Discussion relating to the operations of MTA MetroNorth Railroad including west of Hudson operations and discussion of CtDOT sponsored rail operations such as Shore Line East and the Springfield to New Haven Hartford Line

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, FL9AC, Jeff Smith

  • 120 posts
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8
  by RearOfSignal
 
The more safety components are added the more complacency becomes a problem.
  by Jersey_Mike
 
Nasadowsk wrote:
Tadman wrote: Reminds me of the PTC mandate. Crash caused by texting? Mandate a billion dollar technology that doesn't exist! God forbid we address the root cause and ban texting/cell usage and enforce the rules like we enforce rules about operating under the influence.
The root cause is you have an unreliable single point of failure, and no redundant backup. PTC is going to be that redundant backup. The railroads had decades to implement their own redundant backup. They didn't. Then a crash happened in the wrong congressional district. Now this has happened. The industry can't police itself and feels it's cheaper to pay out lawsuits. That answer is no longer acceptable to congress, or the general public. They don't care that this'll shave a few cents off the dividend for the next few years. They don't care that it'll cost the local transit agency a hundred million or two (hell - MN just blew 370 million on the Port Jervis line, whose ridership is close to being a rounding error for the system as a whole).

For that matter - in water cooler conversation all this week, the one thing that kept coming up is "why isn't there a system in place to prevent this???" Try explaining that in a way that doesn't outrage the average commuter.

Metro-North has a new nickname among a few folks I know, now. It's not pretty, either.
Get off your high horse. The Buffalo commuter plane crass killed 10 times as many people and lead to no substantial changes. The public will forget about this whole thing in about three weeks. The only people who are are safety scolds and signal vendors who stand to cash in. 4 fatalities in 30 years is a more than acceptable causality level. Fung Wah bus kills more people in a week.
  by Clean Cab
 
I am officially renaming MNRR as WTFRR!!!
  by Pensey GG1
 
ryanov wrote:
Tadman wrote:I don't like this, it's government grandstanding. Meanwhile, we're going to have another tragic accident in a few years because we didn't address the root cause. Reminds me of the PTC mandate. Crash caused by texting? Mandate a billion dollar technology that doesn't exist! God forbid we address the root cause and ban texting/cell usage and enforce the rules like we enforce rules about operating under the influence.
The root cause for MetroLink was "trains are not prevented from crashing into one another." Cell phones are not the root cause, they are just one means of distraction. As proven by this incident, there are many different ways to be distracted, and PTC would have prevented all of them if it works as demanded. In fact, they even address the root cause here by saying "fix your signaling system to prevent this, and use a second set of eyes in the meantime at these locations." So government grandstanding? You haven't provided any evidence of that whatsoever. Maybe it's overkill for the amount of risk, but there's no question that it will save lives if properly implemented.
Exactly. The root cause of the Spuyten Duvyil accident isn't the engineer, it's a lack of PTC/ Cab signal drops/ other safety system. Although it's irrelevant with the clarified wording, SLE is a Metro-North train west of New Haven, Amtrak east of NHV, they change crews at NHV. Amtrak NEC trains are Amtrak all the way through (semi-overhead trackage rights on MN). Poor Amtrak. They have the first two successful passenger PTC implementations (ACSES and ITCS), and now they get dragged into this because of negligence on MN's part.
  by philipmartin
 
Knee-jerk reaction. It sounds like it to me, same as the one man crew prohibition after the Lac Megantic disaster.
  by pumpers
 
We don't really know if fatigue was an issue in the Spuyten Duyvil wreck, but with the demand for a 2nd crew member in all cabs, you can bet for sure MN crews will be even more tired and worn thin than usual the next few months. I hope it doesn't have the obvious unintended backfire consequence. JS
  by GCT Worker
 
Jersey_Mike wrote:
Nasadowsk wrote:
Tadman wrote: 4 fatalities in 30 years is a more than acceptable causality level. Fung Wah bus kills more people in a week.

Try explaining that to the 4 families who lost loved ones. Also to the injured some
of whom will take a long time to recover with disabling injuries.
  by nomis
 
Regardless if there is an EO issued to drop the speed to avoid a second qualified crew-member in the cab, rule 7-u would also either increase radio traffic within a mile of those EO restrictions, or even place a crew-member into the cab "when practicable".
  by Clean Cab
 
This order can be handled by simply putting permanent speed restrictions before the affect area and thus eliminate the need for an addition crew member on the head end. An example is the infamous Jenkins Curve (MP 54.7) on the New Haven Line in Bridgeport. Currently it is possible to go into the 30 MPH curve at 70 MPH without a cab signal downgrade. MN could put in a speed restriction of 50 MPH from MP 54.0 to MP 54.7 and that would comply with the mandate and not require an additional crew member on the head end. Similar speed restrictions could be put in at all other affected areas.
  by fl9m2004
 
So that's why when I was returning from watching amtrak northbound Vermonter switch power that the speed dropped. Speaking of speed is there still an area on new haven line where u can do 90?
  by Clean Cab
 
I believe it was dropped to either 80 or 70. Dutch would know.
  by Acela Express
 
The speed dropped to 80 m.p.h. Which use to be 90 m.p.h. Just for the record. Hey guys listen i know a lot has been going on within the past week but just try to calm down and understand things happen. I'm not saying its suppose to but we live in a imperfect world. Hats off to my metro-north brothers and sisters who work hard everyday away from their families, losing sleep and doing their best to keep the system running. More people die everyday from car accidents and shootings, and as soon as this happens its like a total let down. We learn from our mistakes and we move on. God bless those who lose their lives. And god bless the engineer who has to live with this for the rest of his. That man did not wake up that morning with the intent of putting that train on the ground. I just wanna see something positive happen in light of the current events. And let get back to the joy of railfanning and railroading, instead of the should of, would of, could of. It's hard on an engineer looking at miles and miles of track, signals, railroad crossings, etc. sometimes you get what is known as tunnel vision looking at the rails. It can be hypnotizing. But to sum it all up millions of people travel by train everyday. It's still safe. Let the pros handle it.
  by Backshophoss
 
The LIRR and MNR ATC systems are somewhat simular in how they work,it should be modifiable enough to force speed changes by
changing the code to the rails approaching curves where needed,believe LIRR enforces temporary slow orders by code changes to
the rails where needed in ATC territory.

The p-32dm's that have cycled back from Erie rebuild have been modified for ACSES,the M-8's have ACSES
installed but have yet to be tested on the 25kv wire east of New Haven.
Back when the NHRHTA ran the Greenport trip with the Chrome FL-9's and the Comet/Shoreliner I's
we did track speed in LIRR ATC territory in push and pull modes as well as on Amtrak's Hellgate Route,
the same could be said for the Sunrise Trail NHRS trip with the C420 and F-7a Power pack that ran
the Hellgate and New Haven Main to S Norwalk.
Both MN(CR) and LIRR ATC was used back then for those trips.
  by dcmike
 
RearOfSignal wrote:The more safety components are added the more complacency becomes a problem.
So true. I've tried to make this case to safety officers over the years but it seems like for them, it's all about justifying their jobs and having something to point to and exclaim: look how many lives I saved!
  by mvb119
 
The C&S Engineer should be able to come up with modifications to the signal system where if the RTC has traffic set for southbound between CP12 and CP10 the cab signals will display something less favorable than a clear when a train is approaching the curve, but in the same block with traffic set northbound can display a clear as the train will already be through the curve since cab signal code is always fed to the track from the opposite end of the block the train enters from.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8