re:I've seen this movie as well... by russotto · · Score: 5, Funny

    Need someone to have sex with a hot, orange haired diety?

    Whoa there, no need for Willis for that one. I'll do it. And if she objects, tell her the next choice is Shatner.