Major derailment @ Spuyten Duyvil

Here's a pretty comprehensive write up on train control systems:
http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress ... n-control/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As far as straightening out the curve, there are two expensive options:
1. Tunnel under Marble Hill and Schervier Hospital (Bronx Palisades), a short stretch would be at grade and bisect JFK High. (not too much property taking)
2. Tunnel under palisades, then cross Harlem River (another draw bridge), Then more tunneling in Manhattan, and a half mile at grade (expensive real estate).

Either way would be expensive? Perhaps half a billion bucks?

Backshophoss wrote:MN and LIRR are converting slowly to ACSES type PTC,which is not as cell tower dependent as ITCS type PTC,
however,the increasing use of smartphones and tablets requires the building of cell towers to support
the bandwith they need to fuction.

Neither of them use radio frequencies the public uses. The stuff they will be using might have something that does what a cell phone does but it will be on frequencies assigned to the railroad. On their own radio transmitters.

modorney wrote:Here's a pretty comprehensive write up on train control systems:
http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress ... n-control/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for that link. Though I found this explanation a bit easier to understand, for me at least. It's somewhat less detailed but I have no clue what PTC is and parts of that were gibberish to me!

Tommy Meehan wrote:Is there any precedent to what will happen to Rockefeller? Is firing him on the table? I'm sure he's not going to be working as a locomotive engineer again but will he remained employed? Forty-six is kind of old to be starting all over. And it's not like he took out a gun and started shooting people. He made a mistake. A spectacular mistake but still just a mistake.

I don't think Mr. Rockefeller will be at the controls of a train again. If he does have some sort of medical condition that caused the "zoning out" he probably won't be able to go back into engine service due to medical reasons, and if he doesn't have some sort of medical condition...

What does Metro-North usually do with it's engineers who can no longer safely operate trains anymore due to medical reasons? (one the street?)(disability?)(desk job?)

There's some dispute if Amtrak's ACSES has all the bells and whistles of PTC. It may not be able to prevent as many accidents with track workers, for instance.

Amtrak has its own procedures for roadway workers where they must apply a supplementary shunting device (SSD) to the track to be fouled if machinery is involved and if they are fouling without machinery the SSD is optional. If the track is taken out of service a shunting barricade is used at each end of the out of service limits. It works well as if the Dispatcher or operator mistakenly removes the blocking device, the track still shows a TOL. The employee in charge must confirm a positive shunt with the dispatcher or operator. No need for the bells and whistles.

Did a lot of reading earlier. It seems to be that my answer is "railroads without cab signals were hoping to install much cheaper radio-based systems" that were less expensive than ACSES. From what I read, and it was mostly Wikipedia so I know that's not authoritative, ACSES could handle temporary track conditions (eg. Crews working) as well as anything else. I guess common sense would say that a system that has been around since 2000 uses old technology, but... Seems like it usually works pretty well.

From the sounds of Mr. Rockefeller, it would appear that even if he was allowed in the cab again, that he wouldn't want to do it. It was a traumatic event.

I do give him a lot of credit for spilling the beans with no ifs, ands, or buts about it. However, I can only imagine the trial lawyers are lining up and using that now public information for some pretty rock solid cases. It has been mentioned that while the costs of PTC are expensive, an accident can be even more. I'm sure this will cost MN at least $100 million by the time all of the lawsuits settle.

Another thing about PTC, is that like any system, nothing is foolproof. Take the WMATA accident a few years ago, where the fully automatic train operation failed and resulted in a collision. While the media and politicians will make a big deal about it, the facts of the matter are that MN is an extremely safe railroad. But no matter, people are infallible and subject to mistakes.

One thing I wonder about PTC is an alternative implementation of PTC that revolves around cameras that record the surroundings and report back what they see. While that sounds far fetched, an increasing amount of cars now have speed limit information systems being offered. Several BMW models offer them, and they aren't even that expensive. The disadvantages that are on a regular roadway, with a lack of consistent signage are much easier to overcome in a static environment like the rails. Rather than installing transponders that can easily fail, metal speed limit signs are much easier to replace and detect when they "fail."

Regarding the alerter and whether that would have helped in this situation, most of the talk has been about a penalty brake application. It has been mentioned that by the time that happens, you may have been already too far along for it to make a difference. But, we need to remember that the alerter also alerts with a high pitched sound. A distracted or zoned out engineer will probably be jolted from that sound and have that "oh sh*t" moment and take corrective action. While it might not have flat out prevented the accident, there is an order of magnitude of less destructive energy having the train dumped and jumping the rails at 50, 60 or 70 instead of 80.

alewifebp wrote:I do give him a lot of credit for spilling the beans with no ifs, ands, or buts about it. However, I can only imagine the trial lawyers are lining up and using that now public information for some pretty rock solid cases.

The initial reports of "I tried to stop but the brakes failed" have been refuted but the current leaked statements. While it is too early in the investigation to find him guilty of crimes against humanity for his actions it is also too early to exonerate him.

alewifebp wrote:It has been mentioned that while the costs of PTC are expensive, an accident can be even more. I'm sure this will cost MN at least $100 million by the time all of the lawsuits settle.

One of the reasons why PTC or an almost PTC system is not already in place nationally (not specifically Metro North) is that the bean counters doing the math have figured out that the cost of the incidents - including settlements for negligence - is less than the cost of PTC. Railroads are being brought in to this kicking and screaming in part because it will not save them money, If it saved them money they would be more cooperative.

alewifebp wrote:Another thing about PTC, is that like any system, nothing is foolproof. Take the WMATA accident a few years ago, where the fully automatic train operation failed and resulted in a collision. While the media and politicians will make a big deal about it, the facts of the matter are that MN is an extremely safe railroad. But no matter, people are infallible and subject to mistakes.

Exactly. Metro North can spend $86 million on PTC and still have an incident where the railroad is found negligent and has to pay. Politically it is hard to say that lives are not worth the money ... and up until last weekend (if I understand correctly) Metro North could say they never had a passenger fatal incident. So why bother? Saying why bother about even a single life is not politically correct.

alewifebp wrote:Regarding the alerter and whether that would have helped in this situation, most of the talk has been about a penalty brake application. It has been mentioned that by the time that happens, you may have been already too far along for it to make a difference. But, we need to remember that the alerter also alerts with a high pitched sound. A distracted or zoned out engineer will probably be jolted from that sound and have that "oh sh*t" moment and take corrective action. While it might not have flat out prevented the accident, there is an order of magnitude of less destructive energy having the train dumped and jumping the rails at 50, 60 or 70 instead of 80.

A unique sound may have helped, but "highway hypnosis" (which has been around for years - I recall it being featured on an episode of CHiPS 35 years ago) involves a series of autonomic responses. Something buzzes or beeps and you tap a button or move a control ... you can do that in your sleep - and some engineers have died responding to an alerter in their sleep.

A correct design would not dump the train (an emergency brake application that could injure passengers and shut down the railroad including adjacent tracks while the train is inspected) ... it would use normal braking to stop the train.

Designing PTC to enforce civil speeds means adding a safety margin that is probably greater than needed "just to be sure". Where a qualified engineer knows from landmarks where to start slowing for an upcoming speed restriction they are taking the responsibility for being at the appropriate speed into their own hands. If I were programming an ATC/PTC system it would be my responsibility to set the trip points ... and I'd probably set them further out than a qualified engineer - adding an additional "margin of safety" that would make sure the train stopped safely if a penalty application were needed but as a side effect would make the railroad less efficient.

If you ask me to make your railroad safe I'll make it safe ... even if it means making all of your trains run at 15 MPH and stop at every grade crossing. The balance between absolute safety and efficient operation will let your trains run faster but don't expect absolute safety.

ryanov wrote:I don't know why people keep writing stuff like this. Isn't it obvious that the $99 consumer electronics version of this is not going to be certifiable on a train, and that something that is/the process for all of that is going to be much more expensive?

A Rand McNally trucker's gps starts at $225, and has features such as curve warnings. Of course a gps unit for a train will cost more as it has to be custom programmed, but once that cost is sunk the actual hardware is the same. Railroads can't pay 10x what everyone else pays for similar gear and still be competitive. How is a gps certified for cars and trucks?

ryanov wrote:

BandA wrote:Another solution: cc: all train alerts to the conductor's cell phone/radio.

After cell phones have been found as the cause in accidents and are strictly prohibited? Don't think so.

Excuse my ingorance, but don't the train crews have radios to communicate? How about pagers? Whatever the device it should be able to receive automated emergency alerts from the cab.

The Idea of TomTom or Garmin as extra info is actually a good Idea, and I have discussed it with some supervisors, it would identify track no, speed, restriction and voice warning on changes to speed or upcoming curves.
It would also help track cars and crews identify where speed signs are to be located and provide location info.
but how could you keep all those navigation units updated everyday ??

I do think that as a result of this incident you will see a lot of new technology being used. It is almost a certainty that the FRA/NTSB will force MN to get with the times and mandate a thorough reconfiguration of how all trains operate.

justalurker66 wrote:....Metro North can spend $86 million on PTC and still have an incident...

I don't know where the figure $86 million comes from but LIRR/Metro-North are already committed to spending over $400 million to acquire a PTC system. I have read comments during the board meetings that the final cost for a fully implemented system could approach one billion dollars.

Fishrrman wrote: "Life is like a mountain railroad
With an engineer that's brave
We must make the run successful
From the cradle to the grave
Watch the fills, the curves, the tunnels
Never falter, never fail
Keep your hand upon the throttle
And your eye upon the rail

Chorus
Blessed Savior, Thou wilt guide us,
Till we reach that blissful shore,
Where the angels wait to join us
In Thy praise forevermore."

I thought about those lyrics quite a bit through the years.
That's what you have to try for, with every trip.
It's all you can do.

Certainly a 'unique' video of the work Mr. Fish notes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQ-T_tryaE0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tommy Meehan wrote:

Clean Cab wrote:...But the FCC has not yet set aside certain frequencies or OK'd the building of the radio towers needed. So it's not just a matter of the need for such a system, it's the logistics and politics that are holding up the process.

In defense of the FCC, I saw a website the other night for people in the communications business. The demand on the FCC to provide frequencies has grown enormously. So they have problems too. Some of the people were saying that assigning frequencies to PTC is not a simple matter. The quote below is from a similar site.

The radio frequency spectrum is a finite and increasingly precious world resource, and needs to be managed effectively. In particular, dependence on radio communications in one form or another has grown dramatically in recent years, and the growth in the number and variety of applications - many of them bandwidth hungry - and the huge expansion in user expectations place ever-increasing demands on the radio spectrum.

Fixed and mobile communications, sound and television broadcasting, aviation, railway and maritime transport, defense, medical electronics, emergency services, remote control and monitoring, radio astronomy and space research, as well as many other applications, all make extensive use of the radio spectrum. Link

Good find, Tommy. If anything, the description is an understatement of the demand for radio spectrum. There are estimates that if the federal government were to hold additional spectrum auctions, it would bring in billions in revenue. Here is a year old or so report to Congress by the FRA on PTC. It appears that the thinking is that spectrum would not be allocated by the FCC but rather purchased from vendors. Overall this document is very interesting and informative. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 2919,d.cWc

Grey Lady spoke on Wednesday:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/04/opini ... afety.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She notes incidents, freight and passenger, both prior and subsequent to enactment of RSIA 08.

Brief passage:

• When a Metro-North train jumped the tracks in the Bronx on Sunday morning, killing four people and injuring more than 70, it was going 82 miles per hour, on a 30 m.p.h. curve. Why it hit that horrific speed — whether because the engineer was sleeping, distracted or incapacitated, or because of some catastrophic mechanical failure — is a question for the National Transportation Safety Board, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs Metro-North, and criminal investigators and prosecutors.
  
  The question for the rest of us is why that train — and thousands of other trains in commuter and freight railroads across the country — had no automated system to slow or stop it when it ran out of control.
  
  The idea is not new. Mechanical controls to keep trains from colliding or going too fast have been federally mandated since the 1920s. The national safety board has been pleading for the use of “positive train control,” a catchall term for sophisticated automated safety systems using radios and sensors inside trains and beside tracks, since 1969.

While I've past noted that there are public troughs from which PTC will be funded for predominantly passenger lines, I have questioned if the shippers will pay for the rest and rather moving to alternate modes, such as pipelines for handling crude and 'short hauling' roads from the array of East Coast ports with Asian imports in a post-PANAMAX shipping world. The Late Randy Resor (Nellie Bly) and I always had disagreement at our face to face meet-ups with regard to the need for PTC, for he had done much work regarding such when he was in the private sector.

With Goodwell, Red Oak, and now Spuyten Duyvil, along with others not immediately coming to mind, I am 'beginning to believe' in the need for PTC on any lines handling any volume of traffic; class of service notwithstanding. While RSIA 08 was enacted by an unpopular lame duck president who neither knew nor cared what he was signing, RSIA 08 may well prove to be 'good law'.

Randy is looking down with pride that 'he did good' while down here.