New Rule 562 Cab Signals on The RRD Mainline

Hello Everyone, Im an engineer on the railroad and I really have to say I hate the new cab signals on the mainline from Wayne Jct to Jenkin but soon to be all the way up to Dale and from what Im gathering eventually the entire Reading side. Rule 562 is Cab signals with no waysides except at interlockings. I love cab signals but not the way Septa has the system done up. You could be cruising along at track speed from jenkin to Fern Rock with no stops and then all of a sudden north of Melrose Park yuor cabs drop from a clear to approach meduim because you dont have the signal at Tabor Jct. Tabor jct is the interlocking at the north end of Fer Rock Station. After you throw on your brakes to suppress the penalty then all of a sudden the cabs come back up. Ok now you knock off the brakes and try to pick up speed again and your on the straightaway into Fern Rock and your cabs drop again because you dont have the signal at Newtown JUNKshun.The cabs stay at approach medium until you come in to Fern rock station. The problem is the new dispatching center. It was designed to be automatic. The signals and routes get lined up automatically without the dispatchers assistance. All they would have to do is talk to you on the radio and issue orders or whatever else but they do have they capabilities to line the route up themselves without the autorouters assistance but most of them dont.They sit back and when you do call for a line up then yuo get an attitude on the radio. It has made the train ride slower and if you decide to do track speed then your constatly throwing on the brakes. I just think that DVARP or whoever else should create a stink to Septa management about it because its starting to make trains run late and remember how the top brass was trying to get up the OTP of teh train. Its just really disgusting that they are spending all this money on a system we dont need when they couldve spent it on the Newtown line or West Chester.Ive been told by dispatchers to just run at 45 mph so that way when the cabs drop I wonty have to put any brke on. Approach meduim in the cab will only allow you to do 45 and that way when they do drop you know to bring down the speed even more. What do people think of the system. Hey DVARP are you listening? Can anything be said or done??????

And I couldn't agree more. SEPTA really dropped the ball here. I would have preferred that SEPTA incorporated Cab Signals in conjunction with, not as a replacement for, fixed wayside automatic block signals, like they did with the West Chester Branch. SEPTA has done all this track work, but instead of trains going faster, they are in fact going much SLOWER than before. The track speed on the mainline should easily be 70mph. It's only 60 between Wayne Junction and Jenkintown, then 55mph from Jenkintown to Lansdale. Absolutely pitiful!
Let's talk speed restrictions:
Newtown Jct. 45mph for the straight route, MAS (maximum authorized speed is 60), diverting routes are 15 and 30 depending, yet SEPTA has 45mph crossovers in place. WHY?
Jenkin: still 30 mph. WHY?
Carmel: 30mph, MAS 55mph, WHY?

The above post is also on point with regards to the cab signals dropping to less favorable indications. Makes it difficult to run a smooth train and maintain schedule, particularly if you are following another train or if the purported state-of-the-art aforementioned autoroute system, which SEPTA considers a 'godsend', doesn't have interlocking signals displayed for you. It is a total sham. And guess what, slippery rail season is going to be a NIGHTMARE. I guarantee it.

Imagine driving your car on an icy surface on a main road and every few minutes, without warning, you are forced to slam on your brakes. You'll drive a lot slower correct! But what if you had to drive at a higher speed because you were obligated to maintain a schedule. One could also imagine a traffic light, usually the pattern is green-yellow-red (clear-approach-stop for railroaders); now imagine the traffic light going from green to red in an instant of you driving 30,40,50mph. Scary huh! I use this analogy for most of you, who I'm assuming are not locomotive engineers, to understand how the cab signal system works in conjunction with the speed control and automatic train stop. In rule 562 territory, trains are governed solely by cab signals in between interlocking and control points. A 'CLEAR' cab signal indication allows the engineer to operate the train at the maximum authorized speed of the track, as per signal indication. Without the display of fixed automatic block signals to govern their movements and display the condition of the track ahead, an engineer has no way of knowing when the track conditions will abruptly change. Now, for those of you who ride the train into Center City from the Reading Side through Melrose Park southbound, I'll try to illustrate my point in this example.
The south end of Melrose Park platform used to be the home of the distant signal to Tabor Jct. Distant signals govern the approach of trains to home signals or control points. Now that distant signal is no longer in service, so when leaving Elkins Park the engineer is strolling along at 60mph with his next stop being Melrose Park, suddenly the cab signals drop to approach medium and the engineer has to take a 17psi reduction in equalizing resovoir (slamming on the brakes in laymens' terms) to suppress the automatic train stop from activating. If the tracks are slippery as they are during leaf season, odds are you will slide right through Melrose Park and possibly through Fern Rock if you get to the downgrade approaching Fern Rock (which also means you could possibly go through the stop signal at TABOR JCT). Same goes for Newtown Jct. Leave Melrose Park to stop at Fern Rock, there is a pretty considerable downgrade into the station. The signal indication at Tabor Jct is at CAB SPEED, which at its face means nothing other than you have a signal more favorable than restricting or stop. If Newtown Jct. is not displayed, you have no way of knowing, so now you are going DOWNHILL at 60mph hour to maintain SCHEDULE and now you cab signals drop half way down the hill. Now you are definitely sliding through Fern Rock and possibly almost all the way to Newtown Jct. Before 562, if Newtown Jct. were at STOP SIGNAL, the home signal at Tabor Jct. would be at APPROACH MEDIUM, which the engineer would see from the top of the hill, far in advance of the APRROACH MEDIUM, giving him ample time to get his/her train under control and know for sure the conditions of the track ahead.
Sorry for the long post, but I think that the public should be aware of what I consider are SOME of the potential situations I foresee in the future. 562 would be great along the individual branches, but not on the main trunk between Glenside and Wayne Int, where the bulk of the trains operate on the Reading side.

Excellent posts 269 and Whovian. I knew that all signal aspects would be displayed in the cab now that the wayside signals have been torn down between interlockings, but I had no idea they could issue such abrupt aspect changes when operating at track speed.

Has the BLE approached SEPTA about this? It seems like a blatant disregard for safety. I also agree that the DVARP should get involved, considering running times will be severly affect. I'm a semi-regular Fox Chase line rider, and luckily we don't have to really worry about lower siganl aspects popping up I assume, since the only interlocking along the line is the new passing siding and that's only used in rush hour. I had heard about and noticed quite a speed restriction ay Newtown Jct though. We seem to get that 15 MPH restriction as we enter the new piece of track coming up parallel with the main line, and then get a more favorable 30 MPH as we cross over to the Southbound main.

How was the West Trenton Line set-up regarding cab signals? Is it the same as the Main Line/Fox Chase branch?

wagz wrote:Excellent posts 269 and Whovian. I knew that all signal aspects would be displayed in the cab now that the wayside signals have been torn down between interlockings, but I had no idea they could issue such abrupt aspect changes when operating at track speed.

Has the BLE approached SEPTA about this? It seems like a blatant disregard for safety. I also agree that the DVARP should get involved, considering running times will be severly affect. I'm a semi-regular Fox Chase line rider, and luckily we don't have to really worry about lower siganl aspects popping up I assume, since the only interlocking along the line is the new passing siding and that's only used in rush hour. I had heard about and noticed quite a speed restriction ay Newtown Jct though. We seem to get that 15 MPH restriction as we enter the new piece of track coming up parallel with the main line, and then get a more favorable 30 MPH as we cross over to the Southbound main.

How was the West Trenton Line set-up regarding cab signals? Is it the same as the Main Line/Fox Chase branch?

Well, the Fox Chase line is somewhat affected because we no longer really do the MAS up the branch because of the new system. You also get slow signals to and from Lawn and Chelt, and to and from NX. The West Trenton line also has 562 in effect between Jenkin and CP Wood. The difference for the Neshaminy branch is that trains only operate on average once an hour through there, and even during rush hour the MAS along with the station spacing allows for trains not to run on top of one another. Rule 562, in my opinion, actually works better along that branch than on the SEPTA Mainline itself for the reasons listed above.

It never ceases to amaze me that trains ran faster with ABS and pocket watches than they do now. Thanks to whovian and 269 for your insights on this... if only it weren't such a sad topic. If SEPTA built roads, you can bet that their version of the Rt. 309 project would be restoring that highway to its 1950's hairpin-onramp state.

BuddSilverliner269 wrote:Can anything be said or done??????

Contact the SEPTA Citizen Advisory Committee at [email protected].

Ditto.

Copy me at [url=mailto://[email protected]][email protected][/url].

Please try to document the reasons for your concerns as much as you can, because I'm sure there are countervailing reasons for going to cab signals.

Now allow me to play the skeptic here.

Issue 1 is the possibility of signals dropping as you're humming along at track speed, and thus we're slowing down. Wouldn't it be the case that the fact that you're going at track speed is only made possible by the fact that you have cab signals? F'rinstance (and highly simplified), you enter the block with an approach signal in the cab. The train ahead clears the block ahead, and your signal goes up to clear. You speed up, but when you get to the end of the first block, the train ahead is still in the third block, and your cab signal drops to approach.

Now wouldn't it have been the case that if you were still working from the wayside signals, you would have had an approach in the first block and had to have operated at approach speed the whole way through the block instead of speeding up when the second block was clear? If that's the case, then you have a net gain from the CSS, even though you had to slow down when the signal dropped (i.e., half a block of clear running is better than none)?

Issue 2: are the actual blocks the same now as they were with the wayside signals? There are fixed blocks still, right? This isn't CBTC, I don't think (there would have been a lot more ballyhoo had it had been).

If so, then it shouldn't be too much of a surprise if the signal drops when you hit a new block; and from a safety standpoint, it shouldn't make a difference (and in fact, it would be even safer since the CSS can enforce the speed change if necessary).

From what I understand about CSS, they more or less enforce the same block system, and so there should never be a situation where the cab signal drops from clear (green) to restricting (red)--there will always be an approach (yellow) block in between, right?

Now I would assume that if anything, laying cab signals on top of wayside signals would by definition slow things down, since the engineer is obligated to operate by the most restrictive signal he receives. Having both signal systems might produce a redundant level of safety (then again it may not because of human error in remembering the right signal to obey), but I don't see any other benefit, and there'd definitely be a cost to operate and maintain the redundant systems.

What you're missing is that with the wayside signals, the engineer/fireman can 'see' the signal well before it is in effect for his train.

Example: when a train goes through a tunnel, I can see the pot signal at the end of the tunnel that tells me that I have an advance approach coming up. Without that signal, I would have to get all the way to that point before my cab signal would change. Thus, I might be travelling at 35-40mph and I need to be down to something like 25 for the coming set of switches.

It's like having a whistle sign pop up right before a crossing. There is no time to do the proper whistle when I am right there.

It's very difficult to BRIEFLY (locomotive engineer trying to explain train handling to a non-engineer)answer your questions above, Matt Mitchell, but I will try.

Issue 1: Yes you are right! In the scenario you describe, one train following another, your conclusion is on target. The problem is that you have no way of KNOWING if you are following someone, therefore you don't know how to procede as far as backing off the track speed a little to allow the guy to get ahead of you, or keep on throttling up when the signal magically goes up to clear for whatever reason to maintain schedule. Its all about the uncertainty. An engineer has to be able to anticipate, somewhat, based on fixed signals, track conditions, speed restriction, etc. on how to govern his/her train. Cabs with no waysides (Rule 562) isn't a bad thing in and of itself. I think it would be a wonderful system along the individual branches instead of the system trunk from Glenside south because of the congestion of trains that operate through that area. One could argue to just operate at 45mph the whole way, but now you are delaying the train. You can't tell the dispatcher that I went slower because I THOUGHT the cabs were going to drop, or I THOUGHT that I was following somebody. It won't fly!

Issue 2: The answer to the first part of your question is yes, there are fixed block locations where the cabs usually, but not necessarily drop at (I can tell from the impedance bonds in the track gauge). The new "blocks" are actually quite longer than the old ABS blocks were. In good rail conditions (non slippery rail), the cabs dropping would be more of a headache than anything else; when slippery rail occurs (light drizzle on dry rails, morning dew, and the worst of all leaf season) it really becomes a concern. What you have to understand is that with wayside signals, the engineer can SEE way ahead what the track conditions are, and operate the train accordingly. The new system doesn't afford the engineer this luxury. You don't drive your car through a green light thinking that it's going to go right to red. In an engineers case, we can't operate the train hoping that the cabs won't drop. I mentioned above that any signal drop in the cab signal system forces the engineer to apply a considerable amount of braking effort to suppress the penalty, which during slippery rail season can cause an engineer to lose control of their train. I'll give an example, on the Harrisburg line. The ROW from Paoli east into Zoo is mostly downhill. Let's pretend its leaf season, which the Paoli line is notorious for being one of the worst to operate. I leave Haverford station approaching Ardmore with caution so I don't slide through it. Just east of Ardmore is an automatic block signal, and with that signal I know the conditions of the track ahead, including the signal DOWN THE WINDING HILL at OVERBROOK INTERLOCKING. If the signal at Ardmore is at clear, then I'll still have to be careful not to slide through the stations on the downgrade, but I know I have railroad down the hill at Overbrook; however, if the signal is at APPROACH MEDIUM I know as a qualified engineer that by signal progression the next signal at Narberth (distant to Overbrook) is likely at APPROACH and Overbrook is at stop. I know all this even before I come into Ardmore. If Rule 562 were in effect there, I would leave Ardmore, likely under a clear, and I would either have to go even slower than I normally would because of fear of cabs dropping (after all, I don't know what the conditions ahead are until I hit that drop point) thus delaying the train, or take my chances, lose control of the train, and quite conceivably slide all the way down the hill. Scary thought isn't it. With that signal at Ardmore, I know what the track conditions are for the next 3 MILES(the distance between Overbrook and Ardmore)
And yes, cabs can drop at any time from clear to restricting.

Issue 3: False on all counts, Amtrak operates trains in excess of 125mph with cabs and waysides in conjunction with one another on the NE corridor everyday. In fact, trains on SEPTA territory are actually SLOWER now then they were before the project began, its just that the schedule padding helps soften the blow. (I mention some of the few instances in an above post) An engineer is supposed to operate at the more restrictive speed if the Cab signal display does NOT conform to what the fixed signal is within 6 seconds of passing it. For instance, If I go by an APPROACH on a fixed signal, my cab signal should conform to the approach in the Aspect Display Unit within six seconds, which would be a cab signal conformity. On the other hand, if I went by a fixed signal indicating STOP and PROCEED (restricting is the cab signal conformity) and the cabs went immediately to CLEAR after passing the STOP and PROCEED, that would be a cab signal nonconformity and I would have to operate at restricted speed through the entire block, until my entire train (on SEPTA territory, leading wheels by NORAC RULE) passes a more favorable FIXED signal indication, despite the nonconforming CLEAR in the Cabs. If the Cab signal system doesn't conform at TWO CONSECUTIVE fixed signals, than by NORAC rule that would be a Cab signal failure.

Now, if it were slippery rail conditions, and I wanted to maintain control of my train, I would begin reducing my speed way ahead of a fixed signal that I KNOW would force me to suppress a penalty (APPROACH MEDIUM, APPROACH, APPROACH LIMITED, etc.) so I don't have to Lock up my wheels (which causes the decelostats to go crazy and the trains really starts sliding) trying to suppress a penalty. I see your point about anticipating signal drops, and if I had reason to believe they were going to drop (i.e. a fixed signal inidicating anything other than a clear) I can anticipate much better how to govern my train, as opposed to wondering if the signals MAY or MAY NOT drop. Its not practical, between Jenkintown and Wayne, to constantly apply the brakes at drop spots or operate at lower speeds for fear of losing control of my train during slippery rail conditions, and I shouldn't have to.

What I cannot emphasize enough, is that it is difficult to explain the dilemna to one who does not operate trains daily and make it make much sense. It is an onerous task to condense into paragraphs a logical paradigm for non-locomotive engineers to understand what for prospective engineers takes months of extensive training to learn through classroom teaching, qualifying, and on the job training to master. Rule 562 looks nice on paper, but it really has a lot of holes in it, particularly with SEPTA's application of it. Operating a train is not like driving a car. The engineman has to have some idea how to govern the safe, comfortable, and punctual movement of their train. The West Chester branch has cab signals and waysides, along with bidirectional signaling on both tracks; I believe that that system is far better than what SEPTA has incorporated recently between Wayne and Jenkin. What are the advantages of having rule 562 in effect on SEPTA's mainline over incorporating Rule 261 (bidirectional track signaling) in conjunction with waysides? Less signals to maintain, less bulbs to change! Big deal!

I won't even get into what happens when there is a cab signal failure. Please note that there are two qualified locomotive engineers complaining about the same problems on this post.

Thank You Whovian well said. Also Mr. Mitchell you as one of the heads of DVARP should be concerned by what we are saying because we all as engineers want to run the train in a safe smooth way possible and not slamming on the brakes because the system autoroutes you instead of the dispatchers actually lining the routes up for you. 562 wouldnt be bad on the main line if all trains operating on the main line between Wayne and Carmel always has the route and not wait until the cabs drop from an approach medium to an approach to a restricting to get a favorbale signal again. Trains coming off the branchs shouldnt always have the signal but hey heres a novel idea. the dispatchers should monitor train movements and line the route up. Also from an operational standpoint when the cabs drop without you knowing, on the GE cars the brakes is rough because nothing has been maintained properly. The dynamic brake isnt smooth or on some cars yuo get a stronger dynamic then other cars or on most cars you get dynamic brake and air and when you have to throw on 20 pounds of air all at once to suppress a penalty the braking effect is rough and uncomfortable. On the Budds and Louies if you have say maybe longer then a 3 car train and the cabs drop you have but a fraction of a few seconds to pull the handle all the way over to suppression because those cars are straight air and the air exhaust into the brake cylinders at a much slower rate then the dynamic does for the GEs and more then likely the budds will go into an emergency brake application. If you have a 5 or 6 car train and the cabs drop you might as well dump it yourself. This is such a poorly planned system that they are putting in all I hear everyday from engineers is how bad the cabs are. Look on the Newtown Line you cant go even the track speed because of cabs dropping at timed locations. I know you said you were giving different scenirios Mr. Mitchell but you and most of Septa dont operate the trains and deal with this stuff everyday like me and whovian do and thats why Im creating a stink for you to hopefully find out whats going on and will it get fixed or better. Ohh well look for Subway signals in conjunction with this new cab signal system soon. They will be retrofiting the signal heads to have a lunar white light. If you get a solid lunar white light you will be proceeding on main route and a flashig lunar whit e light you will be diverting. Just like The Frankford EL. I dont even knwo why Septa joined the Norac book of rules. Ohh well. Any thoughts on the whovian and Dvarp and others?

Its sad that across the system, rail vehicles are operating slower now than they did 50 years ago with antiquated equipment and signalling. You can really see the difference on the MFL, with the ATC stopping trains in the middle of the platform, and overall slower train movement.

I had heard about and noticed quite a speed restriction ay Newtown Jct though. We seem to get that 15 MPH restriction as we enter the new piece of track coming up parallel with the main line, and then get a more favorable 30 MPH as we cross over to the Southbound main.

Newtown Jct is now restricted for Newtown (I meant to say Fox Chase) trains because of the shorter switches SEPTA installed when SEPTA's trains were segregated from CSX. Another typical example of SEPTA making a change which degrades performance.

As am Amtrak conductor once put it SEPTA is that "foreign railroad".

jfrey40535 wrote:Its sad that across the system, rail vehicles are operating slower now than they did 50 years ago with antiquated equipment and signalling. You can really see the difference on the MFL, with the ATC stopping trains in the middle of the platform, and overall slower train movement.

I had heard about and noticed quite a speed restriction ay Newtown Jct though. We seem to get that 15 MPH restriction as we enter the new piece of track coming up parallel with the main line, and then get a more favorable 30 MPH as we cross over to the Southbound main.

Newtown Jct is now restricted for Newtown (I meant to say Fox Chase) trains because of the shorter switches SEPTA installed when SEPTA's trains were segregated from CSX. Another typical example of SEPTA making a change which degrades performance.

As am Amtrak conductor once put it SEPTA is that "foreign railroad".

Actually Jfrey, the switches SEPTA installed are good for 45mph, which are LONGER then the previous ones. SEPTA has a permanent diverting speed restriction of 15mph and 30mph depending on your route (siding or no siding move). Its ridiculous!