SFMTA's train system running on floppy disks; city fears 'catastrophic failure'
San Francisco’s Muni light rail still boots critical train‑control systems from floppy disks, prompting concern not just about failing media but about a broader, aging control infrastructure that has exceeded its design life. Commenters argue that swapping floppies for modern storage would be trivial compared to the real challenge: replacing vendor-abandoned hardware, low-bandwidth signaling, and decades-old software in a safety‑critical system bound by regulation, liability, and politics. The case becomes a lens on why US public transit upgrades are so slow and expensive, touching on underfunding, risk‑averse project management, and incentives that favor megaprojects and consultants over incremental, technically straightforward fixes.
Scope of the Problem (Beyond Floppies)
- Many argue the floppy angle is a headline hook; the real issue is a full train control system at end-of-life.
- System was designed for ~20–25 years and is now beyond that; major components (onboard computers, servers, loop cables, comms) need replacement.
- The inductive loop cable reportedly has very low bandwidth and physical fragility; past issues include trains damaging the loop.
Floppy Disks: Risk vs Reality
- Several commenters say floppies themselves are not the core risk: they can be cloned, imaged, checksummed, and replaced; floppy emulators (flash/USB) exist.
- Others note media degradation, shrinking supply of blank disks, and the chance of corrupted commands leading to dangerous behavior.
- Some suspect the agency is using “floppy disks” as a vivid symbol to sell an overdue, broader upgrade.
Why Not a Simple Emulator Fix?
- Technically-minded commenters assert a Raspberry Pi or commercial floppy emulator could replace the drive cheaply.
- Pushback: safety‑critical systems need extensive validation, liability coverage, and slow certification; “weekend hacks” don’t cut it legally or politically.
- There is disagreement on whether an incremental “band‑aid” is acceptable versus doing a full system overhaul once.
Cost, Procurement, and Governance
- Reported upgrade is on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars, including ~$36M just for consulting; some calculate ~$2.6M per train.
- RFPs for both vendor and consultant are recent; no contractor is selected yet, implying a long timeline (possibly ~a decade).
- Several comments highlight US public works patterns: megaproject bias, heavy compliance/engineering paperwork, low public‑sector pay driving reliance on contractors, and weak in‑house expertise.
Debate Over “Cutting Edge” and Journalism Quality
- Strong criticism that describing floppy‑based, no‑HDD systems as “cutting edge in 1998” is misleading; others respond that transit tech lags consumer PCs and prioritizes proven reliability.
- Multiple people note factual sloppiness in the article (confusing 3.5" vs 5.25" disks, vague timelines, unclear actual hardware).
Broader Transit & Political Context
- Commenters generalize to US transit dysfunction: chronic underfunding, political point‑scoring, cronyism, “jobs program” incentives, and voters rejecting bond measures that would fund upgrades.
- Some defend public workers as constrained by politics and budgets; others blame public agencies for complacency, corruption, and lack of accountability.