CMStPnP n012944 Speeding is a a good way to get decertified as an engineer from the FRA, and god help you if you hit someone while doing it. No engineer that I know is going to risk his/her's livelihood so you can feel better about Amtrak's on time percentage. Thats why I said the FRA needs to take a second look. As long as it is with a 10 mph range instead of 2-3 mph, I think it's something everyone can live with. They lived with it decades ago before the FRA tightened up on everything. Used to be that napping in the cab could get you fired.....not too long ago.
n012944 Speeding is a a good way to get decertified as an engineer from the FRA, and god help you if you hit someone while doing it. No engineer that I know is going to risk his/her's livelihood so you can feel better about Amtrak's on time percentage.
Thats why I said the FRA needs to take a second look.
As long as it is with a 10 mph range instead of 2-3 mph, I think it's something everyone can live with. They lived with it decades ago before the FRA tightened up on everything.
Used to be that napping in the cab could get you fired.....not too long ago.
Exactly! Nit-picking and an extreme focus on the almost trivial while missing the bigger, more dangerous picture.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimmExactly! Nit-picking and an extreme focus on the almost trivial while missing the bigger, more dangerous picture.
BTW, Airliners speed all the time, they have specific speed limits to follow at specific altitudes in specific locations from 10,000 and below but some exceed them, turn on the local ATC and listen to the ATC telling them to slow down. Commercial busses speed as well. Both speed a lot faster than 2-3 mph over the limit......and thats the competition making up time.
CSSHEGEWISCH Safety is of the FIRST importance in the discharge of duty. Maintaining the schedule time is not. Looking the other way at relatively minor rules violations sets a poor precedent that can lead to real problems later on.
Safety is of the FIRST importance in the discharge of duty. Maintaining the schedule time is not. Looking the other way at relatively minor rules violations sets a poor precedent that can lead to real problems later on.
Exactly. Rules are written for a reason, regardless what used to be swept under the rug. Lets not forget the lawsuits that would come when a train hits a car doing 81 in a 79.
An "expensive model collector"
n012944 CSSHEGEWISCH Safety is of the FIRST importance in the discharge of duty. Maintaining the schedule time is not. Looking the other way at relatively minor rules violations sets a poor precedent that can lead to real problems later on. Exactly. Rules are written for a reason, regardless what used to be swept under the rug. Lets not forget the lawsuits that would come when a train hits a car doing 81 in a 79.
I'm not suggesting engineers should break the rules. I am saying the rules should be modified by the FRA to have more flexibility and latitude, depending on operating conditions such as weather.
Won't PTC end speeding?
n012944Exactly. Rules are written for a reason, regardless what used to be swept under the rug. Lets not forget the lawsuits that would come when a train hits a car doing 81 in a 79.
Yet other modes of transportation in this country are more flexible when it comes to "rules" and "rules enforcement". There would not be any lawsuits if the regulatory body said it was OK or implemented a plus or minus 10 mph tolerance level.......such as most Police Departments due when monitoring your speed behind the wheel.
When most consumers buy a ticket for transportation in this country they expect the mode to be as cheap as possible and as ontime as possible. They really are not paying for large amounts of schedule padding because nobody in the trade really cares about efficient operations anymore.
MidlandMike Won't PTC end speeding?
It can be made speed tolerant and it should be able to determine if passenger train or if freight train by weight and number of axles. Though I am not sure it will use axles in it's calculations on braking. It allegedly will use weight as private railway passenger car owners are being told by Amtrak they need to get their cars weighed so that PTC can determine proper braking distances of Amtrak trains.
CMStPnP n012944 Exactly. Rules are written for a reason, regardless what used to be swept under the rug. Lets not forget the lawsuits that would come when a train hits a car doing 81 in a 79. Yet other modes of transportation in this country are more flexible when it comes to "rules" and "rules enforcement". There would not be any lawsuits if the regulatory body said it was OK or implemented a plus or minus 10 mph tolerance level.......such as most Police Departments due when monitoring your speed behind the wheel.
n012944 Exactly. Rules are written for a reason, regardless what used to be swept under the rug. Lets not forget the lawsuits that would come when a train hits a car doing 81 in a 79.
The numbers speak for themsleves as to why railroads should not take the "look the other way" approach of many police officers.
http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_02_01.html_mfd
CMStPnP When most consumers buy a ticket for transportation in this country they expect the mode to be as cheap as possible and as ontime as possible.
When most consumers buy a ticket for transportation in this country they expect the mode to be as cheap as possible and as ontime as possible.
The idea of a 10mph range might work on straight (tangent) track, but it would never fly on curved track (actually, it might fly as the train sails off of the tracks). The Vmax equation for proper curve elevation gets really tight on this.
For example, on a 2 degree curve, going from 50mph to 60mph takes you from a minimum elevation of 0.5" to 2.0". On a 4 degree curve, going from 35 mph to 45 mph takes you from a minimum of 0.5" elevation to 3" of minimum elevation. There is a great deal of elevation change required for just a small change in speed on curves. It's physics calling the shots.
bartman-tn The idea of a 10mph range might work on straight (tangent) track, but it would never fly on curved track (actually, it might fly as the train sails off of the tracks). The Vmax equation for proper curve elevation gets really tight on this. For example, on a 2 degree curve, going from 50mph to 60mph takes you from a minimum elevation of 0.5" to 2.0". On a 4 degree curve, going from 35 mph to 45 mph takes you from a minimum of 0.5" elevation to 3" of minimum elevation. There is a great deal of elevation change required for just a small change in speed on curves. It's physics calling the shots.
Yeah that argument falls apart pretty quickly.....
So given the logic of your post there should be a 10 mph restriction on every CPR curve between Milwaukee and the Twin Cities because the difference between passenger and freight train limits on most of that line is 10-15 mph. Or is the argument your making is all the curves are speed engineered for one Amtrak train a day and they are only speed engineered to the max Amtrak speed........which I also find difficult to believe because some of the curves on that line are not even elevated.
The first post did not specify a 10-15 MPH speed restriction on every curve. He did say that a fudge factor of 10 MPH may be tolerable on tangent track but was unacceptable on a curve restriction of any speed.
Thanks CSSHEGEWISCH, it is obvious that you understand the basics of track and speed, but comments like "Yeah that argument falls apart pretty quickly....." clearly demonstrates a lack of understanding of the very basics of track engineering and speed by others. If a curve is set for a maximum speed, it is elevated to allow that speed, with a few miles per hour of safety built in due to the Vmax formula and often by adding a bit more elevation (often by using 2" in the Vmax equation instead of 3" for Eu). The idea of allowing crews to go 10 or 15 mph more than the posted speed (as suggested by some) is what causes trains to flip off of curves. You can always go slower, but you never want to go faster. I have cleaned up enough overspeed derailments across the country to know, and have investigated others - both passenger and freight. Over the years, we've taken several trains to Pueblo and filmed them at different speeds and have demonstrated that just a few miles per hour can be the difference between a safe trip around a curve and derailing. In fact, that is how much of the Track Safety Standards has been created, heavy testing. I don't agree with all of the details of every rule, but speed in curves is one where I am very paranoid.
It is mentioned that the track has different speeds for freight and passenger. Sure it does, at least on tanget tracks due to the track classes (engineering standards), but the Vmax applies to every type of train. You may find a curve listed for 60mph for passenger and 40mph for freight, but the curve is elevated for the 60mph. The freight trains will wear the low rail heavily while the passenger will put most of its force on the high rail. Some railroads slow freights a bit on curves due to high loads, but the max speed still exists. Some railroads also worry about too slow of speed due to the extra force on the low rail. Even worse is stopping a train on a curve and then starting back up. This can lead to stringlining a train - pulling off to the inside of the curve.
In some cases, passenger equipment is tested and rated at a higher Eu which allows more speed with less elevation, but that is for specially built and tested trains that provide some of the elevation or tilting. That is how a bit more speed is gained with the Talgos and similar passenger equipment.
If anyone wants to know more, I'm teaching a week-long workshop on railroad track engineering and how to inspect and repair for safe train operations. I've been teaching them for 25 years to the general public (more than 400 rail operations so far), and for more than a decade before that while working for and managing railroads.
Just to be clear on this your saying this applies to existing curves with a speed restriction on them......correct? Without a speed restriction on the curve lower than the 10 mph overage, it's not an issue......correct?
So it only changes the proposal in limiting the time recovery to specific portions of track........it doesn't eliminate the proposal altogether as not viable. Again, I am having problems why we need to apply the most restrictive speed to all track without exception.
CSSHEGEWISCH but was unacceptable on a curve restriction of any speed.
I did not see that in his post, only about how trains are limited on curves. So I guess my mistake was the presumption the train operator has independent thinking ability to rationalize this out. Perhaps I should have planned for a robot at the controls and engineer PTC to over-ride the engineers independent decision making on some stretches of track to make the proposal safer.............oh snap!!!
I think with slow orders you would also want universal observance of speed.
I guess it is the railway culture that I have to be 100% precise here. I think in this day and age that is a little silly but I have been in strong rules based environments where people get institutionalized too much to rules that when it comes to relying on judgement they have issues making judgement calls. The military is one example that comes to mind.
So i guess that also partially explains some observable driving habits I see by some drivers on the freeways when the county or state cannot afford to erect restrictive signs along the right of way.....heh-heh.
Absolute rules with zero latitude are designed for certain targets. From what I have heard from several retired railroaders about behaviors, increasing automation is likely in the not too distant future for most operations.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.