Trains.com

Newswire: Positive Train Control a Waste

8830 views
70 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • 762 posts
Posted by kolechovski on Sunday, September 11, 2011 12:46 PM

"Cab signals have been around since 1920-30s?  Maybe if the roads would have slowly been upgrading their lines with cab signals and LSL/ATS through the years, there wouldn't be such a huge PTC push.  That's just my opinion, for what it is worth. "

-This makes me wonder then why the push for PTC, when instead pushing for this type of upgrade across much of the system has long been wanted, needed, and likely effective.

"Sounds like the exact same description of airbags in cars"

-Well, even having been in a wreck myself, I am familiar with airbags actually working.  The thing is, in my 3-car accident, all of us had our seatbelts on, and we had no real injuries.  To those of you who have listened to emergency responders, especially over the scanner, you know how different those calls are for people in accidents who were not wearing their seatbelts, regardless of if the airbags deployed (which they likely did).  Perhaps PTC is like a raw airbag, and cab signals and ATS are like the seatbelts that should have been used all along.

"No what will stop them from happening is when Drivers have the time to get places without rushing from place to place and a stop for meals again."

-Well, having the time is one thing as well, but even many people with the time still rush or are careless, if not aggressive drivers.  It's way more about attitude.  Of course, it's stupid for anybody to think that EBORs (whatever they are?), or anything at all, will prevent all accidents.  Now I can't assess what good EBORs might be as I don't know what they are, but it sounds that like with many things, they'll only be effective if used realistically, rather than expecting everything from them.

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Sunday, September 11, 2011 9:33 AM

The OTR industry is saying the Same thing about EBOR's why because most of our Accidents like 75-80% are not even the Truckers fault in any way shape or Form  regardless of how you cut it,  Or you will be in an accident in either a Truckstop Parking lotor a Shipper or Reciever.  when you get backed into or things like that.  Yet the FMCSA is pushing for EBORs since they think they will stop all accidents from happening.  No what will stop them from happening is when Drivers have the time to get places without rushing from place to place and a stop for meals again. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Sunday, September 11, 2011 7:48 AM

Bucyrus
 

I don’t think there is any way to put the toothpaste back in the tube now that this is rolling forward.  Whether or not it works will make no difference at all.  I doubt it will be possible to even definitively prove it works or does not work.  Wasting money does not matter to people who have the power to mandate.  And incidentally, you can bet that the cost will be at least four times the projected price. 

Sounds like the exact same description of airbags in cars.

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Saturday, September 10, 2011 5:49 PM

BaltACD

Those who drove Yugo's prefered Rolls Royce's too,

 zugmann:

 

I still like cab signals and a form of auto train stop.  Even if it is not 100% foolproof (WMATA), it sure is better than relying on a human 100% of the time.

 

 

But there are more choices than a Yugo or a Rolls.   Even if every single mile of track isn't full PTC.. there is a lot of track that (IMO) should be.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, September 10, 2011 4:36 PM

Those who drove Yugo's prefered Rolls Royce's too,

zugmann

I still like cab signals and a form of auto train stop.  Even if it is not 100% foolproof (WMATA), it sure is better than relying on a human 100% of the time.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Saturday, September 10, 2011 4:24 PM

I still like cab signals and a form of auto train stop.  Even if it is not 100% foolproof (WMATA), it sure is better than relying on a human 100% of the time.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, September 10, 2011 4:21 PM

zugmann

 BaltACD:

It flunks a cost/benefit analysis, Especially when $19B could be used on more productive safety enhancements.

 

 

Such as?

How much did Graniteville cost?

 

Measures much more cost effective than PTC would have prevented Graniteville which occurred in unsignaled territory.  A 'simple' Automatic Block Signal system would have prevented Graniteville, even with the rule failures of the local crew that tied up with the main track switch open.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Saturday, September 10, 2011 4:00 PM

BaltACD

It flunks a cost/benefit analysis, Especially when $19B could be used on more productive safety enhancements.

 

Such as?

How much did Graniteville cost?

 

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, September 10, 2011 3:58 PM

It flunks a cost/benefit analysis, Especially when $19B could be used on more productive safety enhancements.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, September 10, 2011 3:15 PM

 

I don’t think there is any way to put the toothpaste back in the tube now that this is rolling forward.  Whether or not it works will make no difference at all.  I doubt it will be possible to even definitively prove it works or does not work.  Wasting money does not matter to people who have the power to mandate.  And incidentally, you can bet that the cost will be at least four times the projected price. 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Saturday, September 10, 2011 2:55 PM

I've worked in territory with waysides only.  I've worked on lines that need track warrants/authorities.   I worked lines with cab signals.  And I've worked lines with cab signals and LSL.  Guess which I prefer?  Guess which one just about every RRer I work with prefers? 

 

Cab signals have been around since 1920-30s?  Maybe if the roads would have slowly been upgrading their lines with cab signals and LSL/ATS through the years, there wouldn't be such a huge PTC push.  That's just my opinion, for what it is worth.

 

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • 762 posts
Posted by kolechovski on Saturday, September 10, 2011 12:06 PM

http://trn.trains.com/Railroad%20News/News%20Wire/2011/09/Union%20Pacific%20boss%20positive%20train%20control%20a%20terrible%20waste.aspx

Union Pacific boss: positive train control a 'terrible waste'

Published: September 9, 2011
OMAHA, Neb. — Union Pacific Chief Executive Jim Young said the 2008 positive train control mandate is a “terrible waste of money,” Bloomberg News has reported. Young said the Obama administration should waive the requirement completely, as it’s “not proven to work.”

Congress mandated installation of the collision-avoidance technology following a collision between a freight train and a commuter train that left 25 dead. Subsequent investigation found the commuter train’s engineer passed a red signal. PTC, if working properly, would have foreseen the train’s too-fast approach to the signal and overridden the engineer, stopping the train.

Young noted that the industry estimates it’ll spend $10 billion to implement the technology, but save only $1 billion over 20 years, a “token amount.”

 

 

User Comments
 
LEONARD HENDRICKS from PENNSYLVANIA said:
Saving lives is a waste of money? We're not just talking about passengers, we're talking freight-freight collisions too!!

 

 

 

My comments...does PTC even work at all?  It essentially is a waste when it isn't working, and I heaven't heard much about this, just that there doesn't seem to be any confirmation that it works at all, and plenty of grumblings of it not working.  Sure, if it works, it may quite well be worth it for obvious reasons, but if it's marginally functional at best, would it actually be seriously problematic, besides a massive waste of $$$?  How all has PTC come along so far?

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