why new signals on old line?

[JOHN BRUCE III]

So would it even result in a drug test, then?

[BRAKIE]

JOHN BRUCE III

So would it even result in a drug test, then?

 

Yes..IIRC its mandated by the FRA after any incident.

[dehusman]

BRAKIE

 

JOHN BRUCE III

So would it even result in a drug test, then?

 

 

Yes..IIRC its mandated by the FRA after any incident.

 

 

FRA mandates drug tests after serious incidents resulting fatalities, hazmat releases and extensive property damage.  Since PTC prevents those things from happening there is no Federal requirement to do toxi testing following a penalty application.

[JOHN BRUCE III]

So basically what you had prior to the 2008 Chatsworth head-on that essentially mandated eventual PTC was Metrolink operating crews who were party animals or their enablers, as well as managers who were looking the other way. Thr political situation was that this had to be fixed, but the unions kept insisting that it was nobody's fault. Now it looks like the resolution will be that, after great expense, you can still have party animals, enablers, and AWOL supervisors running the show (and getting paid for it), but PTC will protect their jobs, since it will keep anyone from screwing up bad enough even to fail a drug test. At least, that's how it looks to me. Unless a hostler or whatever is so loaded he makes an extra hard joint at the mechanical faciliy!

[big daydreamer]

This thread has become full of random speculation.

JOHN BRUCE III

Thr political situation was that this had to be fixed, but the unions kept insisting that it was nobody's fault. Now it looks like the resolution will be that, after great expense, you can still have party animals, enablers, and AWOL supervisors running the show (and getting paid for it), but PTC will protect their jobs, since it will keep anyone from screwing up bad enough even to fail a drug test.

• The union protects its members; there is nothing surprising about that.  
• Where does it say that PTC will provent workers from failing a drug test?  
• Where does it say that PTC is designed to eliminate bad management?  

gregc

I don't believe the technology is terribly complicated compared to other systems.    If it were available today, it would be in use, so of course it needs to be developed, but I doubt entirely from scratch. 

...

One simple way of evaluating cost is to compare it to the potential savings.   How many accidents will it prevent, damage to equipment and material being shipped, cost of repairing trackage to restore service, as well as harm to people?

• What other systems are you comparing it to?  Often the biggest challenge is in making all the components work together well within the system.
• "from scratch" is a relative term.  There is always pre-existing technology going into a design, but that doesn't gaurantee easy work.  There is lots of radio and GPS equipment comercially available, but what about the software on the back office servers?  What about the PTC software in the locomotive? Would industry switches on mainline track need their own radios too? These are all questions that should be answered before the system gets put together.

Any cost/benefit evaluation will have to involve educated guesses and scope limits.  Those guesses will involve the probability of an accident and its cost (financial, environmental, or social).  I don't know how the companies do their accounting but I assume the benefit of PTC will be reducing one time accident expenses rather than reducing recurring expenses.  Then they would compare that financial benefit to the financial cost of PTC.  The environmental and social cost/benefit would work similarily.  

It is also possible to combine the different kinds of costs, but that would be too complicated to discuss here. 

[BRAKIE]

dehusman

 

BRAKIE

 

JOHN BRUCE III

So would it even result in a drug test, then?

 

 

Yes..IIRC its mandated by the FRA after any incident.

 

 

 

 

FRA mandates drug tests after serious incidents resulting fatalities, hazmat releases and extensive property damage.  Since PTC prevents those things from happening there is no Federal requirement to do toxi testing following a penalty application.

 

Dave,Just don't bet the farm you just might lose it..I suspect drug testing will continue-gotta put the blame somewhere.

[dehusman]

BRAKIE

 Dave,Just don't bet the farm you just might lose it..I suspect drug testing will continue-gotta put the blame somewhere.

 

 

There are two type of post accident toxi testing.  Federally mandated (the type you were talking about) is only done when the incident meets the federally set thresholds.  The railroad generally does not have the discretion on whether to test in those events.

 

There is also testing permitted on the railroads authority under reasonable suspicion.  That is probably the testing you meant to discuss.  It is NOT federally mandated and is done based on the judgement and policy of the railroad.

 

A PTC penalty application does NOT meet the thresholds for a Federally mandated toxi test.  I have no information whether a penalty application will trigger toxi tests under the railroad's authority.

[dehusman]

JOHN BRUCE III

So basically what you had prior to the 2008 Chatsworth head-on that essentially mandated eventual PTC was Metrolink operating crews who were party animals or their enablers, as well as managers who were looking the other way. Thr political situation was that this had to be fixed, but the unions kept insisting that it was nobody's fault. Now it looks like the resolution will be that, after great expense, you can still have party animals, enablers, and AWOL supervisors running the show (and getting paid for it), but PTC will protect their jobs, since it will keep anyone from screwing up bad enough even to fail a drug test. At least, that's how it looks to me. Unless a hostler or whatever is so loaded he makes an extra hard joint at the mechanical faciliy!

 

Nobody really knows what the penalty application frequency will be since there is no history on this type of system.  You are assuming that every time a penalty application occurs its because some catastrophic event is about to occur.  That's jumping to conclusions.  You aren't considering that there might be a penalty application for reasons other than an impending catastrophic incident.

 

A train is traveling down the railroad at 2am on a Novemeber morning.  A cold front is moving through and the temperature is dropping quickly.  It is operating on clear signals.  A rail breaks in the next block dropping the signal to stop.  Since the bock dropped to stop but the engineer hasn't seen the signal yet, the train has a penalty application to try and get the train stopped before it passes the stop signal.  Nobody is drunk, nobody is being derelict in their duty.  Nobody needs to be drug tested.

 

A train is traveling down the railroad with 85 loads, 22 empties.  Its stops at an intermediate point and sets out a block of 75 loads.  The train departs before the tonnage is updated.  The train thinks its 85/22 but its actually 10/22.  The engineer handles the train based on it being 10/22 but PTC calculates stopping distances based on 85/22 so it is expecting longer stopping distances.  PTC thinks the speed should decrease sooner than the engineer takes action and activates a penalty application.  Nobody is drunk, nobody is being derelict in their duty. Nobody needs to be drug tested.

 

Calm down.

[nbrodar]

As to the cost of PTC...my company plans to spend $1.5 to $2 BILLION (thats billion with a B) to impliment PTC.  I believe the total cost across the industry is somewhere between 10 and 15 BILLION. The entire cost of PTC is borne by the rail industry.  That's a lot of dollars that could have went to track improvements, new rolling stock, and more train crews. Those billions in cost will get passed on to the shippers, and ultimately you and I.

I saw an analysis a while ago (I can't remember if it was the FRA or the AAR) that said over the last decade PTC would have saved 12 lives.  Not 1,200, not 120, 12.  That's roughly $1 billion per life.

[BRAKIE]

dehusman

A PTC penalty application does NOT meet the thresholds for a Federally mandated toxi test. I have no information whether a penalty application will trigger toxi tests under the railroad's authority.

Well,this I do know..Make a mistake on today's railroad and you get to whiz in a jar and then stand before the man to explain why that mistake happen.

More then likely you will end up with street time or handed your walking papers even if you past the whiz test..

A lot of railroads has ARF hiding in bushes and peeking around corners trying to catch a crew in violation.

[steemtrayn]

gregc

this morning i noticed a new signal bridge on I believe the old Lehigh Valley line in Manville, NJ heading west toward Phillipsburg.  They've done without signals on this line for probably close a century.   

 

 

This line has been signalled for as long as I've known it, going back to pre-Conrail days.