BCD Once you get around the curve, it's a straight, level road and the speed limit is 60mph. You can go (if you desire) 70-80mph because the road itself is good for it, the limit is arbitrarily set.
243129Tell that to the cop and let me know how you made out.
I notice you did not suggest that it was unsafe, merely over an arbitrary limit. The police officer will never tell you to exceed the speed limit, but often use their judgement as to when to issue a ticket. A few mph over the limit on an empty interstate is likely to be winked at, unless there were other bad driving habits being displayed.
cx500I notice you did not suggest that it was unsafe, merely over an arbitrary limit.
Euclid cx500 I notice you did not suggest that it was unsafe, merely over an arbitrary limit. Speed limits for road or railroads are not arbitrary.
cx500 I notice you did not suggest that it was unsafe, merely over an arbitrary limit.
Speed limits for road or railroads are not arbitrary.
Roads have the most arbitrary speed limits of all. Remember the years of the Double Nickel - those roads today have speed limits that range from the 55 and every 5 MPH increment up to 85 MPH. Arbitrary to the max.
Today's railroads have their FRA mandated track maintenance standards for various speeds and commodities. I have no idea what if any speed standards the railroads applied to their tracks 'back in the day'. Remember 'back in the day' MILW had their famous 90 MPH slow zones.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Euclid Speed limits for road or railroads are not arbitrary.
Most on this thread do not seem to grasp that.
Maybe because many of us remember the 55mph national speed limit. At your age, I would think that you did, too. If that wasn't arbitrary, nothing was.
Many don't know that yellow speed limit signs on curves, etc., don't have the force of law. They are merely suggestions.
BackshopMaybe because many of us remember the 55mph national speed limit. At your age, I would think that you did, too. If that wasn't arbitrary, nothing was. Many don't know that yellow speed limit signs on curves, etc., don't have the force of law. They are merely suggestions.
In my state there are Photo Enforced Construction Zone Speed Limits. These limits are noramll 10 to 15 MPH slower than the limits both prior to and following the construction zone. The State Authorities announce publically from time to time that you WILL NOT activate the photo equipment that will lead to a 'speeding ticker' IF YOU DON'T EXCEED the construction zone limit by MORE THAN 12 MPH. ie. to get a ticket in a 60 MPH construction zone you must be clocked at 73 MPH or higher. The nominal Interstate Speed Limit is 70 MPH.
Backshop Maybe because many of us remember the 55mph national speed limit. At your age, I would think that you did, too. If that wasn't arbitrary, nothing was. Many don't know that yellow speed limit signs on curves, etc., don't have the force of law. They are merely suggestions.
I do not believe that the 55 mph national highway speed limit was arbitrary either. It was chosen with much thought and deliberations as to how much time it added to trips versus how much fuel it saved. There was a lot of disagreement about these factors and many pros and cons were weighed. That sort of deliberation shows that the 55 limit was not arbitrary.
Labeling railroad speed limits as arbitrary in this discussion seems to be intended to indicate that there is no practical downside to exceding them. And then it further seems to be trying to twist the facts into the notion that railroad speed limits are merely advisory rather than regulatory, similar to your example of the yellow speed limit signs on highway curves. Railroad speed limits have never been of that nature. They are absolute limits just like the maximum highway speed limits. Any exeeding of those limits violates the law in the case of highways, and violates the rules in the case of railroads.
The 55mph limit was arbitrary due to the fact that the design and safety of the road wasn't factored in. It was feel-good legislation in response to the oil crisis.
Overmod Euclid It sounds to me like the CAN DO attitude of the 1900 era has been rewritten in blue to extend another 60 years with superintendents ordering engineers to exceed the 79 mph speed limit in order to make up time. I thought the issue you were concerned with was whether violating the 'Federal speed law' was actionable. This is a different issue: the extent to which individual enginemen were actively prosecuted by 'the Secretary' or his minions for "choosing" to keep their jobs by running late trains fast to make time. Note that this mirrors an earlier difference in operating priority that came up in the Cayce wreck discussion: On the New Haven, any operation with the signal system 'down' treated any facing-point switch as needing to be encountered at restricted speed ... no matter how long that delayed a given train ... whereas many other roads relied on other procedures short of spiking the switches involved to "provide" safety with less delay. It wouldn't surprise me to find the New Haven, or the operating crafts on it, also coming down more firmly on strict enforcement against 'expedient overspeed' in many cases. I'd certainly have thought that any particular effort to put operating men in an evil quandary involving losing their job or seniority for "insubordination" vs. violating Federal law personally would result in clear union demands at the very next collective bargaining session.
Euclid It sounds to me like the CAN DO attitude of the 1900 era has been rewritten in blue to extend another 60 years with superintendents ordering engineers to exceed the 79 mph speed limit in order to make up time.
I thought the issue you were concerned with was whether violating the 'Federal speed law' was actionable. This is a different issue: the extent to which individual enginemen were actively prosecuted by 'the Secretary' or his minions for "choosing" to keep their jobs by running late trains fast to make time.
Note that this mirrors an earlier difference in operating priority that came up in the Cayce wreck discussion: On the New Haven, any operation with the signal system 'down' treated any facing-point switch as needing to be encountered at restricted speed ... no matter how long that delayed a given train ... whereas many other roads relied on other procedures short of spiking the switches involved to "provide" safety with less delay. It wouldn't surprise me to find the New Haven, or the operating crafts on it, also coming down more firmly on strict enforcement against 'expedient overspeed' in many cases.
I'd certainly have thought that any particular effort to put operating men in an evil quandary involving losing their job or seniority for "insubordination" vs. violating Federal law personally would result in clear union demands at the very next collective bargaining session.
Well put Overmod. You are correct in that the New Haven Book of Rules did require that trains running under MBS rules because of signal system failure approach facing point switches prepared to stop.
Euclid Backshop Maybe because many of us remember the 55mph national speed limit. At your age, I would think that you did, too. If that wasn't arbitrary, nothing was. Many don't know that yellow speed limit signs on curves, etc., don't have the force of law. They are merely suggestions. I do not believe that the 55 mph national highway speed limit was arbitrary either. It was chosen with much thought and deliberations as to how much time it added to trips versus how much fuel it saved. There was a lot of disagreement about these factors and many pros and cons were weighed. That sort of deliberation shows that the 55 limit was not arbitrary. Labeling railroad speed limits as arbitrary in this discussion seems to be intended to indicate that there is no practical downside to exceding them. And then it further seems to be trying to twist the facts into the notion that railroad speed limits are merely advisory rather than regulatory, similar to your example of the yellow speed limit signs on highway curves. Railroad speed limits have never been of that nature. They are absolute limits just like the maximum highway speed limits. Any exeeding of those limits violates the law in the case of highways, and violates the rules in the case of railroads.
You are correct Euclid but some on here just don't get it.
So you've never, not once in your life, gone over the speed limit?
EuclidRailroad speed limits have never been of that nature. They are absolute limits just like the maximum highway speed limits. Any exeeding of those limits violates the law in the case of highways, and violates the rules in the case of railroads.
There's a difference between law and company rules. When did railroad speed limits become a matter of federal regulation?
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
I've seen plenty of arbitrary speed limits. Mostly done by Conrail to make little towns happy. Many of those restrictions were simply removed years ago when big blue bit the big one (and crossing protection/switch timers retimed if needed).
zugmann I've seen plenty of arbitrary speed limits. Mostly done by Conrail to make little towns happy. Many of those restrictions were simply removed years ago when big blue bit the big one (and crossing protection/switch timers retimed if needed).
We have some of those too. Straight mainline track that was once allowed 60 mph went to 35 overnight.
Most of CN's branchlines out here have a speed limit of 25 mph, with 115 to 136 lb welded rail on good ties and subgrade. The track looks exactly like that on our 60 mph mainline. But having a track speed greater than 25 mph bumps you up into the next category of track classification, and the regulations then require more frequent patrols and inspections, and stricter standards for maintenance in general. CN has obviously decided that the marginally shorter running times are not worth those extra costs. All this was told to me by a Track Supervisor (Roadmaster).
But in the past many of those same branchlines were allowed 35 or 40 mph, on the same track structure they have today.
I can understand CN's rationale for complying with the regulations in this manner, but the speed limits in the regulations seem fairly arbitrary to me. Just like a highway.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Our highway speed limits are of course in kilometres per hour, with 110 being normal for divided highways. Except for Edmonton's Ring road (Anthony Henday Drive), which is 100. Tell me that's not arbitrary.
Meanwhile British Columbia raised the speed limit on the Coquihalla (of Highway Thru Hell fame) to 120 km/h, sparking another debate over speed limits.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/globalnews.ca/news/4049389/coquihalla-highway-speed-limit/amp/
I always set the cruise control at 10 km/h over the speed limit, and have never gotten a speeding ticket when doing so. But I always stick to the exact limit in school zones and other slow sections, our cops tend to be stricter in those areas.
Makes me think of railroad zone speeds vs permanent slows, etc...
EuclidI do not believe that the 55 mph national highway speed limit was arbitrary either. It was chosen with much thought and deliberations as to how much time it added to trips versus how much fuel it saved. There was a lot of disagreement about these factors and many pros and cons were weighed. That sort of deliberation shows that the 55 limit was not arbitrary.
It was arbitrary, in the sense it had nothing to do with a safe speed. The fuel saving would have been greater at a lower speed, say 50mph. After deliberation, the balance was chosen, in their opinion, to be 55mph as a suitable compromise. The reasons for that arbitrary decision are debatable, and as we have seen, since overturned. Yet working against the arbitrary 55mph limit, the current highway design specifications continued to be for speeds considerably higher. Naturally most folks tended to drive closer to the highway design speed, rather than an arbitrary low one.
Highways depend primarily on posted signs to indicate local speed limits, which can and do change up and down frequently along many roads. The railroads depend more on printed material, either in the employees timetables or daily bulletins and train orders, often supplemented by speed signs as a reminder. Too long a list presents its own risks of confusion; could that have contributed to this accident? For brevity's sake a shorter section that may be good for a faster speed is ignored. The potential may only be useable by a passenger train, with a long freight restricted because one end or the other is always in the slower speed zone, or at least with insufficient distance for meaningful acceleration. But an experienced engineer trying to make up a little time will be aware of it.
A railroad superintendent will never order or ask a train crew to exceed the speed limit. In the past, however, he would not consider running faster in an area both he and the train crew knew was capable of the higher speed a problem requiring disciplinary action. That was tacitly understood by both parties and trains routinely operated safely.
BaltACDToday's railroads have their FRA mandated track maintenance standards for various speeds and commodities. I have no idea what if any speed standards the railroads applied to their tracks 'back in the day'. Remember 'back in the day' MILW had their famous 90 MPH slow zones.
Speaking of the former Milwaukee Road and arbitrary railroad speed limits....
What does it take to lift a former yard limit speed limitation when the yard has either been since ripped up, reduced significantly in operation. I see CP still following some of Milwaukee's former yard limit speed reductions and well in some places there is no yard anymore or it is simply buried under weeds and no longer functioning. Who is responsible for changing the speed limits back?
Backshop So you've never, not once in your life, gone over the speed limit?
In my car yes. While operating a train NEVER.
243129 In my car yes. While operating a train NEVER.
But, but, but....... by doing that in your car, even once, you have put other drivers and pedestrians at great risk. How could you have taken on that terible responsibility and still sleep at night.
If people want to use the term, “arbitrary,” fine. But it seems to me that it is being used here in a way that sounds like trying to talk a cop out of giving you a ticket. The word, “limit” is what matters. It makes no difference whether you think the condition or style of the track or the road would allow you to drive faster without crashing. It also makes no difference whether a cop would not give you a ticket for exceeding the speed limit to some extent.
On the point of railroad speed limits and exceeding them to make up time: There seems to be some disagreement here over whether this is a rule violation. Is it or isn’t it? Or is it vague, subjective, and arbitrary?
Perhaps it is not a rule violation if ordered by a supervisor. But in the Doon, IA derailment thread, we were sternly lectured that rules cannot be suspended. Yet they can be un-enforced when conditions do not warrant them. This gets to be like the sound of one hand clapping. I was once told that you don’t have to use your turn signals if there is nobody there to signal to; just like the tree falling in the forest.
So when a supervisor orders an engineer to make up time by exceeding the speed limit, and the engineer does so; is that a rule violation on the part of the engineer or not? Or is it simply a matter of a rule enforcement being suspended? Or is it a rules violation on the part of both the engineer and the supervisor? Is it collusion? And if it also happens to be a Federal crime, how does the Fed enforce the law?
And; in this entire discussion of exceeding the speed limit to make up time, I assume the time frame context is pre-Amtrak. Is that correct? We know that Amtrak engineers would never be led to believe that speeding to make up time is okay.
And one final point regarding what Overmod mentioned above; during the pre-Amtrak era, why would the unions accept placing their enginemen in danger of life, limb, or even legal prosecution resulting from speeding to make up time?
cx500 243129 In my car yes. While operating a train NEVER. But, but, but....... by doing that in your car, even once, you have put other drivers and pedestrians at great risk. How could you have taken on that terible responsibility and still sleep at night.
Apples and oranges. We are talking about trains are we not?
Euclid If people want to use the term, “arbitrary,” fine. But it seems to me that it is being used here in a way that sounds like trying to talk a cop out of giving you a ticket. The word, “limit” is what matters. It makes no difference whether you think the condition or style of the track or the road would allow you to drive faster without crashing. It also makes no difference whether a cop would not give you a ticket for exceeding the speed limit to some extent. On the point of railroad speed limits and exceeding them to make up time: There seems to be some disagreement here over whether this is a rule violation. Is it or isn’t it? Or is it vague, subjective, and arbitrary? Perhaps it is not a rule violation if ordered by a supervisor. But in the Doon, IA derailment thread, we were sternly lectured that rules cannot be suspended. Yet they can be un-enforced when conditions do not warrant them. This gets to be like the sound of one hand clapping. I was once told that you don’t have to use your turn signals if there is nobody there to signal to; just like the tree falling in the forest. So when a supervisor orders an engineer to make up time by exceeding the speed limit, and the engineer does so; is that a rule violation on the part of the engineer or not? Or is it simply a matter of a rule enforcement being suspended? Or is it a rules violation on the part of both the engineer and the supervisor? Is it collusion? And if it also happens to be a Federal crime, how does the Fed enforce the law? And; in this entire discussion of exceeding the speed limit to make up time, I assume the time frame context is pre-Amtrak. Is that correct? We know that Amtrak engineers would never be led to believe that speeding to make up time is okay. And one final point regarding what Overmod mentioned above; during the pre-Amtrak era, why would the unions accept placing their enginemen in danger of life, limb, or even legal prosecution resulting from speeding to make up time?
The order to exceed timetable speeds should be a written order. That would solve the problem. No supervisor would do that.
EuclidSo when a supervisor orders an engineer to make up time by exceeding the speed limit, and the engineer does so; is that a rule violation on the part of the engineer or not? Or is it simply a matter of a rule enforcement being suspended? Or is it a rules violation on the part of both the engineer and the supervisor? Is it collusion? And if it also happens to be a Federal crime, how does the Fed enforce the law?
You need to look up "good faith challenge". And no supervisor is ever going to order a train crew to violate a speed limit (unless it is for an extremely special event like testing of equipment or track before the actual speed limit is raised. But those are huge deals that are rare and involve many people in many departments, and prob. FRA waivers? so that everything is ok and legal.)
And yes, rules can be suspended through various means. At least on territory I operate on. We don't all use the same books out here.
And I say it again - you can't compare modern rules and regulations to operating practices from 60 years ago!
243129Apples and oranges. We are talking about trains are we not?
No. Speed limits.
I guess that some here place a higher priority on company rules than breaking a LAW.
zugmannAnd no supervisor is ever going to order a train crew to violate a speed limit...
Today?
Insubordination.
Probably will easily get his job back with back pay, though. You have to understand how "being fired" works on the railroad. Also probably why the whole good faith challenge thing was created.
60 years ago? Probably stay fired? I don't know. I wasn't alive then.
zugmann Today? Insubordination. Probably will easily get his job back with back pay, though. You have to understand how "being fired" works on the railroad. Also probably why the whole good faith challenge thing was created. 60 years ago? Probably stay fired? I don't know. I wasn't alive then.
But in any case, to your point above where you said, "And I say it again - you can't compare modern rules and regulations to operating practices from 60 years ago!"--
My understanding of this whole topic is that we are talking about the private railroads running their own passenger trains. So we are talking about the pre-Amtrak era. Balt started this by saying that the 1950s were only 50 years beyond the CAN DO times of the Wreck of No. 97, and so the 1950s were still part of that era and not at all like this Amtrak era. Then somehow, this lurched into several different directions including automotive analogies.
My opinion is that this exceeding the speed limit to make up time had grown rather tepid since its heyday circa 1900. Engineer Brody of No. 97 bragged himself into getting the run of 97 the day of the wreck because the regular engineer was sick and train was late. Brody said, "I'll put 97 into Spencer on time; or I'll sink it into hell."
I suspect much of the tales of similar bravado in the 1950s is urban legend.
EuclidI suspect much of the tales of similar bravado in the 1950s is urban legend.
Suspect whatever you want.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.