zugmann BucyrusI don't know. Let's say any kind of systems. I am just asking whether PTC gives the biggest bang for the buck compared to other approaches for preventing accidents.Can a question like that be answered?
BucyrusI don't know. Let's say any kind of systems. I am just asking whether PTC gives the biggest bang for the buck compared to other approaches for preventing accidents.
Yes, I think it can be answered by anybody who knows the answer. I think I recall reading somewhere about somebody making the claim that the money could be more effective if spent on measures other than the mandated PTC proscription. So I thought I would ask here.
Was the law vague enough that FRA did not have to issue such draconian REGs ? I have often thought that a modified version of ATS would work almost as well. ATS could be a 4 aspect system: --- Clear, approach , restricting, stop. ? That way the many signal aspects that are displayed on various RR line side signals could be still used. ?
As another poster said " GPS " is not the end all. I am worried that if for some reason GPS goes down or cannot provide precise location information. Location requires at least 5 sattelites in view and a prediction that it will be available at destination time ( airline requirement ). If it goes down for any length of time people will die --- probably not RRs if they still have lineside signals.
It will prevent head-on/rear-end & T-bone collisions.
It won't prevent dreails or crossing accidents.
How about 'positive driver control'?
Norm
Bucyrus I don't know. Let's say any kind of systems. I am just asking whether PTC gives the biggest bang for the buck compared to other approaches for preventing accidents.
I don't know. Let's say any kind of systems. I am just asking whether PTC gives the biggest bang for the buck compared to other approaches for preventing accidents.
Can a question like that be answered?
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
zugmann Bucyrus BroadwayLion Is PTC going to stop many accidents? Yes. Could the money spent on PTC stop more accidents than PTC if the money were spent on a systems other than PTC? What kind of systems?
Bucyrus BroadwayLion Is PTC going to stop many accidents? Yes. Could the money spent on PTC stop more accidents than PTC if the money were spent on a systems other than PTC?
BroadwayLion Is PTC going to stop many accidents? Yes.
Is PTC going to stop many accidents? Yes.
Could the money spent on PTC stop more accidents than PTC if the money were spent on a systems other than PTC?
What kind of systems?
BucyrusCould the money spent on PTC stop more accidents than PTC if the money were spent on a systems other than PTC?
Yes, it will. After all it is just a step along the way to full automation of the main lines.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
BroadwayLion a fridge full of diet Dr. Pepper
a fridge full of diet Dr. Pepper
In case we run out of the blue stuff for the toilets?
Will it stop all accidents? No.
Will crews still fall asleep? Yes
BUT, wouldn't you rather be stopped by this than by running into a train in front of you?
Every little bit helps.Having it does not allow crews to go to sleep.
But LION thinks that both the Conductor AND the Engineer should have their own alerters. They cannot reset each others alerter.
LION thinks they should have a kitchen with a fridge full of diet Dr. Pepper and ham sandwiches.
It seems that many conductors are also qualified as engineers, they should both have a full set of controls.
mudchickenGPS and computers (black box technology) are not quite the panacea that the uninformed think it is. Just listed to somebody complain about interuptions to their XM- radio in a garage and just managed to stifle a big guffaw..
Sorry, your safety critical system just had to reboot!
All I can think about was all the heartache and pain Conrail went through with Harmon just to get a functioning Ultracab to the market....
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
BucyrusHow does one predict what the benefit will be without knowing the cost of the accidents that would have occurred without PTC?
Probability using historical data. Very doable.
BucyrusHow does one predict what the cost will be when the R&D has not been entirely completed?
Comparable efforts. This is not a moon shot. Also very doable.
BucyrusWhy is it a statutory requirement if the cost exceeds the benefit?
None. The law is what it is.
BucyrusWhat is the measured quantification of the benefit?
The standards of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs are used.
oltmannd It is called Positive Train Control, and it is a statutory requirement, and the Department of Transportation had to issue it as a matter of law even though the monetizable benefits are lower than the monetizable costs.
It is called Positive Train Control, and it is a statutory requirement, and the Department of Transportation had to issue it as a matter of law even though the monetizable benefits are lower than the monetizable costs.
How does one predict what the benefit will be without knowing the cost of the accidents that would have occurred without PTC?
How does one predict what the cost will be when the R&D has not been entirely completed?
Why is it a statutory requirement if the cost exceeds the benefit?
What is the measured quantification of the benefit?
LION has positive train control on his layout.
If one train runs into the back of another one it positively stops!
oltmannd oltmanndSo, why didn't the RRs fight against it harder? I have a couple of thoughts. What are yours? The RRs may be "banking" their political capital for the re-regulation wars....
oltmanndSo, why didn't the RRs fight against it harder? I have a couple of thoughts. What are yours?
The RRs may be "banking" their political capital for the re-regulation wars....
How about, that at the end of the day, the equipment needed for PTC will benefit the RRs in other ways such as train handling advice to save fuel, easily increase capacity in dark territory, provide platform for "intelligent" trains (see p 20 of July Trains). Perhaps the current hassle and cost really isn't so bad in the net. The RRs may be "banking" their political capital for the re-regulation wars....
From a recent G. Will column:
"
Before returning to Harvard Law School, Cass Sunstein was Barack Obama’s administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, measuring the benefits of regulations against their costs. Testifying to a House subcommittee on Jan. 26, 2011, Sunstein was asked if he could identify an administration regulation whose ―benefits have not justified the cost.‖ He replied:―There is only one big one that comes to mind. It is called Positive Train Control, and it is a statutory requirement, and the Department of Transportation had to issue it as a matter of law even though the monetizable benefits are lower than the monetizable costs. There aren’t a lot like that.‖Concerning Sunstein’s sanguine"
So, why didn't the RRs fight against it harder? I have a couple of thoughts. What are yours?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.