LIRR PTC

On Aug 19 the MTA issued a press release advising the 94% of LIRR trackage is PTC operational.
Am I understanding correctly that, except for the interlocking limits of Harold, and between Jay and Hall there is PTC? Is LIRR using the same ACSES that Amtrak and Metro-North use?
Andy

The news article also mentioned some incompatibility issues between LIRR and Amtrak at Harold Interlocking. But it's either the same or a similar system. I have heard LIRR dispatchers on the radio talking with train engineers about ACSES system issues.

LIRR uses ACSES II with weird aspect believed that Amtrak doesn't use .
Amtrak did the East River Tunnel ACSES install,,Harold interlocking is still in a state of Flux with ESA project and the Cab signals /ACSES under constant revision.

Backshophoss wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:09 pm LIRR uses ACSES II with weird aspect believed that Amtrak doesn't use .
Amtrak did the East River Tunnel ACSES install,,Harold interlocking is still in a state of Flux with ESA project and the Cab signals /ACSES under constant revision.

What weird aspects does LIRR use ?

ACSES works in concert with a wayside signaling system. How does LIRR handle PTC in Manual Block 251 territory?

Would be ATC mode reverse,to allow disengagement of ATC and ACSES in the MBS territory ,KO to GY is the LAST MBS in service on LIRR

Backshophoss wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 11:53 am Would be ATC mode reverse,to allow disengagement of ATC and ACSES in the MBS territory ,KO to GY is the LAST MBS in service on LIRR

Understand but I don't think KO-GY was excepted from PTC.

We've been away from the LIRR for many years.

Can someone give a fair technical explanation of the operating rules involving the Positive Train Control that has been installed. When we were there, initial testing found it to be ridiculously ineffective and trouble prone, resulting in the guy in charge being ousted by the Governor's office.

So now, many years later, how is this system working out?

I can't speak to LIRR specifically but in most cases...

ACSES doesn't work with automatic block wayside and cab signals. ACSES or Advanced Civil Speed Enforcement System does not care what the block condition is. ACSES enforces track speed and temporary track speed restrictions, so if the track speed is 80 but there's a train ahead in the next block ACSES will display 80 and cab signals will enforce slow speed; and vice versa, if track speed is 30 because of a curve and there's a clear block ahead cabs will enforce max authorized speed and ACSES will enforce 30 mph.

ACSES also enforces a positive stop. The most restrictive move for automatic block signals is a stop and proceed, again ACSES doesn't care about block conditions. The reason the most restrictive move is stop and proceed in block territory is just to keep the trains spaced apart. If an interlocking or control point signal displays a stop that means stop and await further instructions either from a less restrictive signal or verb authorization and ACSES will enforce a complete stop. If it is necessary to pass a signal at Stop after receiving authorization from the dispatcher, ACSES will limit the train to 15 mph within the interlocking limits after use of the Stop Release button.

Believe KO to GY has an exemption from PTC for now,MBS is still used with only 1 train moving under Positive Block between KO and GY.
Eastern Montauk Branch was converted to CTC,Cab Signals,ATC,and ACSES,due to more trains and service needs.
MN was doing that between Devon and Waterbury,but that segment is getting CTC,cab signals,and ACSES II wayside gear installed

A few things - you can have PTC in MBS, there is PTC from KO - GY, and the block limits haven't changed. Only thing that has changed is you need more separation between freights and passenger trains, but given there is a %5 cut back in service account COVID, so hopefully the fellas on the NYA can still get things done. I'm sure they would welcome future plans to signal out to LD, but we'll see what future budgets will bring.

Yes, there was snags and setbacks, but that wasn't just the LI. But it is working and hopefully the snags that remain will get ironed out soon.

krispy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 6:45 pm Only thing that has changed is you need more separation between freights and passenger trains,

I'm curious about the need for additional separation. Is it true that a WB Extra can't observe an EB Regular passing a block limit complete, report that to the Operator and then get permission to enter WB - they have to wait for some reason? What is the perceived hazard that requires the (new) separation? Adding separation now implies that the M.B. rules are somehow lacking and I don't think that's the case.

In terms of human error you've got Conductor / Engineer / Operator / Dispatcher involved- isn't that quadruple redundant?!?

But that's not how the Feds see it, it goes back to when they pulled the exemption on speeds on the Montauk Branch east of Babylon using the Distant Switch signals, with the MAS dropping to 59 mph!
That started the process to CTC/ATC the Montauk Branch to MY.