Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="edblysard"] Matt Rose, in this months issue of Railway Age, as part of his acceptance speech for winning the Railroader of the Year award from RRA, pointed out that the cost to benefit ratio of PTC is 22:1, for every $22.00 railroads will spend implementing PTC, $1.00 in possible benefits may be realized....not what I would call a favorable ratio, and that is not the first time or the first place I have seen and heard that ratio. He went on to point out that next year, 700 million dollars of BNSF capital projects will be shelved to spend the money on the first stages of PTC. He further pointed out that said money will most likely have to come from projects like tie replacement and track maintenance that are known to enhance safety and profits. In that same issue, (different article) there is a graph that shows the year 2009 has the one of lowest number of injuries and fatalities for quite some time... Food for thought. [/quote] Ed, The cost/benefit ratio of 22:1 seems like a good reason not to do PTC.  Can safety measures like PTC just be foisted on the railroad industry because nobody can be opposed to safety?  If so, is there any limit to what can be mandated in the name of safety?  Why not just mandate a complete separation of grade crossings while they are at it?
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag