Trains.com

restricting signal questions ?

4371 views
21 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 964 posts
restricting signal questions ?
Posted by TH&B on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 7:27 AM

I am concerned about the use of restricted speed and signals for passenger trains, especialy loaded passenger trains. If a restricting signal does not gaurentee the line is clear, then I would say a passenger train should not proceed at all in those conditions. 

 

No wonder Amtrak can't run on time to a schedual when they run through sidings and past yards and even approach stations at slow unsafe restricting speeds. In blind curves or bad weather anything faster then pulling 2mph with a brake set would be unsafe.

 

The Pere marquette accident seemed to be caused by a restricting signal.  I would say if a passenger train recieves a restricting signal it should mean stop until a more favourable indication. Or if a railroad company cannot afford to let a passenger train know if the track is cleared then it shouldn't run passenger trains. It's not safe and it makes for slow trains.

 

Restricting speeds should be for in yard movements only with empty stock or on freight only lines. I can understand under rare emergnency situaltions one could use the restricting rule for a passenger train. But it shouldn't be communly used if you want to run safe and fast passenger trains.

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 7:47 AM

The Pere Marquette incident was allegedly caused by the Engineer misinterpreting a signal.  Yes, it was a restricting signal aspect, but apparently he confused the indication with a more favorable aspect that is used in his regular territory.

A restricting signal is a great tool to keep a train moving when circumstances prohibit normal operations.  When the definition of a restricting signal (or any signal, for that matter) is followed explicitly, there are no problems.

And yes, sometimes 2mph is all one can operate at if visibility is greatly reduced.  Heck, I've even run a train at restricted speed with the conductor walking ahead of the train because the fog was so incredibly thick.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 10:35 AM

Properly operating at Restricted speed is not unsafe.  Improper opearation at restricted speed is.

When you involve humans in any process, you introduce the risk of human errors.  There is risk in everything we do.  Risk must be minimized but it is difficult to eliminate it.  Even computers can cause errors if not programmed properly or if a mechanical failure occurs.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,880 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 1:29 PM
For any railroad to use a red over yellow as a restricting signal into a siding is ridiculous. CSX where I am uses either A lunar signal or a flashing red to denote a restricting signal. That appears to be much more logical. And safer. No additional signal heads either; only reprograming the signal logic. Does anyone know what the NOROC rules call for. Isn't that at least somewhat a standard?
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,926 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 2:34 PM

NORAC Rule 290 - Restricting:  (click on the image to enlarge so you can read it)

Rule 291 is stop and proceed.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 2,849 posts
Posted by wabash1 on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 2:58 PM

 blue streak 1 wrote:
For any railroad to use a red over yellow as a restricting signal into a siding is ridiculous. CSX where I am uses either A lunar signal or a flashing red to denote a restricting signal. That appears to be much more logical. And safer. No additional signal heads either; only reprograming the signal logic. Does anyone know what the NOROC rules call for. Isn't that at least somewhat a standard?

A much more logical signal? yea right It dont matter what you use if you are qualified on that line of road then you run according to the meanings of those signals there is nothing wrong with the red over yellow for restricting. its better than most other signals ive seen.

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 4:10 PM

Deja vu!

Did something happen in the news recently to prompt this rehash of a subject beaten to death in two or three previous threads?

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: heart of the Pere Marquette
  • 847 posts
Posted by J. Edgar on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 4:23 PM

the ex Pere Marquette-C&O-CSX uses a red-over-yellow aspect for the restricting indication....rulebook says reduce speed to restricted speed which is not to exceed 15 mph prepared to stop short of obstruction bad switch\derail or other on track equipment etc etc.....makes sense to me....if your moving from signalled track to an unsignaled siding on your way thru a yard to get to the Passenger station you would need something to govern your movement...and keep your eyes open...example.....d708 out of Ensel Yd Lansing MI was called to go around the wye at Elmdale onto what is left of a long abandoned branch to pull stored cars stashed there about 3 years before......we pulled the cars cuz they was rippin up the track....well off the siding instead of a slow clear or slow approach you get a restricting and thats the last signal you see until you come back to the approach signal...... its like a all weather signal to govern your movment past the signal on unsignalled track......red-over-yellow  pink-over-mauve...colors dont realy matter its the rules you follow

i love the smell of coal smoke in the morning Photobucket
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 964 posts
Posted by TH&B on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 5:16 PM
I brought this up because passenger trains traveling at restricted speed is not a compedive mode of transport, speed wise.


I'm also questioning the safety of restricting speed. The PM crash was just what came to mind. Why would you even send a loaded passenger train down a busy track with trains on adjacent tracks blocking any view in curves ? What is the point in having a signal that just basicaly indicates the track is unsafe but proceed anyways with a train full of passengers that can't stop so easily. It could even be broken rail !





  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: heart of the Pere Marquette
  • 847 posts
Posted by J. Edgar on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 5:36 PM

well.....with that logic no passenger train would travel on any track with another track or train near it....not practicle....RR's have yards and wide open spaces and bad track good track and curves and fast trains and slow trains good signals and bad signals.....and all in all RR's in America are pretty darn safe considering...ton-miles\passenger-miles etc etc....and from what ive seen both as a railfan and railroader there is a sense of pride in safety among operating employees that is umatched in any other industry...running a passenger train down "bad track on a curve in the dead of night in a snowstorm in a busy yard" on  a restricting signal happens ever day....think about it....a modern amtrak passenger train moving at 15 mph can stop in about 50 feet (1 car length)...moving at 75 maybe a lil more....im thinkin 15 is safer then 75....and yes it could be a broken rail they do break which is why the signal; indication tells ya to look where your going....competitive?....lol Amtrak compete? with who or what?....well anyway most restricting signals Amtrak is going to see is in yards cities and towns....where they should be moving slow anyway

 

 p.s.   love the Polara

i love the smell of coal smoke in the morning Photobucket
  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,267 posts
Posted by n012944 on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 5:39 PM

Stopped is not going to get you there that quickly either!  

Restricted speed=A speed that will permit stopping within one-half range of vision.  It will also permit stopping short of a train, a car, an obstruction, a stop signal, a derail or an improperly lined switch.  It must permit looking out for broken rail.  It will not exceed 15 mph.

As long as this rule is followed, nothing that you mention matters, but that is one of those funny thing about railroading. For the most part when you follow the rules you will be O.K.  It is when rules don't get followed that bad things start to happen.

An "expensive model collector"

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,926 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 5:48 PM

I brought this up because passenger trains traveling at restricted speed is not a competive mode of transport, speed wise.

Neither is sitting in traffic, all alone in your car, but that doesn't stop people.  It would be a lot more efficient if I could pull out of my driveway, set my cruise control at 80 per and not slow down until I had to pull into my parking space at work, but that's not going to happen...


I'm also questioning the safety of restricting speed. The PM crash was just what came to mind. Why would you even send a loaded passenger train down a busy track with trains on adjacent tracks blocking any view in curves ? What is the point in having a signal that just basically indicates the track is unsafe but proceed anyways with a train full of passengers that can't stop so easily. It could even be broken rail !

You know, I think that's exactly what they had in mind.  Besides, calling for restricted speed does not mean that the track is unsafe.  It means that there is the potential.  Every time I run on our railroad, I deal with restricted speed (NORAC Rule 98).  Visibility is not limited, but we still have to follow the rule, and our limit is 5 mph, not 15 or 20.

80. MOVEMENT AT RESTRICTED SPEED

Movements made at Restricted Speed must apply the following three requirements as the method of operation:

1. Control the movement to permit stopping within one half the range of vision short of:

a. Other trains or railroad equipment occupying or fouling the track,

b. Obstructions,

c. Switches not properly lined for movement,

d. Derails set in the derailing position,

e. Any signal requiring a stop,

AND

2. Look out for broken rail and misaligned track.

AND

3. Do not exceed 20 MPH outside interlocking limits and 15 MPH within interlocking limits. This restriction applies to the entire movement, unless otherwise specified in the rule or instruction that requires Restricted Speed.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: heart of the Pere Marquette
  • 847 posts
Posted by J. Edgar on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 5:55 PM
 n012944 wrote:

.

As long as this rule is followed, nothing that you mention matters, but that is one of those funny thing about railroading. For the most part when you follow the rules you will be O.K.  It is when rules don't get followed that bad things start to happen.

.....not to sound redundant....and not wanting to kick a dead horse......its the rule....and those that follow the rule that determine how safe you are.....most RR rulebooks and such have come about after decades of learning what works and what doesnt...
i love the smell of coal smoke in the morning Photobucket
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 964 posts
Posted by TH&B on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 5:55 PM
But my point is that I don't think passenger trains should travel on track that isn't bonded, and passenger trains shouldn't travel slow either.


The restricting rule should remain but only used in very unusual circumstances, not at every meet and approaching every other yard and station. If you want people to use passenger trains they have to average a faster speed safely, all tracks were you run passenger trains should be bonded so the train can move along safely.

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: heart of the Pere Marquette
  • 847 posts
Posted by J. Edgar on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 6:04 PM
how does a passenger train get to the station platform? either in Toronto or in Pawdunk passenger trains have speed restrictions.....fact of life....and not all rail is bonded im over 40 years old and i havent lost sleep over it
i love the smell of coal smoke in the morning Photobucket
  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Ely, Nv.
  • 6,312 posts
Posted by chad thomas on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 6:52 PM

Not to be a smart a%$ but....

When you are driveing through town and see a stoplight ahead do you hold at the previous signal because there are cars in front of you?

Restricted signal allows you to advance as much as you can down the line even when signals are not showing a green every couple hundred feet. It just isn't practicle with wayside signals to "green light" you right up to the rear of the next train (or any obstruction). In reality wayside signals are spaced 2-3 miles apart out of the congested areas (could be much shorter in yard complexes or places where at grade crossings are). It's kind of like following a car on a two lane road, are you going to stop at a controlled intersection and wait till the car ahead clears the next signal or are you going to follow at restricted speed?

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Lilburn, GA
  • 966 posts
Posted by CSXDixieLine on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 7:05 PM

Restricted speed is faster than stopped.

Restricting does not mean the track is unsafe. Unsafe is when the train is not operated according to the rules as indicated by the signals.

You seem to want the signal to display red/absolute stop instead of restricting, but if a train disobeys/misinterprets a red signal and has an accident, do you then think that red/absolute stop is also unsafe? I don't understand your logic.

Jamie

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,926 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 7:10 PM

But my point is that I don't think passenger trains should travel on track that isn't bonded, and passenger trains shouldn't travel slow either.


You think the TGV and ICE run at 200 mph all of the time?  And they're on dedicated track!



The restricting rule should remain but only used in very unusual circumstances, not at every meet and approaching every other yard and station.

NORAC Rule 98 (which calls for restricted speed) is very normal around terminals (for railroads using NORAC - the other rulebooks will have something similar).  Stations along the main don't usually have such restrictions.

If you want people to use passenger trains they have to average a faster speed safely, all tracks were you run passenger trains should be bonded so the train can move along safely.
 

Passenger trains can move safely - as long as they play by the rules.

My tourist road doesn't even have signals.  We get our track authority from the dispatcher.

Your other option is something that a lot of people would like, but which isn't likely to happen any time soon - completely separate tracks for freight and passenger.

As was pointed out, rules have been developed for reasons.  In many cases, those reasons are written in blood.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: heart of the Pere Marquette
  • 847 posts
Posted by J. Edgar on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 7:22 PM
rules rules rules....and the men and women who follow them...nuff said???....Sign - Dots [#dots]
i love the smell of coal smoke in the morning Photobucket
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 8:10 PM

When you talk about "non-bonded track", it sounds like you think that the passenger train in question was diverted to a yard track or something.

It wasn't--at Englewood it crossed from one main track to the other in CTC territory (no such thing as a "wrong" main), and was sent beyond the crossing to follow a train that was a couple of miles ahead, waiting for its signals to clear.  It crossed over because the track ahead of it was occupied by another freight train moving toward it.

Now, I don't see too many options here.  Either the train did what was intended (cross over and follow), or stop and stay, possibly incurring even further delays from traffic on Metra's line crossing at Englewood.

Your options are even further reduced if you don't want your passenger train running slowly.

By persisting in this thoughtless rant you are suggesting that current and former railroaders on this forum can't operate trains safely and efficiently, or that we don't know what we're up against when we come across a Restricting signal.  I sincerely hope that you'll refer to the previous threads on the subject of this train, the track, the signals, the rules, and everything else connected with this incident, and let it rest, at least until some findings have been made public by people who are paid to find out what happened. 

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Thursday, March 6, 2008 6:11 AM
 CShaveRR wrote:

By persisting in this thoughtless rant you are suggesting that current and former railroaders on this forum can't operate trains safely and efficiently, or that we don't know what we're up against when we come across a Restricting signal.  I sincerely hope that you'll refer to the previous threads on the subject of this train, the track, the signals, the rules, and everything else connected with this incident, and let it rest, at least until some findings have been made public by people who are paid to find out what happened. 

Carl, he's just not reading, or at least not comprehending, what everyone is saying here.  He has a certain idea in his mind and apparently is not really looking for answers, he is merely looking for confirmation of his misunderstanding. Either that, or he's a troll.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,880 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, March 6, 2008 12:37 PM
All the points that have been made on this topic are valid especially those that tell what an engineer must do. Lets face it a restricting signal is the most complicated of the signals to obey and takes the most concentration. I have flown all over the world and the air traffic rules and radio statements ( with few minor exceptions) are the same in all FAA and ICAO states including light signals. The railroads need standarization throughout the US with no possibility of ambiguity especially for restricting aspects. What with the shortage of T & E throughout the US; if an old head goes TDY he may not remember what the signal aspect means where he is operating especially if fatiqued. This is a place where standarization should triumph over differences on other divisions or RR's

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

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