Railroad Forums 

  • Wharton (CP) Upgrades

  • Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.
Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.

Moderators: lensovet, Kaback9, nick11a

 #1253808  by Jersey_Mike
 
ApproachMedium wrote:Metrolink is using the I-ETMS system i believe, which is far more advanced than any of this ACSES stuff.
And Metrolink is having massive problems with it due to wireless interference and bandwitch issues which is what NJT is trying to avoid. Remember, when you have speed signals and ATC to enforce the speeds it simplifies the problem greatly. Out west with route signaling you can't just have 3 or 4 standard speed codes to send through the rails. It's the original sin that made ATC style systems unworkable and sent the freight railroads down the whole wireless route that is now causing so many problems.
 #1253924  by ApproachMedium
 
I did not know that much about it since we dont deal with it over here but that makes sense. Our speed signaling is much easier to code in the rails.
 #1254015  by OportRailfan
 
ApproachMedium wrote:Not necessarily. They can actually drive a 562 system using LESS hardware than whats being used for a standard 261 territory, that is, if they are using all standard all electromechanical relays. Places like the High line on amtrak are all ran by PLCs (Programmable Logic Computers) and other more modern nonsense that drives vital relays.

With good old regular electromechanical signaling you can eliminate all of the stuff for bulb out circuits, approach lighting, and the physical signal itself, etc. All that has to be done is the code sent thru the rails based on block occupancy.
You mean almost the entire railroad is ran via RTU's. No need for NY to see EVERY TPR, ASR, or RGPR.
 #1254060  by nick11a
 
Diverging signaling in the Midwest/west along with PTC.... variable speeds for switches based on location... yeah, I can see that being pretty complex. I would think that the "speed signaling" approach of the east coast would be easier to implement.
 #1254084  by ApproachMedium
 
nick11a wrote:Diverging signaling in the Midwest/west along with PTC.... variable speeds for switches based on location... yeah, I can see that being pretty complex. I would think that the "speed signaling" approach of the east coast would be easier to implement.
Which is what i never understood either. Speed signaling + Cab signals and we have hardly the amount of stop signal violations and speed related issues that out west seems to have. Granted you can still have a stop signal violation with CSS territory but with all of those beeps and changes and possible penalties it seems a lot harder this way. With no CSS its just a free for all. Go as fast as you want and kill everyone. (Hello Chatsworth)
 #1254087  by nick11a
 
ApproachMedium wrote:
nick11a wrote:Diverging signaling in the Midwest/west along with PTC.... variable speeds for switches based on location... yeah, I can see that being pretty complex. I would think that the "speed signaling" approach of the east coast would be easier to implement.
Which is what i never understood either. Speed signaling + Cab signals and we have hardly the amount of stop signal violations and speed related issues that out west seems to have. Granted you can still have a stop signal violation with CSS territory but with all of those beeps and changes and possible penalties it seems a lot harder this way. With no CSS its just a free for all. Go as fast as you want and kill everyone. (Hello Chatsworth)
Yeah, well, some railroads who act under "diverging/route" signaling will need to start biting the bullet and start standardizing how things are done out there. Yes, the east coast/NORAC railroads all have their foibles, but at least there is a relatively standard form of signaling and corresponding rules/actions required.

Back closer to the topic as it pertains to the east/NJT, with the advent of PTC/ACSES/etc, Rule 261 railroads with wayside fixed automatic signals will become redundant. It's a fairly safe bet that any future re-signaling of NJT's presently used "Rule 261" lines would be to Rule 562. They won't be going out of their way to do this; it isn't a needed expense. But, when it comes time to redo a line, then automatic waysides will go by the wayside.

In other words, take pictures of automatic signals while they are still around. 20-30 years from now, they could be a thing of the past.
 #1254258  by sixty-six
 
ApproachMedium wrote:Well its 251 in the one direction because it still has the physical automatic block signals. If you have to make a reverse move in that territory, instead of DCS rules applying to the move, 562 rules apply. So you would have to operate according to that set of instructions to make a reverse move.
Did anyone at Amtrak even look at a NORAC book before deciding it's rule 251? Boy, can't wait to stump the dispatcher when he can't decide what rule to follow in order for me to reverse!
 #1254283  by nick11a
 
sixty-six wrote:
ApproachMedium wrote:Well its 251 in the one direction because it still has the physical automatic block signals. If you have to make a reverse move in that territory, instead of DCS rules applying to the move, 562 rules apply. So you would have to operate according to that set of instructions to make a reverse move.
Did anyone at Amtrak even look at a NORAC book before deciding it's rule 251? Boy, can't wait to stump the dispatcher when he can't decide what rule to follow in order for me to reverse!
Yes, the application of it here on Amtrak is a bit.... interesting.
 #1254295  by sixty-six
 
nick11a wrote:
sixty-six wrote:
ApproachMedium wrote:Well its 251 in the one direction because it still has the physical automatic block signals. If you have to make a reverse move in that territory, instead of DCS rules applying to the move, 562 rules apply. So you would have to operate according to that set of instructions to make a reverse move.
Did anyone at Amtrak even look at a NORAC book before deciding it's rule 251? Boy, can't wait to stump the dispatcher when he can't decide what rule to follow in order for me to reverse!
Yes, the application of it here on Amtrak is a bit.... interesting.
251: "Reverse movements against the current of traffic will be governed by non-signalled DCS rules."

562: "Reverse movement must not be made without verbal permission of the dispatcher."

Good job, guys.
 #1254364  by nick11a
 
sixty-six wrote:
nick11a wrote:
sixty-six wrote:
ApproachMedium wrote:Well its 251 in the one direction because it still has the physical automatic block signals. If you have to make a reverse move in that territory, instead of DCS rules applying to the move, 562 rules apply. So you would have to operate according to that set of instructions to make a reverse move.
Did anyone at Amtrak even look at a NORAC book before deciding it's rule 251? Boy, can't wait to stump the dispatcher when he can't decide what rule to follow in order for me to reverse!
Yes, the application of it here on Amtrak is a bit.... interesting.
251: "Reverse movements against the current of traffic will be governed by non-signalled DCS rules."

562: "Reverse movement must not be made without verbal permission of the dispatcher."

Good job, guys.
You get to pick which rule you want to observe! :"Now... there's a choice."
 #1254382  by OportRailfan
 
sixty-six wrote:
nick11a wrote:
sixty-six wrote:
ApproachMedium wrote:Well its 251 in the one direction because it still has the physical automatic block signals. If you have to make a reverse move in that territory, instead of DCS rules applying to the move, 562 rules apply. So you would have to operate according to that set of instructions to make a reverse move.
Did anyone at Amtrak even look at a NORAC book before deciding it's rule 251? Boy, can't wait to stump the dispatcher when he can't decide what rule to follow in order for me to reverse!
Yes, the application of it here on Amtrak is a bit.... interesting.
251: "Reverse movements against the current of traffic will be governed by non-signalled DCS rules."

562: "Reverse movement must not be made without verbal permission of the dispatcher."

Good job, guys.
Hooray Rules Department!
 #1254426  by ApproachMedium
 
Has anyone even read the amtrak rule book? Probably not. I also made an oopsie, its actually listed as 261 and not 251.

Track 4 Ham to County is eastbound rule 562 cab signals used without fixed automatic signals. ABS, CSS and 261 are in effect for eastbound movements. Reverse movements by 502(B)
Westbound is fixed abs signals in service for westbound movements only. ABS, CSS and rule 261 are in effect for westbound movements and reverse movements are rule 562(B).

That makes more sense.
 #1254435  by nick11a
 
ApproachMedium wrote:Has anyone even read the amtrak rule book? Probably not. I also made an oopsie, its actually listed as 261 and not 251.

Track 4 Ham to County is eastbound rule 562 cab signals used without fixed automatic signals. ABS, CSS and 261 are in effect for eastbound movements. Reverse movements by 502(B)
Westbound is fixed abs signals in service for westbound movements only. ABS, CSS and rule 261 are in effect for westbound movements and reverse movements are rule 562(B).

That makes more sense.
Oh, Approach Medium! We spent all of this time debating about the discrepancies of the two rules that were supposedly in effect on that track..... only to find out this! I would have read the rule book, but I don't have a current rule book and was trusting you! I'm going to start calling you Approach Restricting.... maybe in time, you'll make to it Approach Clear. LOL. ;-) Just kidding.

Anyway, it is always fun discussing rules that are in effect (especially when they're not in effect.)
 #1254439  by sixty-six
 
ApproachMedium wrote:Has anyone even read the amtrak rule book? Probably not. I also made an oopsie, its actually listed as 261 and not 251.

Track 4 Ham to County is eastbound rule 562 cab signals used without fixed automatic signals. ABS, CSS and 261 are in effect for eastbound movements. Reverse movements by 502(B)
Westbound is fixed abs signals in service for westbound movements only. ABS, CSS and rule 261 are in effect for westbound movements and reverse movements are rule 562(B).

That makes more sense.
Well, now that makes much more sense, doesn't it? :P
 #1254443  by nick11a
 
sixty-six wrote:
ApproachMedium wrote:Has anyone even read the amtrak rule book? Probably not. I also made an oopsie, its actually listed as 261 and not 251.

Track 4 Ham to County is eastbound rule 562 cab signals used without fixed automatic signals. ABS, CSS and 261 are in effect for eastbound movements. Reverse movements by 502(B)
Westbound is fixed abs signals in service for westbound movements only. ABS, CSS and rule 261 are in effect for westbound movements and reverse movements are rule 562(B).

That makes more sense.
Well, now that makes much more sense, doesn't it? :P
Yes, I feel better too. Nonetheless, it is still an interesting concoction of rules Track 4 between those limits. It almost makes my mind hurt.