Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Do Railroad Managers Secretly Favor PTC?
Edit topic
Updated your discussion topic below.
Subject
Enter a subject for your topic. Maximum 150 characters.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">On the surface, PTC is just a way to prevent crashes by taking the human element out of part of the decisions making process. But when you think about it, there is really no reason to limit automation to just that part of the process. Automation can drive the train and switch the cars. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">Further technology of the same sophistication as PTC will be able to analyze the entire train consist including individual car weight, car type, and arrangement of cars in the consist. It will compare these train factors to route geometry and weather conditions, and control the power and braking for the best economy and performance. That will save money. Reducing or eliminating crews will save money. Automation will save money. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">But no railroad manager can come out in favor of this brave new world because it will trigger union and labor resistance and animosity. And no single railroad would dare to move ahead because the cost would put them at a disadvantage with their competition. Nobody can afford to go first. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">So, enter the government mandate for PTC. On the surface, there is good reason to complain about it just because it is a mandate and nobody wants to be told how to run their business. But are the complaints just for show? Is it possible that managers actually welcome the opportunity to enter the road to full automation while escaping blame from the unions by saying that the government has forced them into it? Do they welcome the fact that the government mandate keeps the playing field level by forcing their competition into simultaneously bearing the same expense for the upgrade?</span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">This theory might help explain why railroad managers have been so tepid in their criticism of the mandate. They might actually support it, and their mild protests may be only a show for labor and the unions. </span> </p>
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
E-mail Subscribe
Check the box below if you want to receive e-mail notifications when replies are made to this thread.
Receive notifications
Update Discussion Topic
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
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
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy