Why not use track warrants?

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Railway Man

  [snip]  But there is worse than that.  There is a lot of complexity hidden in the word "signal," which includes "power switches."  If the signal system is not responding, there's no way to operate turnouts except in manual mode (hand throw), and no way to know if each turnout is lined and locked for movement in the intended direction unless someone gets down off the train, clears the snow off the points, and inspects the points, unless there's a target on a switchstand that's visible.  And in deep snow, with small targets, not possible. 

This is bad enough on a single-track railroad with a siding every 10 miles or so, and a very big deal in a territory that has complex train paths through multiple interlockings, junctions, and station throats.  Sure, one train can hand-throw its way out of its initial station, but is it supposed to line the switches behind it?  If there's a four-man crew, perhaps it could do this.  Or, it's possible to run trains in such a way that use of crossovers and turnouts is minimized. In this kind of territory, that might reduce the number of trains that can be operated to a handful of through trains.  [snip]

RWM 

I understand that past practice in these situations is often to line most of the turnouts for the 'Normal' (main/ straight) route - especially at the more remote interlockings out in the country, away from the main stations.  Then, the NorthEast Corridor is run as a railroad essentially consisting of just 2 to 4 parallel single tracks all the way between those major stations - "straight shots" - where the Maintenance-Of-Way forces can concentrrate their efforts on just a few critical turnouts, depending on the configurations and the needs.   It essentially reduces the operation to a single speed - the 'lowest common denominator' of the train that makes the most stops and goes the slowest, typically a commuter train if they're running - unless another track in that direction (3rd or 4th track) can be kept open for Amtrak's faster and less frequent stops.  Nevertheless, this at least keeps a couple of tracks open, trains moving, and operations somewhat more fluid even if delayed.  However, I have no information as to whether that was done in this instance or not.   

Also, that 'stop-gap' method works best if the signals are still intact to keep the following trains properly spaced out.  But if the signal system is 'out' so much as to no longer be able to provide safe train separation - even though route switching capability may have been already intentionally sacrificed to the situation - then of course the capacity and performance of the system will be degraded even further. 

- Paul North. 

[nbrodar]

Another thing to note....NORAC track warrants are absolute.   Once a train is issued Line 2 movement authority, he owns the railroad until he gives up that authority.   Under NORAC, It is impossible to fleet trains with track warrants.

It is possible to roll up authority behind a train, but each following train needs a new Line 2 to proceed.

Nick

[tree68]

Amtrak uses the NORAC Form D on their own tracks, or whatever the host railroad uses on the tracks of others.

I've copied a lot of Form D's.  It's not a fast process.  Even assuming that switches, communications, and the track in general weren't a problem, the DS would look like the proverbial one armed paper hanger if he/she were trying to run trains on block station headway.  It's a pain on our tourist line when we have to do it.

There is also the logistics of having copies of the Form D in the hands of both the engineer and the conductor.  The engineer can't copy a Form D while in motion, never mind cell phone considerations.

[BaltACD]

Railway Man

Moreover, when the signal system goes out, the communications might go out with it.  That was sometimes the case on the railroads I've worked for because we used common microwave backbones.  We could dispatch with cell phone, assuming we could get connectivity, and in a snowstorm with everyone trying to be on their cell phone at once?  Or the train in a tunnel?  Or in an underground station? Maybe not.

RWM

Of course the FRA's Emergency Order after the Chatsworth, CA incident prevents use of private cell phones on trains now-a-days.

[Railway Man]

csmincemoyer

With the blizzard affecting rail travel in the northeast I'm reading that one of the main issues is that the signals are out.  All other things considered (overhead has power, tracks passable) why couldn't the railroads in the NE Corridor use track warrants in emergency situations?

It's a fair question.  But the issue is not a lack of signal indications to issue authority for movement to trains; the rule book already has ways to do that which are similar to track warrants.  Of course, as MC noted, speeds are reduced because now it is dark territory, and dispatcher workload greatly limits the number of trains that can be dispatched -- in this territory, probably for every 100 train movements that are feasible under CTC, running on permits, warrants, whatever, the capacity probably drops to about 10. And of course, following movements are spaced out, station dwell time becomes extremely problematic, and so forth.

But there is worse than that.  There is a lot of complexity hidden in the word "signal," which includes "power switches."  If the signal system is not responding, there's no way to operate turnouts except in manual mode (hand throw), and no way to know if each turnout is lined and locked for movement in the intended direction unless someone gets down off the train, clears the snow off the points, and inspects the points, unless there's a target on a switchstand that's visible.  And in deep snow, with small targets, not possible. 

This is bad enough on a single-track railroad with a siding every 10 miles or so, and a very big deal in a territory that has complex train paths through multiple interlockings, junctions, and station throats.  Sure, one train can hand-throw its way out of its initial station, but is it supposed to line the switches behind it?  If there's a four-man crew, perhaps it could do this.  Or, it's possible to run trains in such a way that use of crossovers and turnouts is minimized. In this kind of territory, that might reduce the number of trains that can be operated to a handful of through trains.

Moreover, when the signal system goes out, the communications might go out with it.  That was sometimes the case on the railroads I've worked for because we used common microwave backbones.  We could dispatch with cell phone, assuming we could get connectivity, and in a snowstorm with everyone trying to be on their cell phone at once?  Or the train in a tunnel?  Or in an underground station? Maybe not.

RWM

[henry6]

If it were one or two signals or one or two switch locations, it might work.  But with such wides spread and univsersal problems of signal/switch problems, it is better to have a cup of coffee.

[mudchicken]

For openers, with the signal system out, you are reduced to 49 MPH and in certain situatons restricted speed. (a relative crawl compared to the normal hump'n boogie)...you're gonna need a lot more crews to handle the fewer trains as well....

Secondly, have fun finding enough rules qualified switch tenders and dispatchers. Crossovers and facing point switches ought to be a thrill (lot fewer options to work with) based on what Iittle I know about NEC operating practices and the rulebook. Even with the lower speed, the buffer between trains will be much larger. Problems will compound in effect.

Hopefully, the handfull eastern hoggers (DMU etc) and signal guys on this forum will get on here and better explain the headaches.

 

[csmincemoyer]

With the blizzard affecting rail travel in the northeast I'm reading that one of the main issues is that the signals are out.  All other things considered (overhead has power, tracks passable) why couldn't the railroads in the NE Corridor use track warrants in emergency situations?