Trains.com

Class I railroads looking to shutdown all operations over looming PTC deadline

9455 views
157 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 3:18 PM

oltmannd
Plus, as soon as he got past the plant, the UP train CS would have knocked down to restricting.

An interesting irony is that the UP engine was equipped for operation in ATC, ATS and CCS, but none were in effect on the commuter line.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    August 2015
  • 26 posts
Posted by ALEXANDER WOOD on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 4:53 PM

BaltACD
Bovine excrement young man.  ACSES only has applicability to Amtrak and only to their electrified territory.  FEC has not been running PTC, as the design standards have yet to be fully standardized for all Class 1 carriers which FEC is not.  They may be running some form of home grown kluge system that satisfies their own needs but that system is not the PTC system that the rest of the Class 1's have settled on.  Get some real world work and railroad experience.

I did NOT say that the FEC is running I-ETMS, but rather that they are running PTC (of an unspecified type). Maybe you should bother to read my posts in full. If you had bothered to read my post, you would see that my point is that Amtrak has been running A FORM OF PTC since 1999, proving that PTC technology, in one form or another, has been around for a while.

oltmannd
Not so sure this is correct.  No NS or CSX locomotives have ACSES equipment.  I doubt P&W power does, either.  They do have the LSL version of ATC, but that is not PTC. I think freight trains running on the NEC (the south end, at least) will not be ACSES equipped. They'll run under the loophole that allows some unequipped trains to run in PTC territory, I think.  NS, CSX, Amtrak and Conrail haven't figured out what an interoperable I-ETMS/ACSES system might look like, yet.

P&W is full ACSES. Back in the day when the ethanol trains went on the ENC, P&W power had to go on in Willimantic, CT well away from the corridor, since NECR doens't have ACSES gear on any of their locomotives. Then they backed the trains across the Thames river bridge, which is a bizarre move. They later re-did the shortcut to avoid the NEC until Providence that was FRA excempt previously. There is a video of an ethanol train that was behind schedule running up the150mph section of the NEC to save transit time, which is pretty interesting. I believe it was doing 60ish over the 150mph track in RI.

Apparently they are going to connect I-ETMS and ACSES together in the back office and put the I-ETMS gear on the line too. I guess NS figured that was cheaper than putting ACSES in all the locomotives that handle NEC service, the figure I heard a number of years back was $50K per loco for ACSES. You'd think that they could make a combined I-ETMS and ACSES setup for a small marginal cost above just I-ETMS, but I guess not.

That section of the NEC is the last place in the US that could avoid PTC after Chase, Silver Spring, and now Philadelphia.

oltmannd
They didn't even have to do that much.  Expansion of cab signal and/or equipping some dark territory with functional PTC would likely have taken the heat out of the NTSB's drive for PTC.

Quite possibly.

Buslist
Please do some research before commenting. FEC has (or had) cab signals, that is NOT PTC. And ACSES required significant augmentation to meet the statuary requirements. Just so you know I was a member of the FRA's RSAC PTC panel so I know a bit about it! Your credentials?

Supposedly they have/had PTC. I don't know how close it is to meeting the modern requirements of PTC in regards to the current mandate or in comparison to the 1999 implementation of ACSES. There is very little information available about it on the internet.

jeffhergert
I myself haven't forgotten that there were a few witnesses that say they saw a clear signal for the commuter train.   http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-traincrash4-2008oct04-story.html  They couldn't find any record of it or get the signal system to reproduce a false clear, so of course it didn't happen.  I don't know, but it always seemed odd that almost immediately a spokesperson blamed the accident on their own employee.  Something you don't usually do, unless maybe you know your new million dollar computer aided CTC has bugs in it.

Wow, that's interesting. Wikipedia says 3 people saw the green signal. I seem to think that they are mistaken, based on the other evidence, but it is spooky nonetheless.

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • From: New Hampshire
  • 23 posts
Posted by 12444 on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 9:09 PM

Good news! The dealine has been extednded to 2020!: https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/1462

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 9:14 PM

12444

Good news! The dealine has been extednded to 2020!: https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/1462

^old news - Senate is only 1 part of the legislative process - the House is a different kettle of fish

Tha GAO now concurs that it will be impossible for the railroads to meet the Dec. 31, 2015 deadline and recommend an extension along with more extensive FRA oversight.

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/ptc/gao-report-confirms-need-for-ptc-deadline-extension.html?channel=63

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 9:17 PM

From the bill summary on the linked page:

08/01/2013 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

That was two years ago...

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • From: New Hampshire
  • 23 posts
Posted by 12444 on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 9:28 PM

BaltACD

 

 
12444

Good news! The dealine has been extednded to 2020!: https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/1462

 

^old news - Senate is only 1 part of the legislative process - the House is a different kettle of fish

Tha GAO now concurs that it will be impossible for the railroads to meet the Dec. 31, 2015 deadline and recommend an extension along with more extensive FRA oversight.

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/ptc/gao-report-confirms-need-for-ptc-deadline-extension.html?channel=63

 

Ohh, ok.

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Thursday, September 17, 2015 12:58 AM
Excerpt from GAO report
In total we interviewed 26 railroads identified by FRA to be required by law to implement PTC. Specifically, we interviewed the four largest Class I freight railroads as determined by revenues, 13 commuter railroads, and 9 smaller Class II/III freight railroads.
BNSF Railway, CSX Corporation, Norfolk Southern, and Union Pacific.

Capital Metro, Long Island Railroad, Massachusetts Bay Transit Administration (MBTA), Metro North, New Mexico Rail Runner Express, North East Illinois Commuter Rail (Metra), Peninsula Joint Powers (Caltrain), RTD Denver, South Eastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink), Utah Transit Authority, Virginia Railway Express, TriMet.

 

Alaska, Belt Railway of Chicago, Kansas City Terminal, Nashville and Eastern, New Orleans Public Belt, Pan Am Railways, Portland and Western, Saratoga and North Creek, and Terminal Rail of Saint Louis.  

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy