Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed?
Author: Dr Zarkoff
Date: 02-07-2018 - 13:45

A few minor comments:

> Prior to Dr. Robinson's invention of the closed loop track circuit and the consequent advent of automatic signaling,

Thomas P. Hall started his researches and experiments with electrically operated automatic block signals in 1866, using track instruments for train detection. Track circuit control wasn't widely adopted until after 1873, a result of the PRR deciding to adopt them.

> And yes, where safety and signal systems are concerned; "high speed" means any speed that does not permit a complete stop at a safe braking rate, within one half sight distance; to any obstruction, broken rail, kink,

Since when do signal systems check for kinks in the track?

> This inadequacy requires the replacement of every track circuit in America where PTS is to be installed;

Last I heard, the FRA won't permit the abolition of track circuits (in favor of GPS) because they are the only way to detect broken rails.

> As it is, Amtrak's version (North East Corridor) which predates the PTS mandate, is far superior to that foisted upon the railroads, does not rely on the foibles of GPS and uses cab signalling technology to its max; and it does work.

Amtrak's coded track and cab signal system was first installed in the mid-1920s - - - following a 1922 ICC order for installing ATS/cab signals on certain railroads. For PTC, Amtrak uses the ACSES II system, which was developed jointly with Siemens and is based on the European ERTMS system. It's an add-on to the cab signals.



Subject Written By Date/Time (PST)
  NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Graham Buxton 02-04-2018 - 18:26
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Geob 02-04-2018 - 19:12
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) JOHN 02-04-2018 - 19:53
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-04-2018 - 20:53
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Hoghead 1 02-04-2018 - 21:13
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-04-2018 - 21:16
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) RRACS 02-06-2018 - 07:56
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Hot Water 02-06-2018 - 07:59
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 08:34
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 11:09
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 11:27
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 11:35
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 11:45
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 11:58
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Dr Zarkoff 02-06-2018 - 12:36
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 12:51
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 14:09
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? BOB2 02-06-2018 - 14:57
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 15:45
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 16:23
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? OldPoleBurner 02-07-2018 - 12:15
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? Dr Zarkoff 02-07-2018 - 13:45
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Dr Zarkoff 02-06-2018 - 16:10
  Re: 59 mph, in unsingalled territory OMG! BOB2 02-06-2018 - 17:14
  Re: 59 mph, in unsingalled territory OMG! tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 18:48
  Re: 100 years, actually over 17 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? BOB2 02-06-2018 - 19:36
  Re: 100 years, actually over 17 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 19:42
  Re: 100 years, actually over 175 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? BOB2 02-06-2018 - 20:39
  Re: 100 years, actually over 175 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? tundraboomer 02-07-2018 - 06:14
  Re: My poor logic, yeah right? BOB2 02-07-2018 - 08:35
  Re: My poor logic, yeah right? OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 13:12
  Re: My poor logic, yeah right? OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 13:32
  Re: Yep that was in the rule book but I never saw it used....and it's still a bad practice. BOB2 02-07-2018 - 15:34
  Re: Yep that was in the rule book but I never saw it used....and it's still a bad practice. OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 17:28
  Re: Yep that was in the rule book but I never saw it used....and it's still a bad practice. OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 18:10
  Re: My poor logic, yeah right? tundraboomer 02-07-2018 - 17:27
  Re: 100 years, actually over 17 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? OldPoleBurner 02-07-2018 - 13:16
  Re: 100 years, actually over 17 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? Dr Zarkoff 02-07-2018 - 13:51
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) BOB2 02-04-2018 - 21:16
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-04-2018 - 20:40
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) WILL 02-04-2018 - 20:59
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) RWS 02-04-2018 - 21:53
  Atk in SC Nudge 02-07-2018 - 18:21
  Re: Atk in SC OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 18:36
  Re: Atk in SC tundraboomer 02-07-2018 - 19:15
  Re: Atk in SC Dr Zarkoff 02-07-2018 - 21:38
  Re: Atk in SC Finis 02-07-2018 - 20:46
  Re: Atk in SC Glen Icanberry 02-09-2018 - 03:55
  Re: Except that some of them feel it is safer to run at 59 when you turn them off, but only at restricted speed when they fail? BOB2 02-09-2018 - 07:47
  Re: Except that some of them feel it is safer to run at 59 when you turn them off, but only at restricted speed when they fail? tundraboomer 02-09-2018 - 08:14
  Re: Except that some of them feel it is safer to run at 59 when you turn them off, but only at restricted speed when they fail? OPRRMS 02-09-2018 - 10:50


Go to: Message ListSearch
Subject: 
Your Name: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 ********   **     **        **  **     **  ********  
 **     **  **     **        **  **     **  **     ** 
 **     **  **     **        **  **     **  **     ** 
 ********   **     **        **  **     **  ********  
 **     **  **     **  **    **   **   **   **        
 **     **  **     **  **    **    ** **    **        
 ********    *******    ******      ***     **        
This message board is maintained by:Altamont Press
You can send us an email at altamontpress1@gmail.com