Lower Montauk Division Discussion

Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.

Moderator: Liquidcamphor

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby freightguy » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:42 pm

There should be no code down there if the ASC cut out is still on the Lower Montauk near Richmond Hill. The trains would have the speed control cut out before entering the non speed controlled territory. A lot of freights and passenger trains rolled along at more then 40 MPH before it reduced to that secondary track. Though I heard stories of people forgetting to cutout the ASC and it was a much longer ride
Signed off
freightguy
 
Posts: 1136
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:18 pm
Location: Medford, NY

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby EM2000 » Tue Oct 01, 2013 3:10 am

The Lower Montauk has already been made a secondary, and with that all of the signals were taken out of service.
EM2000
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:43 pm

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby Jersey_Mike » Tue Oct 01, 2013 7:29 am

Doc Emmet Brown wrote:I still think Its a safety Issue. double track with crossovers and Yards along the way, all it would take is a slight human error for something to happen, or a car to roll out of the yard. Look what Happened when the Engine rolled out a few years ago. Also, they are not abandoning the line, they are just proposing removing the signals.
Newsday may say the limit will be 10, but lets face it the engine will have a 15 code with no signals, and most will be doing 15. Its all about, no passengers, who cares about the safety of the train crews. Hope someone does not rip open a tanker car filled with toxic chemicals or propane in that area of queens, its heavily populated.
Look in the timetable special instructions about operating with a speed failure. The speed limit is higher, when there is an engine on the operating end, as opposed to a cab car. Ask yourselves why? Because the Engine provides more of a barrier for the public. Guess the Engineer is expendable. The FRA should smack this one down, if they have a clue.
Since its years ago and everyone involved is retired or passed, Ill share a story about operations down there.
I was the Conductor On an Westbound heading into fresh pond from the east end. We got permission to use the crossover to go into the yard. Just as the rear end of my train cleared, and I was throwing the switches back. Here comes a Passenger train out of LIC around the bend at restricted speed, because the block signal was down due to the switch being opened.
The Engineer of the eastbound reamed me out, with some choice words. I said, hey I had permission don't look at me.. He said.. geez you got to be (bleep) ing me!
All it takes is a small mistake.


Are you serious? Tens of thousands of miles of previously signaled railroad have been downgraded over the years as traffic patterns change. The railroad is not some make-work charity. If you want a government job digging and filling in holes move back to Russia, but in the real world even public sector railroads need to be efficient and signaling a line where trains move at walking speed is simply ridiculous.
Jersey_Mike
 
Posts: 4689
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:39 am
Location: CHARLES aka B&P JCT MP 95.9

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby Doc Emmet Brown » Tue Oct 01, 2013 4:20 pm

Ok if you want to play the putdown game and make go back to russia comments, thats up to you. I will not lower myself to your standards.
I feel it is an unsafe situation. Just be ready when the I told you so time comes, sooner or later it will.
Yeah lets run freights down there with no signaling.. wheeee...
Image

Image

Image
Marty, It runs on steam!
User avatar
Doc Emmet Brown
 
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:22 pm
Location: Hill Valley, (Or somewhere in Time)

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby my2cents » Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:22 pm

Jersey,
Then why is the railroad looking to get a waiver if the signals are out already? Did they take the signals out then ask for the waiver?
my2cents
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:35 am

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby Jersey_Mike » Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:13 am

my2cents wrote:Jersey,
Then why is the railroad looking to get a waiver if the signals are out already? Did they take the signals out then ask for the waiver?


If you mean Out of Service that term actually means they are still there, but not considered in service. They might still even be lit, but cannot govern train movements. The NYA/LIRR are probably not applying for a waiver, but to abandon the signaling system. Any change in a line's installed safety equipment requires FRA approval, but with only freight running over the line at low speed where is no requirement for a signaling system to be in place that would then need a regulation to be waived.
Jersey_Mike
 
Posts: 4689
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:39 am
Location: CHARLES aka B&P JCT MP 95.9

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby Tadman » Thu Oct 03, 2013 11:51 am

It is insanity, and it is a safety hazard, but the insanity is being caused by a mindless group of regulators pushing for PTC. Blanket unfunded mandates rarely work right. PTC is being mandated mostly because of chatsworth, where an engineer neglected his duty and texted others. PTC will not solve this problem, only dilligent management will. In fact, PTC is a false safety blanket that already could've killed quite a few people in last year's Niles, MI, Amtrak accident. A speeding train was given the wrong signal and sped into a tiny siding and narrowly missed some hoppers. "Oh but we have PTC that can never happen"...

Yeah right. It's insanity.

And so you have BS workarounds like making long stretches of main into a "yard" to get around PTC. Bad ideas are born to get around even worse ideas.
Tadman
 
Posts: 8446
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 10:21 am
Location: Michigan

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby Head-end View » Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:47 pm

The Long Island Railroad installed its Automatic Speed Control system as a result of the two horrendous crashes they had in 1950. The rest of the railroad industry has had enough similar incidents through the years that such backup systems should have been installed on all main lines nationwide a long time ago. If the industry as a whole had taken heed as LIRR did, the Chatsworth accident and many others may well have been prevented. Chatsworth was apparently the last straw. The federal government took the knee-jerk action that it did because the railroad industry failed to do so on its own over the last 50 years. So now railroads are stuck with the consequences of their own failure to take care of business, back when they had so many years to do it.
Head-end View
 
Posts: 2335
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: The second row on a SEPTA Silverliner V

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby jayrmli » Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:23 pm

While I don't like to see the signals go, as Jersey Mike pointed out, this is nothing out of the ordinary. The line is not considered main track anymore, but a secondary track. The speed has been reduced to 10 MPH and is now freight only. There is no need for the signals anymore if that is the case. To remove them, federal law requires that you petition for their removal.

Times change. At one time the Bay Ridge branch was a 45MPH line four tracks wide in spots and powered by overhead catenary. Today, it's a single track secondary line with no signaling and a speed of 10MPH. Now the Lower Montauk will be the same.
Check out my website about railfanning in the Northeast!

http://www.northeastrailfans.com
jayrmli
 
Posts: 1755
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 3:23 pm
Location: Moriches, NY

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby Doc Emmet Brown » Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:54 am

Yep and when engine 160 took a stroll what happened? secondary track, no crossing protection, how many people were hurt? Hmmm.
Insanity, accident waiting to happen.. It may take time, same with the TMI on the tunnels... watch..Just a matter of time..
Secondary track with no signals... 10 miles per hour.. yeah that wil work..this happened on such a track..uhhh ok
Image
Marty, It runs on steam!
User avatar
Doc Emmet Brown
 
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:22 pm
Location: Hill Valley, (Or somewhere in Time)

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby NYCrails » Fri Oct 04, 2013 7:46 am

It all comes down to the RR nitpicking and playing cheap around the corners so they don't have to pay signalmen and other M of W departments from maintaining Lower Montauk. Nothing else. Why pay them when you can hire more managers and directors.
NYCrails
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 1:38 pm
Location: Queens NY

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby Head-end View » Fri Oct 04, 2013 5:28 pm

"It may take time, same with the TMI on the tunnels... watch..Just a matter of time.."

Doc, what is TMI ?
Head-end View
 
Posts: 2335
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: The second row on a SEPTA Silverliner V

Re: End of position light signals on Lower Montauk

Postby Doc Emmet Brown » Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:03 am

TMI= Too Much Information...as in another thread..
Marty, It runs on steam!
User avatar
Doc Emmet Brown
 
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:22 pm
Location: Hill Valley, (Or somewhere in Time)

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby Jeff Smith » Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:28 pm

Community board pushing for reactivation: Times Ledger

I honestly can't tell if they're talking about commuter rail, or light rail? It's hard to make out. They're also talking about incorporating other discontinued branches such as Bushwick and Rockaway.

CB5 officially backs Crowley’s commuter rail
...
“This commuter-rail line should be considered a part of a master plan for a new commuter rail system for the residents of Queens County,” CB 5’s recommendation read. “[The concept] would connect the Jamaica LIRR Station to the Hunters Point Terminal in Long Island City.”

The resolution noted that the proposal could be part of a larger plan with additional phases, including the reactivation of the old Rockaway Branch of the LIRR, reactivation of the Bushwick Branch of the LIRR, connection to the LIRR’s East Side Access to Grand Central Terminal, or the LIRR’s existing Penn Station Access.
...
Crowley hopes to establish a rail commuter service line on the LIRR Lower Montauk line, which carried passenger service until the late 1990s and is currently lightly used to transport freight.

“Light rail in this community could change the way we all work, where we eat, the way we play and more,” Crowley said at the CB 5 meeting.

The plan would create new passenger stations at the Atlas Park Mall in Glendale, the M train station at Metropolitan Avenue in Middle Village, the abandoned Fresh Pond Road station beneath the Metropolitan Avenue overpass, Flushing Avenue in Maspeth and the Hunters Point Terminal in Long Island City.
...
Bob Holden, a committee member, said the plan would only be feasible if it went to Jamaica and was connected to the Rockaway Line, which he said would alleviate many commuting problems on Woodhaven Boulevard.

“They need a transportation master plan,” he said. “The plan is not really a plan yet, it’s just an idea.”

Crowley anticipates each rail car will cost about $3 million. The tracks and the right-of-way—two of the most expensive pieces—have been secured for the future project, according to a Crowley spokeswoman.
...
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator
Jeff Smith
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7444
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby SwingMan » Wed Dec 23, 2015 4:26 pm

Count how many trains there are that turn in Jamaica now that very well could be doing this run, but the timing and planning just wasn't there. I don't think much of this, mainly because I don't think they know what the heck they're talking about.
SwingMan
 
Posts: 2243
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:52 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Long Island Rail Road (LIRR)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: scopelliti and 5 guests