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.
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
12444 Good news! The dealine has been extednded to 2020!: https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/1462
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.
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...
Larry 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...
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDBovine 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.
oltmanndNot 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.
oltmanndThey 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.
BuslistPlease 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.
jeffhergertI 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.
oltmanndPlus, 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
oltmannd Buslist oltmannd ALEXANDER WOOD If the railroad had successfully self-regulated, all the major lines would have been running PTC in the 1990's. But they didn't. So that's how we got to where we are today. 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. Remember cab signals would not have prevented Chatsworth so there would still be heat. And cab signals do nothing to enforce slow orders or work zone restrictions which are a significant part of the PTC funcunalit. It possibly could have prevented Chatsworth. He'd have had a restricting in the cab. As soon as he hit 23 mph he would have gotten a penatly brake application. Plus, as soon as he got past the plant, the UP train CS would have knocked down to restricting.
Buslist oltmannd ALEXANDER WOOD If the railroad had successfully self-regulated, all the major lines would have been running PTC in the 1990's. But they didn't. So that's how we got to where we are today. 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. Remember cab signals would not have prevented Chatsworth so there would still be heat. And cab signals do nothing to enforce slow orders or work zone restrictions which are a significant part of the PTC funcunalit.
oltmannd ALEXANDER WOOD If the railroad had successfully self-regulated, all the major lines would have been running PTC in the 1990's. But they didn't. So that's how we got to where we are today. 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.
ALEXANDER WOOD If the railroad had successfully self-regulated, all the major lines would have been running PTC in the 1990's. But they didn't. So that's how we got to where we are today.
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.
Remember cab signals would not have prevented Chatsworth so there would still be heat. And cab signals do nothing to enforce slow orders or work zone restrictions which are a significant part of the PTC funcunalit.
It possibly could have prevented Chatsworth. He'd have had a restricting in the cab. As soon as he hit 23 mph he would have gotten a penatly brake application.
Plus, as soon as he got past the plant, the UP train CS would have knocked down to restricting.
If they would be using UP's coded cab signals, there would be no penalty brake application as long as the cab signal aspect change was acknowledged. There is no speed component for them.
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.
Jeff
oltmannd Randy Stahl oltmannd ALEXANDER WOOD Amtrak's ACSES has been running since 1999, and it works fine for mixed passenger/freight operations. 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. All of the P&W engines have cab signal and ACSES. No wonder the P&W is nearly broke!
Randy Stahl oltmannd ALEXANDER WOOD Amtrak's ACSES has been running since 1999, and it works fine for mixed passenger/freight operations. 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. All of the P&W engines have cab signal and ACSES.
oltmannd ALEXANDER WOOD Amtrak's ACSES has been running since 1999, and it works fine for mixed passenger/freight operations. 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.
ALEXANDER WOOD Amtrak's ACSES has been running since 1999, and it works fine for mixed passenger/freight operations.
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.
All of the P&W engines have cab signal and ACSES.
No wonder the P&W is nearly broke!
I do hope your wrong !!!!
To your point, Conrail had at least a couple terrible wrecks in CS territory. But, I think there's enough "better" in it to have turned the heat down a notch.
The point is the RR's were so busy merging and sorting out merger effects to devote any attention and/or money to safety systems. Some/any forward progress might have put them in a better position today.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
BaltACD Remember, that engineer had made a station stop in view of the stop signal he ran past.
Remember, that engineer had made a station stop in view of the stop signal he ran past.
Yeah, but the claim still can't be made. You know that. I ran under both cab and non-cab. Something nice about having that display in the cab. I'm not saying it would have prevented it, but we can't say it wouldn't have, either.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
zugmann Buslist You can't make that claim. Maybe having that approach, then restricting lit up on the tree in the cab would have been enough to prevent the engineer from running the signal. Or maybe not.
Buslist
You can't make that claim. Maybe having that approach, then restricting lit up on the tree in the cab would have been enough to prevent the engineer from running the signal. Or maybe not.
BuslistRemember cab signals would not have prevented Chatsworth so there would still be heat.
ALEXANDER WOOD This is utter nonsense. FEC has been running PTC for quite a while, and while not practical for remote freight rail lines, Amtrak's ACSES has been running since 1999, and it works fine for mixed passenger/freight operations. Heck, if the railroads had all installed ATC like the PRR and New Haven had, many of those accidents likely would have been prevented, and the calls for PTC may never have materialized. The only downside I can see is that now billions have been invested in the old-school block signalling system, so it's unlikely that any FRA operations will see rolling-block CBTC for a very, very long time, while transit operations, as closed systems, can use CBTC to increase capacity. Although it may not be relevant anyway, as the densest commuter rail operations around NYC use very short fixed blocks anyway.
This is utter nonsense. FEC has been running PTC for quite a while, and while not practical for remote freight rail lines, Amtrak's ACSES has been running since 1999, and it works fine for mixed passenger/freight operations.
Heck, if the railroads had all installed ATC like the PRR and New Haven had, many of those accidents likely would have been prevented, and the calls for PTC may never have materialized.
The only downside I can see is that now billions have been invested in the old-school block signalling system, so it's unlikely that any FRA operations will see rolling-block CBTC for a very, very long time, while transit operations, as closed systems, can use CBTC to increase capacity. Although it may not be relevant anyway, as the densest commuter rail operations around NYC use very short fixed blocks anyway.
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?
ALEXANDER WOODIf the railroad had successfully self-regulated, all the major lines would have been running PTC in the 1990's. But they didn't. So that's how we got to where we are today.
ALEXANDER WOODAmtrak's ACSES has been running since 1999, and it works fine for mixed passenger/freight operations.
ALEXANDER WOOD dakotafred If the railroad had successfully self-regulated, all the major lines would have been running PTC in the 1990's. But they didn't. So that's how we got to where we are today. The technology for PTC has been around for a decade or two, and the technology for ATC has been around since the 1930's or earlier. I hope that in the coming years, as the technology develops, crash-avoidance technology is mandated into new cars, as it will save lives. Planes already almost auto-fly, and planes are the safest mode of transportation already, which is amazing given the fundamental risks involved in getting something off the ground and back on the ground, and then going that with hudreds of aluminum tubes all moving around at the same airport over the course of a day. Buslist This is utter nonsense. FEC has been running PTC for quite a while, and while not practical for remote freight rail lines, Amtrak's ACSES has been running since 1999, and it works fine for mixed passenger/freight operations. Heck, if the railroads had all installed ATC like the PRR and New Haven had, many of those accidents likely would have been prevented, and the calls for PTC may never have materialized. The only downside I can see is that now billions have been invested in the old-school block signalling system, so it's unlikely that any FRA operations will see rolling-block CBTC for a very, very long time, while transit operations, as closed systems, can use CBTC to increase capacity. Although it may not be relevant anyway, as the densest commuter rail operations around NYC use very short fixed blocks anyway.
dakotafred
If the railroad had successfully self-regulated, all the major lines would have been running PTC in the 1990's. But they didn't. So that's how we got to where we are today. The technology for PTC has been around for a decade or two, and the technology for ATC has been around since the 1930's or earlier.
I hope that in the coming years, as the technology develops, crash-avoidance technology is mandated into new cars, as it will save lives. Planes already almost auto-fly, and planes are the safest mode of transportation already, which is amazing given the fundamental risks involved in getting something off the ground and back on the ground, and then going that with hudreds of aluminum tubes all moving around at the same airport over the course of a day.
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.
Remember, we were all 18 once and had all the answers - it is only when we got older that we realized our answers were useless and we didn't even understand the questions. You are no different.
dakotafredSo, where is the PTC for highways, where 35,000 die each year, and for the airlines for that matter? Railroad deaths have been miniscule; when they've occurred, it's usually because of the failure of imperfect human beings who, God bless them, do right 99.9 percent of the time. Civilian -- non-railroad -- casualties, like the California passengers who died and inspired PTC, probably made mistakes in their own jobs that had serious consequences. Where was the PTC for their line of work? PTC is an unattractive bit of political grandstanding by Congress that is pure economic waste and a smear on the people operating our trains. Would that Congress did one-tenth as good a job as our railroaders.
BuslistOf course the fact that no one, not even the aerospace firms could build or demonstrate a workable system is irrelevant! We should have installed something that had no chance of working and gummed up the industry then! There were plenty of test installation, all of which failed, the Lockheed Martin Illinois project probably the most visible (Only about $50M blown on that attempt, but then again it's easy). You can still see the marks in the ballast from their foot dragging. Great thinking!
zugmann 12444 *Sigh.* Yet another hint that our government is slowly taking our freedom away. *sigh* What the heck is this law for, anyways? To stop a certain operation that's necessary? What the heck? What freedom? Please explain. Railroads do not operate in a vacuum. Do you beleive there should be no regulation at all?
12444 *Sigh.* Yet another hint that our government is slowly taking our freedom away. *sigh* What the heck is this law for, anyways? To stop a certain operation that's necessary? What the heck?
*Sigh.* Yet another hint that our government is slowly taking our freedom away. *sigh* What the heck is this law for, anyways? To stop a certain operation that's necessary? What the heck?
What freedom? Please explain. Railroads do not operate in a vacuum. Do you beleive there should be no regulation at all?
No, I just think it's dumb how the railroads have no choice but to meet the deadline, and that they have to shut down if they don't.
Dakguy201 nyc#25 The "government bozo" is Sara Fienberg who is the acting adminstrator of the FRA. She apparantly has no idea of how a shutdown would affect the commerce of the nation. Ms. Feinberg is a political operative whose background is a staffer for former Senate Leader Tom Dashle, former White House Chief of Staff Rahn Emanuel and Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx. As a matter of law, her position "shall be an individual with professional experience in railroad safety, hazardous materials safety, or other transportation safety." It is unclear to me just where she might have attained such experience.
nyc#25 The "government bozo" is Sara Fienberg who is the acting adminstrator of the FRA. She apparantly has no idea of how a shutdown would affect the commerce of the nation.
The "government bozo" is Sara Fienberg who is the acting adminstrator
of the FRA. She apparantly has no idea of how a shutdown would
affect the commerce of the nation.
Excerpt from Senate press release
The pending nominee to be the next administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) will provide testimony at a U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation confirmation hearing on Thursday, September 17th at 9:45 a.m. Ms. Feinberg has served as the Acting Administrator of the FRA since January 2015 and the president formally nominated her to be the next administrator at FRA on May 29, 2015. Her nomination questionnaire is available here. This hearing will take place in Senate Russell Office Building, Room 253 and a live video of the hearing will be available.
BaltACDNot a single 5 day week
I'm in the wrong line of work.
wanswheel The House takes the entire week off to celebrate the Autumnal Equinox, Columbus Day, Veterans Day and Thanksgiving. Only 39 potential deadline-extension days till Christmas.
Not a single 5 day week
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.