• Government fines MARC $30K for delaying installing PTC

  • Discussion related to DC area passenger rail services from Northern Virginia to Baltimore, MD. Includes Light Rail and Baltimore Subway.
Discussion related to DC area passenger rail services from Northern Virginia to Baltimore, MD. Includes Light Rail and Baltimore Subway.

Moderators: mtuandrew, therock, Robert Paniagua

  by davinp
 
Government Fines MD $30K for Delays Installing Safety System
The News4 I-Team has learned the federal government is fining Maryland's MARC train system nearly $30,000 for failing to keep up with the installation of a mandatory safety system

Sounds like MARC is far behind VRE. I don't know if MARC has started training the crews on how to use PTC yet. Obviously, MARC has allot more locomotives and cab cars than VRE
If MARC doesn't have PTC installed and running by Dec 31, Amtrak may not allow them to operate on their tracks

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/loca ... 04731.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
  by STrRedWolf
 
I have to wonder if the FRA was clear about the timelines of the PTC install... and if it was in communication with the FCC.
  by zuckie13
 
GOOD!!

There is simply no viable excuse for MARC other than actively not choosing to make this a priority. MARC did not need to do any infrastructure work for this, their trackage is all Amtrak and CSX. They had to manage to install the equipment in about 110 pieces of equipment (Locomotives and Cab Cars) and train the Engineers. There should have been minimal "design" because that was done for them by Amtrak and CSX who designed the systems it needs to work with. Its' being cheap and procrastinating. My state should have been fined more.
  by STrRedWolf
 
zuckie13 wrote:GOOD!!

There is simply no viable excuse for MARC other than actively not choosing to make this a priority. MARC did not need to do any infrastructure work for this, their trackage is all Amtrak and CSX. They had to manage to install the equipment in about 110 pieces of equipment (Locomotives and Cab Cars) and train the Engineers. There should have been minimal "design" because that was done for them by Amtrak and CSX who designed the systems it needs to work with. Its' being cheap and procrastinating. My state should have been fined more.
Oooohkay...

Here's the deal. The equipment ALREADY had ACES on it, which took care of Amtrak's PTC. In other words, MARC Penn Line service isn't going to be affected.

The equipment needs CSX's standard on it. Does MARC have that standard on it's equipment? Is CSX running on PTC right now on the Camden and Brunswick Lines?

MARC says it's 85% complete and already begun training the crews. CSX says it'll have the equipment in by end of 2018 and be operating with PTC in 2020.

FRA says CSX only has little more than 60% of PTC up and going on it's lines, and is over 90% on all other setups, and MARC is lagging on everything.

I think FRA and MARC aren't seeing eye-to-eye on things. Sad to say, I think this is going to go to court.
  by zuckie13
 
STrRedWolf wrote:I think FRA and MARC aren't seeing eye-to-eye on things. Sad to say, I think this is going to go to court.
The problem is, this is all based on MARC's plan. They submitted a plan, they are behind on that plan and that drives this fine process. So the FRA is looking at what MARC said they would do by certain dates, sees they havn't done it, and therefore can and should fine them.
  by Backshophoss
 
IS CSX not allowing Access for MARC(BBD) Crews to do their install work along he ROW??
  by zuckie13
 
Backshophoss wrote:IS CSX not allowing Access for MARC(BBD) Crews to do their install work along he ROW??
MARC does not have to install anything along the ROW. It's CSX's PTC system so CSX does all the trackside installation. MARC only needs to install the compatible equipment on their locomotives and cab cars - and train the engineers to use it.
  by Backshophoss
 
CSX went the I-ETMS route for PTC,so MARC has to install I-ETMS gear on all the Cab Cars and Power.
MARC is set up already for ACSES for the NEC.
  by mmi16
 
Backshophoss wrote:CSX went the I-ETMS route for PTC,so MARC has to install I-ETMS gear on all the Cab Cars and Power.
MARC is set up already for ACSES for the NEC.
And it is not like this is a big surprise to MARC. MARC is like most governmental commuter agencies - since the implementation of the PTC requirements they have felt that being government chartered agencies that they are above the PTC requirements and the never did any realistic actions to implement PTC until recently.
  by STrRedWolf
 
mmi16 wrote:
Backshophoss wrote:CSX went the I-ETMS route for PTC,so MARC has to install I-ETMS gear on all the Cab Cars and Power.
MARC is set up already for ACSES for the NEC.
And it is not like this is a big surprise to MARC. MARC is like most governmental commuter agencies - since the implementation of the PTC requirements they have felt that being government chartered agencies that they are above the PTC requirements and the never did any realistic actions to implement PTC until recently.
Which sounds like FRA's communications between it and the transit agencies is not up to par.
  by Backshophoss
 
It would better that CSX allowed an ACSES overlay on the routes used by MARC ,instead of I-ETMS gear shoehorned into MARC equipment!
NJT and CRSA are doing a joint install of ACSES and I-ETMS gear on NJT's Raritan Valley Line .
  by zuckie13
 
Backshophoss wrote:It would better that CSX allowed an ACSES overlay on the routes used by MARC ,instead of I-ETMS gear shoehorned into MARC equipment!
NJT and CRSA are doing a joint install of ACSES and I-ETMS gear on NJT's Raritan Valley Line .
It all depends on how that overlay works. Does it require additional wayside equipment? I think the bottom line for MARC probably was/is to do what' cheapest. CSX certainly wouldn't want to spend anything extra, and they picked I-ETMS for their entire system (like most of the major freights). I'd imagine if MARC had to spend money on radio spectrum and/or extra wayside equipment it probably would cost more than installing the equipment for I-ETMS in the locomotives. The math for NJT is different, since they have a much larger fleet. May have made more sense for them to spend the extra on that one line.
  by mmi16
 
Backshophoss wrote:It would better that CSX allowed an ACSES overlay on the routes used by MARC ,instead of I-ETMS gear shoehorned into MARC equipment!
NJT and CRSA are doing a joint install of ACSES and I-ETMS gear on NJT's Raritan Valley Line .
And how much would MARC be willing to pay CSX to install ACSES on the Camden and Brunswick Lines, in addition to the already CSX installed I-ETMS gear?

I have a good idea of how much MARC would be willing to pay - and it wouldn't buy any penny candy!
  by STrRedWolf
 
mmi16 wrote:
Backshophoss wrote:It would better that CSX allowed an ACSES overlay on the routes used by MARC ,instead of I-ETMS gear shoehorned into MARC equipment!
NJT and CRSA are doing a joint install of ACSES and I-ETMS gear on NJT's Raritan Valley Line .
And how much would MARC be willing to pay CSX to install ACSES on the Camden and Brunswick Lines, in addition to the already CSX installed I-ETMS gear?

I have a good idea of how much MARC would be willing to pay - and it wouldn't buy any penny candy!
Considering the occasional excursion to Cumberland, it's not worth it.

That said, is CSX putting ACSES on the Brunswick line because Amtrak runs trains along that line (all the way up to Chicago)?
  by mmi16
 
STrRedWolf wrote:
mmi16 wrote:
Backshophoss wrote:It would better that CSX allowed an ACSES overlay on the routes used by MARC ,instead of I-ETMS gear shoehorned into MARC equipment!
NJT and CRSA are doing a joint install of ACSES and I-ETMS gear on NJT's Raritan Valley Line .
And how much would MARC be willing to pay CSX to install ACSES on the Camden and Brunswick Lines, in addition to the already CSX installed I-ETMS gear?

I have a good idea of how much MARC would be willing to pay - and it wouldn't buy any penny candy!
Considering the occasional excursion to Cumberland, it's not worth it.

That said, is CSX putting ACSES on the Brunswick line because Amtrak runs trains along that line (all the way up to Chicago)?
Have never heard of CSX installing anything other the I-ETMS - anywhere on their property. The do operate more Amtrak trains on more routes than Amtrak does.