NJT HOBOKEN TERMINAL ACCIDENT THREAD

I wonder why we in the US don't use something a little more energy-absorbing at the end of track, instead of a giant chunk of steel or concrete. We seem to love electronic technology, but something with a bit of mechanical sophistication like the European style bumper could have at least mitigated the damage in Hoboken. See link for picture and/or look up "buffer stop" on Wikipedia: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi ... to-license" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BuddR32 wrote:Which I'm almost certain wouldn't help here at all.

The biggest problem is that track can be exempted from PTC. As long as the FRA accepts the exemptions as part of the PTC plan PTC does not have to be active in those locations. Perhaps this accident will change that attitude and force PTC to be used in terminal situations.

PTC is a concept, not a product - which is another problem with discussing PTC. Different products develop PTC in different ways. It would be like asking for a smartphone and being handed an Apple, a Samsung and a Windows phone. They are all three smartphones but they operate in similar yet different ways. The concept of PTC is found in its name - "Positive Train Control". The idea is to be in positive control of the train at all times. (Yet exemptions and limitations persist.)

PTC can be programmed to stop trains at signals. Define the bumper as a stop signal and PTC will enforce a stop at that bumper. If the system detects a train movement that would interfere with a stop at the defined mark the system would take action to enforce the stop. PTC can do this. But it is up to those implementing each system as to whether or not their PTC actually does what it could do.

(BTW: If one does not like PTC then one should not have avoidable train accidents. Every incident involving loss of control or loss of situational awareness, especially those with death and injuries involved, is an advertisement for PTC.)

swampoodle wrote:

sean3f wrote:With all the innovation around self driving cars, trains could be next. In some sense Trains may be easier to automate as they are on a fixed trajectory.

Who would you have build them? Nippon Sharyo? CAF?

sd80mac wrote:Someone posted pic few pages ago, looking down the track stub. you can see the beam run across at the top of picture. Train would climb over bumper and the platform and hit that beam.

Is this an actual beam or are we talking about the thing people keep saying is a beam but is really the back of the departures board?

Compared the temporary weekday schedule and the full schedule for the Main/Bergen line. Noted the following changes.

Off peak service is the same as the full schedule. In the morning rush, trains 1150, 50, 1252, and 1254 were dropped. 46 makes extra stops at Ramsey Main St., Glen Rock, and Radburn. 1152, and 1154 run fully local instead of going express from Radburn to Secaucus, and 1156 added stops at Broadway and Rutherford.

In the evening rush, 1263, 1357, 1269, 1271, 59, and 1171 were dropped. 1163 makes all Bergen Line stops instead of going express to Ridgewood. 1165 is normally express to Radburn and is also running fully local. 1167 and 1169 are normally express to Radburn, but 1167 is making all stops except Garfield and 1169 is skipping Garfield and Route 17. 1223 is running all the way to Suffern instead of turning at Waldwick. Normally that would result in the number being changed from a 1200 series train to 1100 series, but the kept the original number here. 51, 53, and 55 added a stop at Route 17 when their first stop after Secaucus is normally Suffern.

I'm guessing the equipment rotations also needed to change vs what they are in the full schedule. Normally train 50 is also used on 45 and 64. That would mean that the equipment from another train would have to do those trips. 46 or 54's equipment would most likely do that. 1171 was one of the trains that isn't running and it's equipment normally finishes at Suffern after that trip. They likely extended 1223 to Suffern to get the equipment back there for the night. The equipment for the last Port Jervis inbound, train 68 is normally supplied by train 59. Since 59 isn't running, the equipment from 61 would most likely handle 68.

NJ Transit is lucky they built Secaucus Junction. Had that not been built, this Hoboken accident would have been much worse for everyone.

Station will get rebuilt and safety improvements made. And hopefully more redundency in the network at busy areas.

New transportation bill should help.

no matter how you make the bumper block, s*it will happen .

Only tracks 10-17 are reopening. 1-9 will remain closed for repairs until further notice. Seems like the priority was getting service to Hoboken on lines where that is the only terminal. While only a few rush hour trains were dropped in the morning and evening rush on the Main/Bergen/Port Jervis/Pascack Valley lines, the trains running between Dover, Summit, MSU and Hoboken are largely not restored yet. Makes sense to do that because those lines have the midtown direct trains still running on a normal schedule and passengers can change to Hoboken trains at Newark or Secaucus. The lines that use the SEC lower level have Hoboken as the only terminal and thus should get most of the slots while the station is only half open.

Thanks, DutchRailNut, for the photo which appears to be from the Netherlands. Comparing the bumper in the foreground with the one hit by the train, we might be able to see how the bumper reduced some of the impact as it yielded ground. Do you know which terminal is shown in the photo?

this was a few years back in Den Haag CS (the Hague)

justalurker66 wrote:

BuddR32 wrote:Which I'm almost certain wouldn't help here at all.

PTC can be programmed to stop trains at signals. Define the bumper as a stop signal and PTC will enforce a stop at that bumper. If the system detects a train movement that would interfere with a stop at the defined mark the system would take action to enforce the stop. PTC can do this. )

Well, that means taking action BEFORE the bumper, so the train doesn't reach it, with how far depending on speed and how fast the PTC can bring the train to a halt. Which all means that normally trains will have to stop some distance before the bumper to prevent activation, and riders will have to walk farther when they get off. How far that means assuming 10 mph or 20 mph, I'll defer to the experts (and let them pick the speed).

pumpers wrote:Well, that means taking action BEFORE the bumper, so the train doesn't reach it, with how far depending on speed and how fast the PTC can bring the train to a halt. Which all means that normally trains will have to stop some distance before the bumper to prevent activation, and riders will have to walk farther when they get off. How far that means assuming 10 mph or 20 mph, I'll defer to the experts (and let them pick the speed).

An expert (a real one, not just an Internet expert) on another forum described PTC programming intended for BNSF where PTC would stop the train a safe distance before any stop signal but the train could continue to move if under 3 MPH. Such programming would allow a train to be stopped at the normal stopping points on a platform (just be under 3 MPH before where PTC would stop a 4 MPH train). Such programming would prevent accelerating from 8 MPH to 21 MPH at the platform (hence preventing an accident similar to the Hoboken event).

The engineer should be taking action before the bumper ... slowing the train to a smooth stop and not bruising the passengers. PTC would simply be making sure that the engineer was doing their job and stepping in when they are not.

actually PTC can only stop a train before a red signal like 300 feet before, as it needs a safety margin for slide, abs, etc etc etc.
but Terminals with no thru routing are basically not PTC compatible.
and even if a terminal could be made PTC compatible a train would stop 300 feet from bumper block (red signal) and to get closer would require a red/signal overide.
so not only stop but permission from dispatcher to hit red signal overide.
now with brakes just used it becomes more dangerous as brakes do not have a chance to recharge for final stop.

Perhaps this has been asked earlier, but do these trains make a safety stop? Some trains at Union Station do, some don't, so I'm not sure of what determines the use of a safety stop.

with NJT and low platforms it is usually only done during backup moves to bumper block.