SEPTA seeks $$ for major West Trenton Line Help

I understand the PTC systems will not protect against low speed rear end collisions. It's my understanding that they will only enforce positive stops at 1) Stop signals, 2) out of service road crossings and 3) work zones. Does anyone know if this is true?

aem7 wrote:I understand the PTC systems will not protect against low speed rear end collisions. It's my understanding that they will only enforce positive stops at 1) Stop signals, 2) out of service road crossings and 3) work zones. Does anyone know if this is true?

The road crossings bit is not part of the definition, but such could be marked as a work zone or 0mph TSR. You're thinking of highway crossings because the only operational GPS+radio based PTC system currently in service is Amtrak's ITCS on the Michigan Line and that was designed as a grade crossing safety system for Midwest high speed rail and morphed into PTC over the decades it they have been trying to get it to function.

When is a decision expected on the TIGER grant? JS

I think someone mentioned increased CSX traffic... Today I saw a 80-100 car ethanol train westbound, and once on my train, a double ended local probably out of woodbourne eastbound... Never seen 2 trains like that till today.

pumpers wrote:When is a decision expected on the TIGER grant? JS

It should be later this summer or in early fall.

Just to stir the pot, I asked over on the NJT forum http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 0&start=15" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; about the PTC plan where NJT runs over the Conrail Lehigh Line between the old CNJ (Raritan Valley line) and the NEC heading to Newark. As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, this seems similar to Septa running on CSX in the West Trenton area.
The response was basically, "No problem".

Conrail will install, service and maintain all PTC/ASES II and V-ETMS equipment on this segment of track. These two systems will be engineered to work “seamlessly” and interface so that both the freight and passenger movements are monitored and controlled by the PTCNJTPTCIMPPLNFNLV14Page 41 of 162
system. The NJ Transit and Conrail back office servers will communicate with one another to transmit and receive vital train movement authorities on this portion of the Lehigh Line. Conrail and NJ Transit will develop a “handshake” protocol with Conrail when it enters or departs the Lehigh Line."

.
On the first page of the thread is a link to an official document of the whole NJT PTC plans, with lots of details on how NJT and Conrail are going to make it work (along with how all the local freight tenants on NJT will work too). I don't claim to understand any of it.
JS
PS. Around 15-20 years ago I lived right alongside the West Trenton line a bit north of West Trenton, and 10 trains a day was on the high side. So the 20 I see quoted now, which could go up further with more oil, is a big increase. It sure was fun when we had houseguests and I forgot to warn them about what might happen in the middle of the night : The whole house and then everything in it first shaking when the power was running full out on the uphill grade, followed by the whistle at the grade crossing next to the house which would scare the bejesus out of them, especially in the summer with the windows open.

Thank you for the confirmation that SEPTA is basically being a whiny little bitch. Regarding the RVL I am wondering if they are going to install cab signals or just try to use ASES without them. Amtrak's ACSES can still enforce stops even without cab signals being active, but the cab signals help, especially when the whole data radio piece is not available and ASES is designed not to need radio links. ASES is ACSES compatible so that system and its digital radio links could be use on that portion of the line and that could be a solution for SEPTA/CSX if CSX has issues with installing cab signals on the Trenton Line.

All this talk of back office systems is bad mojo and I really hope that its all vaporware waiting for the mandate to be waived. Amtrak, SEPTA, et al have enough problems getting normal dispatching systems to work properly let alone something that is more safety critical and or able to deny service if it fails. As Amtrak's ITCS installation on the Michigan Line shows you don't need any centralized infrastructure for this sort of thing. Servers can be placed with existing wayside signaling equipment and tie into the existing hardware without adding new single failure points.

Well, SEPTA got $10 million.

http://www.phillyburbs.com/00redesign/n ... 308ac.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

George Mattar, Bucks County Courier Times wrote: SEPTA has received a $10 million grant that will go toward building an additional track from the Woodbourne station in Middletown to Trenton, officials confirmed Tuesday.

The federal Department of Transportation awarded the grant to separate SEPTA’s passenger service and CSX freight service on a 6-mile stretch of the West Trenton Line, according to SEPTA spokesman Andrew Busch. There are SEPTA commuter stops on that stretch of the line at the Woodbourne Road and the Yardley stations.

“The federal funds awarded to this project will allow SEPTA to construct its own stretch of track in the area, separating the two lines and allowing both SEPTA and CSX to improve their service,” Fitzpatrick said. “The project benefits travelers, businesses and the region by increasing connectivity and allowing for station upgrades.”

Station upgrades?

I still think 3rd track to west trenton will happen eventually, whether reading delaware viaduct given new top deck or separate span, no idea.

25Hz wrote:Station upgrades?

High platforms. Can't do them(*) if freights are regularly using the track due to high/wide cars.

*--there are workarounds available, but they're not desirable.

Matthew Mitchell wrote:

25Hz wrote:Station upgrades?

High platforms. Can't do them(*) if freights are regularly using the track due to high/wide cars.

*--there are workarounds available, but they're not desirable.

isn't that the point of a third track? with a third track SEPTA can have a high level and the freights can still get through on two tracks

In a perfect world, high level platforms would be added. However, I am interpreting this to mean that the 3rd track that CSX runs on exclusively between Neshaminy Falls and Woodbourne would be extended to West Trenton. While doing this separates SEPTA and freight operations, it forces Yardley into the same boat Langhorne and Woodbourne are in with regards to high platforms. Segregating the freight and passenger traffic may prevent either freight or passenger to be held up by the other, but the West Trenton Bridge has no room for additional track, and freight traffic would still block one of the West Trenton platforms in addition to possibly still blocking the yard tracks.

I don't see what benefit this has outside of SEPTA's attempt to transitize the Regional Rail. It is not worth it in my opinion and does not address the biggest problem: yard tracks being blocked by a late freight.

There are many other things that are higher priority than this in my book, such as the aging electrical systems and substations. No electricity, no trains.

R3 Passenger wrote:In a perfect world, high level platforms would be added. However, I am interpreting this to mean that the 3rd track that CSX runs on exclusively between Neshaminy Falls and Woodbourne would be extended to West Trenton. While doing this separates SEPTA and freight operations, it forces Yardley into the same boat Langhorne and Woodbourne are in with regards to high platforms. Segregating the freight and passenger traffic may prevent either freight or passenger to be held up by the other, but the West Trenton Bridge has no room for additional track, and freight traffic would still block one of the West Trenton platforms in addition to possibly still blocking the yard tracks.

I don't see what benefit this has outside of SEPTA's attempt to transitize the Regional Rail. It is not worth it in my opinion and does not address the biggest problem: yard tracks being blocked by a late freight.

There are many other things that are higher priority than this in my book, such as the aging electrical systems and substations. No electricity, no trains.

Agree on all points.

But, I wonder if a new top deck for the reading Delaware viaduct could solve all this crap? In theory you'd have a straight shot from yard to just past yardley...

Anyways, yea. Not impressed, especially since this will likely cause huge schedule disruptions.

R3 Passenger wrote:In a perfect world, high level platforms would be added. However, I am interpreting this to mean that the 3rd track that CSX runs on exclusively between Neshaminy Falls and Woodbourne would be extended to West Trenton. While doing this separates SEPTA and freight operations, it forces Yardley into the same boat Langhorne and Woodbourne are in with regards to high platforms. Segregating the freight and passenger traffic may prevent either freight or passenger to be held up by the other, but the West Trenton Bridge has no room for additional track, and freight traffic would still block one of the West Trenton platforms in addition to possibly still blocking the yard tracks.

I don't see what benefit this has outside of SEPTA's attempt to transitize the Regional Rail. It is not worth it in my opinion and does not address the biggest problem: yard tracks being blocked by a late freight.

There are many other things that are higher priority than this in my book, such as the aging electrical systems and substations. No electricity, no trains.

Have you not read the rest of the thread (or at least the first post)? The third track isn't because they felt like it, but because of the Federal mandate of installing PTC systems on all passenger rail lines. Said PTC system is incompatible with freight operations (unknown how this will affect NS/CSX in NJ where they share trackage with NJT), so trackage for freight and passenger operations must be segregated. In fact SEPTA is losing some capacity in the deal since the Delaware River viaduct can only support two tracks, so SEPTA will single track from some point in PA through West Trenton.

Also I'm not sure where you get the idea of freight trains regularly blocking the yard? Except for some extenuating circumstance like a train going in to emergency because a brake line broke, a freight train should not be stopped blocking the interlocking ever.

Why is SEPTA and the politicians saying this will improve times? Are there lots of delays now? If so, how frequent. If time is to be gained, how much? Would it have been cheaper/more effective for SEPTA to have adopted a system compatible with CSX?
It doesn't sound like this is an efficiency gain at all. I suppose this also does nothing to allow more frequent service in the future?
Are there any plans to do short turns on the line, perhaps at Somerton or Langhorne? The service is quite dismal now, better headways would be more desirable.