MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Discussion relating to the operations of MTA MetroNorth Railroad including west of Hudson operations and discussion of CtDOT sponsored rail operations such as Shore Line East and the Springfield to New Haven Hartford Line

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, Jeff Smith

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby RearOfSignal » Thu Jun 06, 2013 9:36 pm

LIRR272 wrote:Why was the loco towed due to a cab signal failure? Is this common on MN? As far as I know a locomotive can run under its own power even with the cab signal cut out or inoperative but at 79 MPH.


If the cabs or ATC fail en route the train can continue to final destination. However it cannot be the lead unit to travel to get the problem fixed, if the repairs cannot be made at final destination. Train cannot depart initial terminal with inoperative cab signals.
Hurry up and wait at the signal!
User avatar
RearOfSignal
 
Posts: 2519
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:31 pm

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby LIRR272 » Fri Jun 07, 2013 12:05 pm

DutchRailnut wrote:Cab signal failure gives max speed of 59 mph and slow speed(15 mph) through each interlocking.


Under NORAC Rule 554, the speed can be 40 MPH and Rule 556 is 79 MPH. So is this a MN operating rule?

If the cabs or ATC fail en route the train can continue to final destination. However it cannot be the lead unit to travel to get the problem fixed, if the repairs cannot be made at final destination. Train cannot depart initial terminal with inoperative cab signals

I understand and know part of above statement. Please educate me on something: If the lead unit fails en route, it can't be leading if there are no Mechanical forces to repair the issue at its destination? Which facility on MN doesn't have Mechanical personnel to fix the issue such as an ATC, cab signal or both or even ACSES?

I know MN doesn't fall under NORAC, but if it did would Rule 551 Part D come into play?
LIRR272
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Elmont NY

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby truck6018 » Fri Jun 07, 2013 1:35 pm

The quote from Dutch is part of out operating rule. To be exact, it's restricted speed from the point of failure to the next interlocking signal. As long as an absolute block signal is displayed it's slow speed with in interlocking limits and MAS not exceeding 59 MPH outside of interlocking limits prepared to stop at the next interlocking signal.

It would be unfair to compare MNRR's failed train rules to NORAC's as there is a completely different set of rules pertaining not just to this but to other operating conditions such as signals. MNRR's wayside signals do not give the condition of the block ahead the way NORAC's does.

As far as turns, MNRR's operating rules clearly state that when a train control apparatus failure has occurred, the train control apparatus on that engine will be considered inoperative until repaired and tested by a qualified mechanical person. With that said, if a train has a train control failure running south to GCT, by rule it can turn and run as a train to a yard for repair as that failed car will no longer be on the leading end. At that point the defective car has to be repaired or swapped prior to running south again.
truck6018
 
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:31 pm

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby LIRR272 » Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:23 pm

Truck, thanks fro the clarification. I didn't mean to compare the two operating rules, but was trying to understand what MN does in these cases. However based on your explanation, I still do not understand why an engine would have to towed due to a cab signal failure unless the train was leaving its initial terminal and there was no time to swap out the locomotive. In which case the lead unit would be capped with another loco. Is that the case with this incident?
LIRR272
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Elmont NY

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby DutchRailnut » Fri Jun 07, 2013 6:26 pm

Engine 204 had to be towed cause the newly installed ACSES system did not work as was suppose to.
It has been fixed since.
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21200
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby LIRR272 » Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:21 pm

Dutch,

Thanks for the info. Now I have more questions:

1) Is this an MN rule where if the ACSES system doesn't work, the lead unit can't continue?
2) Where is the ACSES system active on MN territory?
LIRR272
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Elmont NY

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby RearOfSignal » Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:24 pm

LIRR272 wrote:

Truck, thanks fro the clarification. I didn't mean to compare the two operating rules, but was trying to understand what MN does in these cases. However based on your explanation, I still do not understand why an engine would have to towed due to a cab signal failure unless the train was leaving its initial terminal and there was no time to swap out the locomotive. In which case the lead unit would be capped with another loco. Is that the case with this incident?


Equipment with "head end" failures get towed all the time. Maybe they did swap the engine and the tow was part of a deadhead move later in the day. The person who posted about the 204 being towed didn't specify where it was being towed from or under what conditions. Just because the train made it to a terminal doesn't mean the problem could be fixed there. Besides cab signal/ ATC failure covers a wide area of things that can break and thus need to be fixed. It would be a bad idea to run passenger equipment with a bad end -even if its not the lead end, because in case the crew needs to change ends for whatever reason they would be unable to run with the bad cab signals from that end.
Hurry up and wait at the signal!
User avatar
RearOfSignal
 
Posts: 2519
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:31 pm

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby RearOfSignal » Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:25 pm

LIRR272 wrote:1) Is this an MN rule where if the ACSES system doesn't work, the lead unit can't continue?
2) Where is the ACSES system active on MN territory?


There is no ACSES cut in anywhere on MNR yet, wayside or on-board, thus there are no rules specifically governing ACSES failures.
Hurry up and wait at the signal!
User avatar
RearOfSignal
 
Posts: 2519
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:31 pm

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby DutchRailnut » Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:26 pm

No ACSES anywhere on MNCR yet. Engine 204 was mis-wired and could not be properly cut out.
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21200
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby LIRR272 » Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:57 pm

Now I understand. Thanks. You can ignore the PM I sent you.
LIRR272
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Elmont NY

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby LIRR272 » Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:05 pm

RearOfSignal wrote:
LIRR272 wrote:

Truck, thanks fro the clarification. I didn't mean to compare the two operating rules, but was trying to understand what MN does in these cases. However based on your explanation, I still do not understand why an engine would have to towed due to a cab signal failure unless the train was leaving its initial terminal and there was no time to swap out the locomotive. In which case the lead unit would be capped with another loco. Is that the case with this incident?


Equipment with "head end" failures get towed all the time. Maybe they did swap the engine and the tow was part of a deadhead move later in the day. The person who posted about the 204 being towed didn't specify where it was being towed from or under what conditions. Just because the train made it to a terminal doesn't mean the problem could be fixed there. Besides cab signal/ ATC failure covers a wide area of things that can break and thus need to be fixed. It would be a bad idea to run passenger equipment with a bad end -even if its not the lead end, because in case the crew needs to change ends for whatever reason they would be unable to run with the bad cab signals from that end.


Rear of Signals,

The reference to the train being towed came from another poster. So to me it wasn't clear why a revenue train was towed due to a cab signal failure. As it has been brought there are different operating rules for every railroad. Additionally, towing a locomotive didn't register as beign a deadhead move. I was not encouraging that the unit be used in servie with a defective cab signal system. On the railroad I work for a train control failure en route and by rule can be moved under Rule 556 to the end point where it has to be repaired. If unable to, then the unit is deadheaded to another repair facility. Very similar situation.

Thanks.
LIRR272
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Elmont NY

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby RearOfSignal » Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:53 pm

MNR rules differ because MNR does not utilize intermediate wayside signals. Even in such a case under NORAC rules, rule 556 would still not apply. Movement is only authorized to next forward repair point. Of course with a push pull train that shouldn't be a problem unless both ends fail.
Hurry up and wait at the signal!
User avatar
RearOfSignal
 
Posts: 2519
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:31 pm

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby freightguy » Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:47 pm

Written by William C. Vantuono, Editor-in-Chief
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services
8

AAR President and CEO Ed Hamberger
Association of American Railroads President and CEO Edward R. Hamberger on Wednesday, June 19, 2013 told a Senate Commerce Committee panel that, despite investments of roughly $2.8 billion since 2008 on implementing positive train control (PTC) to meet the Rail Safety Improvement Act deadline of Dec. 31, 2015, the freight railroads have determined it will not be possible to have a fully interoperable nationwide PTC system up and running by that time.
“Due to both technological and non-technological challenges that have arisen throughout the implementation process, the current 2015 deadline should be extended by at least three years, to Dec. 31, 2018, with flexibility given to the Secretary of the Department of Transportation to consider additional extensions should they be deemed necessary,” Hamberger said.

“A lot of progress toward implementing PTC has been made to date, and railroads are working extremely hard to meet the 2015 deadline, collaborating with federal regulators and suppliers all throughout the process,” Hamberger said. “There will be a lot of PTC implemented throughout the nation’s rail network by 2015, but there will not be a fully interoperable system in place by then. While the deadline is important and something we never lose sight of, it is paramount that we end up with a PTC system that allows for the safe passage of both passengers and freight.”
Signed off
freightguy
 
Posts: 1136
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:18 pm
Location: Medford, NY

PTC Contract Awarded

Postby NH2060 » Fri Nov 15, 2013 12:34 am

NH2060
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: MNRR PTC Status and Plans (ACSES)

Postby Jeff Smith » Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:22 pm

So where does MNRR stand with this? This is the last I've seen on it; it's a bit old: Courant

$1B Loan Approved To Install New Safety Feature For Metro-North

..."There are 166 million rides taken on LIRR and Metro-North annually. Installing PTC will further ensure the safety of employees and passengers alike," Sarah Feinberg, acting chief of the FRA, said in a statement.

...Metro-North and LIRR workers, outside contractors and a joint venture of Bombardier Transportation and Siemens Rail Automation are expected to install transponders along almost 600 miles of track and equipment on more than 1,400 rail cars.

"With this infusion of funding, crews will be getting to work on individual cars and along hundreds of miles of track to install state-of-the-art technology that can save lives," New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said in a statement.

The MTA has not announced a target date for positive train control to be working, and has not said how its system would work with other trains, such as those of CSX and Amtrak, that use the same rails...
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

PreviousNext

Return to MTA Metro-North Railroad and CtDOT Passenger Rail

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests