Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Do Railroad Managers Secretly Favor PTC?

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="jeffhergert"] [quote user="Murphy Siding"] [quote user="jeffhergert"] [quote user="schlimm"] Zugman:  I gave an accurate account of how and why automatic couplers and brakes became part of the safety equipment you and Ed "enjoy" today.  The parallel of the ASA and PTC is obvious, except today, labor seems opposed, while then it was in the forefront of advocacy, Ed's contrafactual comment about some workers notwithstanding.  As for another line of reasoning, that there really aren't many collisions, that one sounds like a kid who just totaled the family car saying, "But dad, it's only one crash after driving the car 283 times!"   Some of us who are not trainmen wonder why the opposition, if not for fear of train automation and job loss?  If that is true, wouldn't it be wiser to say so with the hope of garnering public support for manned locomotives post-PTC, since the law is not going to be repealed? <div style="clear:both;"></div> [/quote] Labor, at least the BLET, is not opposed to PTC.  They have called for it to be deployed.   Jeff     <div style="clear:both;"></div> [/quote]  What reason do they give for supporting it? <div style="clear:both;"></div> [/quote] Safety.  After all, PTC is supposed to be a crash avoidance system.  We talk about PTC and partial or total train automation as if it's the same thing.  It isn't, although PTC would be a necessary component for automation.  I think when the NTSB, and even the BLET (I don't know what the position is of the UTU on PTC, I assume they also are for it.), talk about the need for PTC they are looking at it's simplest, basic purpose.  A system that is supposed to keep one train from running into another/overrunning it's authority.   The NTSB doesn't care whether trains are run by human or computer, it's beyond the scope of their agency.  They only concern themselves about the safety aspect.  I imagine the unions feel they can either fight or mitigate any possible job losses that PTC and/or further automation might cause.   Jeff  <div style="clear:both;"></div> [/quote] I think it is logical to consider PTC as only being a crash avoidance system, but will the project unfold logically?  It has been kicked off by pure emotion.  My thoughts about PTC evolving into automation is that it is the basic essential foundation of automation.  But beyond that, I think the dynamics of the mandate pushing such a large scale endeavor is likely to create a monster with unstoppable inertia.  Part of that unstoppable inertia will be the endless gravy train of mandate-driven developer work by outside contractors coupled with a very wealthy customer. With this dynamic driving the project, the end point objective is likely to become obscured as the project takes on a life of its own.  So I see it going right past being a crash avoidance system and continuing into the next natural extensions of scope.
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