Positive Train Control (PTC) 101 - what even is it? - Railroad 101
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- Reward the train for being good, or some such.
Visit the channel shop: hycetrains.com...
Join my discord: / discord
Become an ES&D Train Crew Member and get extra perks!
/ @hyce777
![[SFS] This is a boxcar that ruined our week.](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/F-Jb1L8ShrY/mqdefault.jpg)
Class one engineer for 20 years here. I detest PTC, for several reasons.
First and foremost, PTC has created an entire generation of throttle jockeys who are dependent of the screen in front of them to know where they are. As one conductor put it to me, old engineers run better without PTC, new ones run better with it. With the exception of information about the signals ahead, the PTC display does not give any information at all which I don’t already know as an experienced engineer. WHEN (not if) PTC does not work, it will create a situation where a supposedly qualified train crew are completely incapable of safely operating a two mile long string of explodey boys, but they’re doing it anyway.
Related to that, far too many people rely on PTC as a cab signal system. Even the railroads expect us to use it in that capacity. The reliance on an unreliable technology scares me. With railroads in the Hunter Harrison era cutting back on maintenance and generally cutting every conceivable corner in the quest for profits, it’s likely to create a deadly situation that could have been easily prevented.
Finally, I dislike PTC because of its use on railroads not as a safety device, but as a discipline system. For a long time, it was common practice to automatically take a crew out of service after an enforcement, regardless of the reason. There have been several well documented examples of PTC being programmed with the wrong data and then enforcing a crew for doing exactly what they should have been doing.
There are numerous little things I can nitpick about PTC, from design to implementation to reliability. While I appreciate the goal of preventing accidents, blind faith in an imperfect technology is making a situation that I fear could be just as bad or worse in the long run.
That's frustrating, but not terribly surprising to hear. It's definitely not a foolproof system, and lord knows looking at the enforcement data the amount of extra enforcement that PTC caused for a software issue is ridiculous. I'd have hoped that engineers were still learning their subdivisions the right way first, but, I suppose this is the easier way out. Not fantastic, that. Almost sounds like old heads and air vs. newer engineers and relying on dynamics.
@@Hyce777 In theory, we’re expected to know our territory without help. But given that there is a mandatory track line view right in front of us at all times, it’s virtually impossible to ignore. I’ve caught myself paying less attention to signals since I have them right in front of me, and I learned railroading a quarter century ago. We are mentally lazy creatures by design, and sadly it seems that the people who designed PTC didn’t consider that in their design.
Don’t get me started on running with air vs. dynamics! I had to teach myself, and got disciplined for doing so, but to this day those trains I’ve run with air were the fastest and smoothest runs I’ve ever made. I miss the circus trains just for that if nothing else. I loved having a Ringling Bros. trainmaster compliment me on my skills.
@@Hyce777 Time for me to get on a train. If you’re ever in the Carolinas (can’t imagine why you might have heard of Spencer, NC), look me up. There’s a meal and a beverage of your choice with your name on it, a railroad man (and sometime model railroader) who would love to talk shop, and a young boy who loves your channel.
@@kenrickman6697 stay safe my friend - and thank you! I'll be back out that way one of these days.
@@Hyce777 "We are mentally lazy creatures by design, and sadly it seems that the people who designed PTC didn’t consider that in their design."
I feel like that's the entire point of systems like PTC - to reduce problems which can be caused by the human factor. Granted it creates a whole new set of problems to solve, but at that point it's going to come down to the numbers game: does the number of problems caused by the new system outweigh the number of human error problems the system solves? I don't have the statistics in front of me, but I would be astonished if PTC were not reducing the total number and average severity of rail incidents.
It kind of parallels the discussions around automation in passenger cars. The automation is absolutely going to fail, but the threshold of "better than the average idiot who tries to read a newspaper while driving at 70 mph", the threshold of what constitutes an acceptable level of failure in automation only needs to be lower than the actual overall performance of the manual process it replaces.
common misconception. negative train control isn't when you rub a train's face in the oil spill it left on the ballast, it's when you *don't* if it *doesn't*
Ha!
@OP: Oh, we’re well into Hegel and dialectics…? I can dig that (rather than ballast)… 😅
@@musiqtee skinner, actually, but i guess the structure of operant conditioning does map pretty neatly onto a hegelian dialectic, so it's not like you're wrong.
@@toslowlypoke I agree, but I wasn’t sure (smart) how to append behaviorism to the (quite simplistic actually) PTC (ATC here) unit - I got hung up on the OPs (dual) negatives forming a progressive change of observation (not outcome)… 😂
Good big bang theory reference.
I’ve been a certified PTC installer for 7 years. PTC can absolutely control throttle. Not so much on earlier retrofitted locomotives. But on factory installed units, it can absolutely be fully automated. That’s why carriers are pushing for one man crews. I kinda agree. But the person in the conductor seat should be an electrician.
Interesting! I only ever dealt with modified power. That's not so surprising, thinking about it though. Thank you for the correction! I'd also note that a lot of the industry is *obviously* pushing for automation, but it's nice to see the support from the regulators.
@@Hyce777 You were spot on with everything else. I wouldn’t call it a correction, more of an addendum. Next time you’re in Houston, and have a min, it be fun to look at some cool cars in my shop and drink some beers.
Sold! :D @@BoostedCyclePerformance
I've only ever seen that with PTC TO blended units and TO can't run for crap. Now a PTC penalty will open the PCS and cut all power but not Dynos
@Hyce777, you are right about the PTC not selecting throttle positions. What the gentleman is referring to is the energy management system. PTC and EMS have been integrated on the same screen, however they are a separate system from an operating standpoint. EMS is set up by the Engineer separately from the PTC and you can run PTC without the EMS active. PTC, by itself, will not do anything besides provide warning and dump the air if you don't take appropriate action.
To all fellow ES&D crew members,
In lieu of this video, the Eat Shit & Die will be running under Negative Train Control (NTC). Here are the 6 commandments:
#1: The throttle stays on the ceiling AND back wall at all times.
#2: The Johnson bar is welded all the way in the corner, because the ES&D doesn't believe in going backwards.
#3: Every safety valve is welded shut; the ES&D paid for the whole pressure gauge, therefore the ES&D is going to use the whole goddamn gauge.
#4 Speed limits? The ES&D doesn't have time for that bullshit!
#5 Forget the f*cking signals! Every train is highest priority on the ES&D. You just need to race the others to the switch, and pray you get there first!
#6: Following the Vatican & Southern's example, all express services have 150 pounds of nitrous-oxide on tap in the locomotives to ensure passengers arrive on time, regardless of their condition upon arrival.
Are we still allowed to brawl it out over who gets on the turntable first? Please say yes!
🫡
@shimesu443 yes
To quote my own comment: speed limits on the ES&D are merely speed suggestions
Oh hell yeah!!
I like to think of the two man crew requirement in the same light as planes. Under ideal conditions commercial planes could be capable of take off, flight, and landing without any human input. However, when things go wrong it's nice to have a pair of pilots to provide educated oversight of the automated systems and reduce the odds of catastrophy.
Hmmm 1 man crews are only really viable for metro systems due to their frequent stops
Longer distance trains need 2 man crews moreso passenger trains think britain and europe gets away with 1 man freight crews but our trains and distances are alot shorter and don't end up stuck in the middle of nowhere.
The train wreck you discussed is also why if the FRA catches you with your phone on while on duty at any time they kill you in real life
It kinda astounds me that it took till post 08 to ban cell phones in the cab. Kinda seems like this would have been a no-brainer several years earlier. I think honestly that was the bigger issue in that wreck, I mean PTC is good obviously, but I think the real culprit here, as is often the case with Railroading is just pay the f*ck attention to what you are doing. Its not hard work, but if you screw it up, the consequences can be disastrous/fatal.
@@ericsundell9978 All safety rules are written in blood.
@@ethanwhitehead2085 For sure, and the more seemingly repressive they are, the more blood was spilled in the ink. At this point I assume a lot of industrial fatalities are caused by either the victim or someone who controlled the victim deliberately tossing the rules aside.
The missile knows where it is, because it knows where it isn't
HLC?
@@lonnyyoung4285 it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error
@@lonnyyoung4285 would you intercept me?
The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.
In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation, the variation being the difference between where the missile is, and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too may be corrected by the GEA. However, the missile must also know where it was.
The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows. Because a variation has modified some of the information the missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn't, within reason, and it knows where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn't, or vice-versa, and by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be, and where it was, it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error.
That Thumbnail wreck is also why the FRA banned the usage of cell phones during the operations of the train. For those who don't know, cell phones must be turned off and must be stored away somewhere that is not in or on your persons.
Many operations permit crews to have cell phones for work related activity
@cdavid8139 yeah. And I'm jealous. But it is cool when get I operate on G&W territories, it's sort of like a free pass. There's been quite a few times when I've had to call a track car or a MOW crew who are 10-20 miles down the main line from us to get permission through their limits. And a lot of those times, they would have to call me back to let me know their crews are in the clear.
Two PTC fun facts from the Northeast:
- Amtrak and a number of the commuter railroads use ACSES, a PTC system that relies on transponders placed in the middle of the track, instead of using GPS. I think this was because they wanted to be able to differentiate speeds between outer (local) tracks and inner (express) tracks and couldn't guarantee reliable enough resolution with GPS, but I could be wrong on that.
- Strangely enough, PATH (Port Authority Trans-Hudson, the subway system between Jersey and Manhattan) was included in the PTC mandate despite being isolated* from the neighboring mainline railroads. IIRC this was a legacy thing from when the system was the Hudson & Manhattan and actually DID share tracks with the PRR, meaning they fell under the FRA's jurisdiction when it was formed.
Interesting! I knew the northeast corridor used a different system but it's entirely out of my wheelhouse. Cool!
@@Hyce777 it would be interesting to see you review other systems. things like the german PZb LZB, and the Japanese ATC-s and ATC-p systems, and the lackluster uk AWS and TPWS. cause I think you could give interesting points on how well you feel these systems work/how safe you feel they are.
@@Hyce777 The two main systems are called I-ETMS (the one that is mainly used on freight railroads), and ACSES or ASES (The one with transponders mainly used on passenger only railroads). But there are some others. The others being used on some isolated lines, or one.. being carried over from a system that existed before PTC, but qualified as being PTC.
PATH utilizes Communications Based Train Control, a similar product utilized by MTA New York City Transit on their "L" Canarsie line. (I helped commission that system to bring them into compliance by the 2018 deadline in my previous job). The ACSES system also doesn't have a dependency upon the GPS resolution...something that came to light awhile back where the entire I-ETMS system came to a standstill, but the Northeast corridor trains were still able to run. Tunnels areas come to mind where GPS can be problematic.
-An ACSES-II PTC engineer
@@Aliceintraining while the UK systems are more limited in scope they've been around and functional for a lot longer.
Imho as an outsider from a RR that uses a transponder based system the implementation of PTC does seem to be a good example of perfection being the enemy of good enough.
Hyce,
I just want to thank you for this video. My dad and I have been confused about the inner workings of PTC for a while now and you basically answered all of our questions. I have a feeling he’s going to appreciate this just as much as I did
"dont show up drunk" kenosha starts playing in my head xd
Greeting from PZB90, LZB, ETCS land :p
You forgot a good dozen ones.
Thankfully ETCS will finally unify it, somewhat.
@@0ptera he pretty much mentioned all the train control systems currently in operation in Germany, except ETCS.
Oh, except one, which is the Fahrsperre at the Berlin S-Bahn. Essentially, it works by installing a movable little arm at signals, which, if the signal is red, will extend. When a train then comes by, it literally opens the main air line, emptying it, thus applying all the brakes.
@@m0llux when mentioning Berlin you have to think of ZBS as well
The Rotterdam Metro uses the LZB system too
@@m0llux The London Underground has had that tripcock emergency stop system for a long time as well. I'd assume it's probably been reinvented quite a few times.
We gon' learn today.
This was a super fun and informative video! I know we all love the "PTC could have prevented this" memes but having a more serious video talking about PTC was excellent! Where I live in New Jersey, we have a very small freight railroad called the Morristown & Erie that doesn't have PTC installed in their very small roster of locomotives. They run along a stretch of track that NJT doesn't use but sometimes they have to run on the Morris & Essex Line and they have to run with a NJ Transit engine on the front that does have PTC. They also have an exception to run excursion trains at the Whippany Railway Museum (Which you should come and visit btw! They have some super cool stuff!) without having PTC (or a NJT locomotive on the front) even though there are several crossings on the line. (Like you mentioned in the video in relation to steam locomotives not having PTC, there are workers stationed at each crossing to make sure that the crossings are clear.)
Steam locos in Germany have basically a brake cylinder connected to the throttle lever with a over pressure valve, so if the brake pipe drops below max application it will close the regulator really quickly to about 5% (minimum steam flow for lubrication and to not draw a vacuum)
That's really cool!
In Europe it is called ERTMS ( European Rail Traffic Management System ) It not using Gps. It uses Position Balise and the locomotive's distance counter to calculate the exact position of the train
Level 1 (with signals and fixed transponders often just at the signals) Level 2 (without signals/or signals but continuous data transmission via GSM-R )
Level 3 (without signals and track management continuous data transmission via GSM-R Moving block)
Britain uses AWS and TPWS systems that one can see in the gauge.
Tempi rail crash flashbacks...
The difference between Level 1 and Level 2 is not whether it has lineside signals or not; it's the mode of data transmission. Level 1 has intermittent transmission (i.e. only at fixed transponders), Level 2 has continuous data transmission via GSM-R. And you can have lineside signals on Level 2, although you don't have to.
@@davidty2006 they are less sophisticated, but they get the job done. TPWS can work at any speed and conditions theoretically.
@@sniper.93c14 long as there is electricity and enough distance to stop.
The problem with PTC is the class one railroads use it to terminate employees. It is a good thing for safety but once you get a 30,000 ton coal train with 2 seperate sets of DP and they want you to use Trip optimizer, and it starts to speed, but they don't want you to disengage TO until it prompts you to take control and by the time it does that you're enforced by PTC for speeding and then they pull you out of service. Point being is PTC just becomes another thing the engineer has to monitor on top of all the other things that are controlling the train makes it very difficult. The conductor can not even control PTC.
Management is getting incorrect training
Who says management gets any training at all? As far as I can tell, they’re hatched out of an alien pod already perfect.
Thank you for the video! Very informative.
I never in a million years thought I would hear the words "navigation by dead reckoning" applied to a _train._ Ye gads! Fun to learn today!! :)
Honestly it makes sense, wheelslip aside the tracks are pretty well laid down.
What I'm surprised is the railroads don't just have the work crews just clip a bar with a resistor between rails. That would trip the track circuit and mark that segment as occupied.
I think that every safety system that can compute a safe stopping distance has some form of dead reckoning. That is, all but the simplest train safety systems worldwide. Things like the UK's AWS can't tell the train to stop in so many metres, but the Germans had such a system in at least the 60s, which did need a little mini-computer to do all the numbers onboard.
I say "Germans" because I think that both east and west had similar systems, because it started development before the wall was started, but it's been a while so don't quote me on that bit
So the Train knows where it is because it knows where it isn't.
I actually knew the engineer on the Chatsworth collision. Yes, he was texting at the Chatsworth station, but he had forgotten the signal before hand was a restrictive signal, and the conductor didn’t remind him. The final signal before the track went to one line had malfunctioned showing green when it should’ve been red, unfortunately the UP freight had just cleared the last signal before the double track so when Robert ran the red, there was no way of either Crew, knowing that they were gonna run into each other. another interesting thing about PTC is that my line the Ventura in Santa Barbara subs were the first part of the country to be fitted with PTC
Ugh. Horrible. I'm sorry for your friend.
Thank you. I’ve long felt that there had to be a lot more to the story than just “Texting is bad, mmmmay?” As a lifelong railroader, I’m not about to defend the use of electronics on a train, but I feel that texting became the scapegoat and nobody bothered to look into a more nuanced explanation of the situation.
The control point was lined AGAINST the Metrolink train, the dispatcher cannot set a route or even request a signal in that condition. And this idea that there was a "false clear" is untrue. Shunt the rail and the signal defaults to red. And it WAS red, the guy ran a red absolute. Why? who the hell knows. Probably because as a commuter engineer you not only get used to doing the same things at the same places but you expect clears wherever you go. The meet they were making was usually at a different spot. Running on an approach, making a station stop, texting on your phone, blowing for crossings...etc are all distractions that get in the way of remembering that you're running on an approach. It's not rocket science. The engineer was just distracted at the worst possible moment.
I do wonder if theres a trend starting of putting them on steam locomotives since Canadian Pacific 2816 and UP 4104 have had those systems added on board.
Over un the shop for 576 theres been discussions lately on it though mostly just wondering how those other steam locos are implementing the system
It'll be interesting. If folks want to play on the main....
UP 4014
For steam locomotives: Germany still has Indusi as the main backup for everything as that is not depending on any other fixed infrastructure besides the passive inductors.
The Dutch system was created after the last steam locomotive left the scene. There is a version that can be used on steam but it probably ties in into the existing Indusi actuators.
As a train driver in Germany reading about train crews getting into trouble for an intervention seems like some sort of distopian fiction. Over here we´ve had some sort of train control on every train since the 80s and on every route since about 2012. I´ve been driving on my own now for about three years and I´ve had so many interventions by PZB alone that I couldn´t even count them, if I wanted to. (Some were due to equipment failure but most were caused by me not braking enought or otherwise being stupid, but nothing serious ever happend. Stuff like passing a signal at danger after being authorised to do so but forgetting to actually override the train stop.) Being suspended from driving after every single one seems insane to me. After 2 weeks we wouldn´t have any train drivers left operating.
I think what they get you for is speeding. Althpugh, there is a central analysis office, that regulary checks TRU data to check driver performance. After a dangerous event they will also scrutinize you.
PTC is great when it works. How does PTC work? Judging by my local railroad... Poorly. When you have a PTC hit at a given location given to every train that passes, for weeks on end, for no reason anyone from train crews to dispatchers can find..? Well, hurrah for PTC, can we get it working better please?
Clear back in the 40's, Pere Marquette was using ATS (Automatic Train Stop). The FRA ordered the 1225 crew to remove the no longer functional hardware. I assume ATS was a neanderthal ancestor of PTC?
Essentially yeah. Usually based on mechanical trip stops tripping a brake valve.
and ats was a lot better
Now that my job places me in very close proximity to the rail industry (well, auxiliary to. I'm railway taxi - drive crews from their train to hotel / yard / other train / whatever), maybe now I'll start to understand what's being said when the crew in the back starts griping about PTC!
I love your videos. I'm the type to google everything I can find and yet yours always teach me something new, even if it's something I thought I had well understood. And now that I'm interacting somewhat with the industry on a daily basis, it's more than just trivia knowledge. You don't really gain an appreciation for everything until you're dealing with it up close
As far as I’ve understood it, workers are, generally speaking, lazy and stupid. What keeps the train driver from over-relying on the PTC and keeps them paying attention to the track if the PTC will (theoretically) do all that for them?
Penalty applications almost always stop you, so, frequent stops. :)
The territory I am qualified on, I get to use both the I-ETMS and ACSES systems. I love the I-ETMS much better than the ACSES. ACSES is great for passenger, especially commuter, as there is no entering information into a computer about your train. But, for friend, that does stuff like switching and reverse moves at switches and interlockings, yeah, it doesn't work well. There is no "restricted mode" like I-ETMS has. Also, it is programmed that every freight is a 15,000 ton all load train (maybe exaggerating a little) where I-ETMS performs according to your current train consist that is entered into the system.
After watching to the end, adding a few more things.
1) You didn't mention about PTC not being able to stop a rear end collision. Right now, there is no way to communicate where the rear of a train is.
2) You mentioned 21 in a 20 will cause braking. PTC won't enforce until 5 over except for the upper limits of restricted speed, then it will enforce at 20 mph.
3) Another thing it does, it starts blowing approx 20 seconds before a crossing (not sure of the exact number of seconds)
4) As far as problems, we had numerous in our cab signal territory. It still isn't perfect. When the Cab Signal drops to restricting, we have to be prepared to stop at the next Cab Signal Box or Interlocking fixed signal. PTC wants you at restricted speed now and will count you down to a penalty brake. If you're running on an approach in the cab (remember, the cab signal aspects just dictate max speed), you want to start slowing down before the next box where it drops to a restricting.
Commandment #7 of Negative Train Control (NTC): Instead of fusees, conductors and/or brakemen will drop a motion-detecting C4 explosive, with a fuse-like warning light. Ignore these new warning devices, you can kiss your ass goodbye!
Come now Hyce, we all know PTC means Pet The ChooChoo
So how would this work for a train like 4014, would they just use the diesel that’s behind it? Sorry it’s probably a stupid question. Hope your having a good day!
Essentially yeah
Though they did recently add it to the locomotive. I dont know the nuances but most likely its just GPS data, the signaling system in the cab, and controling the train breaks but not the locomotive breaks since they try to avoid using those on that locomotive
4014 was recently outfitted with PTC, and while the steam team TECHNICALLY doesn’t need a diesel anymore, they are choosing to run with one for the foreseeable future to cut down on 4014s brake use
The same as it does for the diesel. They used to use the Diesel's PTC behind the big boy, but with it's separate implementation it's just like a diesel with 26L, except the equipment is all in the tender save for the displays.
@@Hyce777 oh ok thank you very much!
CFRs mentioned. Church of Alco shall be summoned
Trains, aircraft, road vehicles, and watercraft are all trending towards systems that inform operators or act independently when an unfavorable situation is predicted to occur. The current feature sets, level of implementation, and maturity of the various systems leads me to believe that the teams don't talk. Complete interoperability would be interesting. A mesh of every powered conveyance could relay important train or truck information through passing cars
PTC is a good system, better a bad security system than none. I would have said that ETCS would be better than PTC because relying on GPS is not that good in my opinion because GPS spoofing and jamming is a problem for PTC. In my opinion they have the problem with ETCS not and ETCS you also get digital train radio that is encrypted and no one can hear or speak without a GSM-R sim card.
If PTC is anything like Electric Logs.
And if FRA is anything like the FMCSA. The manufacturer of the PTC are self certifying.
Meaning the manufacturer says "yep, we meet the regulations"
HYCE!!!! Whats up big bro,
Hey just wanted 2 thank u 4 ur reply few months ago. I was going thru it n u made my day. 😊😊
Let me know if u make it to Japan. U would love our trains!!!
C ya 😊😊😊😊😊😊😊
PTC wouldnt have stopped the 93 Amtrak Mobile Alabama crash.
Thanks Hyce, as a Railroad Conductor currently this is exactly what PTC does. It’s not Full proof but it’s a backup. Still as a conductor I still have to know my territory and use the timetable charts and know where Quiet Zones are or speed restrictions are at to let the engineer know. Can’t be over speeding going into a siding. When there is a restricted speed going In or leaving out. Sometimes PTC does crap out on us so we have to follow through timetable and get word from Dispatch. But it is what is.
Railroad could look up to the skies for a better version of PTC. TCAS works pretty good if you ask me.
Dumping the air on a plane sounds like a bad idea.... Lol
@Hyce777 Yeah, but every plane knows what every other plane is doing and where it is in closer proximity and will steer accordingly if the pilot doesn't react to its callouts. Our intercity express trains in Germany can align switches for overtaking and collision avoidance if dispatch misses something.
@@David-xl8zf makes sense. That's basically what PTC attempts to do in a rail context.
In the UK we have two systems, AWS and TPWS. They work together to stop trains if the driver isn't paying attention (This is excluding the dead mans switch that stops the train if the driver hasn't responded to a random beep in cab).
The way AWS and TPWS works is that when you come up to a signal, displaying "caution", "preliminary caution" or "danger", an electromagnet on the ballast below the train will be energised, this in tern will be detected by the train and will set off an audible and visual warning in the cab. It doesn't tell you what the warning is for so it forces the driver to look forward and pay attention to what the system is warning you about. You have to acknowledge the warning within 2.2 seconds or it puts the train into Emergency breaking. After a failed AWS acknowledgement, a driver must contact the signaller in order to get permission to isolate / reset AWS and reset emergency breaks before being able to move off, and they generally have to explain why they missed the AWS acknowledgement.
These electromagnets are also in place for upcoming speed restrictions and other such hazards. We don't have them for things like crossings because it is expected that a signal will become "danger" should a crossing be malfunctioning, and as such the AWS will respond accordingly to the red signal. However this is just scratching the surface as to what safety systems we have, as well as things like in cab signalling for high speed lines etc.
TPWS also does things to make sure you aren't over speeding by too much but I'm not too familiar with that side of it so i decided not to even try and explain that part.
Oh, and every mainline train in the UK has to be AWS capable, but it's pretty easy to support.
So PTC question: are steam engines grandfather in if they are newly built or do they need it in some form ie need a diesel after the steam engine, or built in?
I ask this because I am having to do research for my short line and I might as well ask someone who knows PTC.
From conversations Ive had working on a restoration.
It depends, bur most times if running a SL in a PTC system, the helper deisel will have it and the SL doesnt have it on board.
There are 2 that I know of in the US that have it and thats the big boy whcih just got it, and the Canadian pacific
They either need a waiver, or need it if they are running on a required road. Most short lines don't need PTC. Look at the requirements.
@@Hyce777 thank you.
So I have a Railroad question: what does the railroad do with the old wooden ties?
Great question. No idea.
@@Hyce777 I was hoping for a it depends. I thought that if it can not be used anymore on the main it might be used as a replacement for the yard/shop like old rail but I could be wrong.
Most are collected and sold to landscaping contractors or used on MOW trackage.
@@Johndoe-jd In the UK at least, they sell them to lumber companies that check them over, see if any are safe to re-use for other projects (e.g. garden bed building, path laying/borders, etc.) and resell the good ones. The bad ones that are clean but clearly fractured or damaged, they basically mulch them and use it as wood chip (often used in landscaping, occasionally as playground safety cover, though this is being phased out in favor of rubber matting that has more give in the event of a fall).
I can answer that: the ties get sold to home improvement stores to be sold to homeowners to be used for exterior home decorations, such as retaining walls (my house has a retaining wall made out of old railroad ties), the perimeters for gardens, and several more examples. I worked at a home improvement store for a few years and we sold old railroad ties in the garden section.
@6:30 - "lots of switches"
dumb network engineer thought: what if you used the rails to carry a CANBUS network? then you could have a vendor agnostic setup where any PTC-compliant monitoring device just tell "the rail" what its status is, and any PTC compliant locomotive could read "the rail" and learn status of track devices and get hazard warnings.
What happens when the switch is in the wrong position? June 7th 1973, Eckman, WV. My father as conductor in the engine with the engineer. Freight train, N&W The switch was thrown and Daddy's train was directed towards a stationary train. Head on collision, the stationary train caught fire. All of the articles say no one was hurt, however, my father's back was broken that day. I was fortunate enough to purchase an original photo off of Ebay of the wreck and some of the locals grabbed some photos that day as well. One of my very first memories is "helping" my mother nurse my father back to health.
If there's anything you know about another one of Wabtec's systems (particularly Trip Optimizer), we would love to learn more what you know if it!
Ugh, it takes SO much restraint to not make a bunch of trolley jokes, because these darned newfangled tech bro railroaders took Philadelphia Transportation Company’s acronym!
So many memes are popping into my head and none of them are the one you mentioned. Namely the one from Anchorman, "60% of the time it works everytime." And trying to wrap my mind around this I gave up and defaulted to "The Missile Knows Where it is." ( just youtube search it for the original like 70's audio for the Air Force's video on them trying to explain how their radar guided missiles worked.) It can be translated over to this though. "The Choo-choo knows where it is because it knows where it isn't and it knows where it isn't because it knows where it is." You'd just need to go find it for the entire garglemesh that is. It makes sense if you're able to comprehend it, like calculus, but what it actually benefits you personally in your life........Can't think of much.
Compared to ex-USSR, PTC looks like such a legal overcomplicated mess so i even doubt if it really works.
When I hear stories and reports on accidents where "PTC could have prevented this", I am reminded of all the accidents I haven't heard of, because PTC did prevent them. Its not perfect system by any means, but it is forward progress.
Any comments on ETCS? It's currently being tested here in Finland.
Funny thing-we've had PTC for a long time before Chatsworth. 103 years before in 1905, the UK's GWR gave us ATC, which applies the brakes if actions aren't taken.
ATC and PTC are similar in concept but extremely different in implementation. The US has had many varieties of the same on many alignments, for probably as long as the UK has as well. Just wasn't required, nor as "sophisticated" (complicated).
Electromagnetic ATS has been around here in the states since the mid-1920s. It’s a far more rudimentary system compared to modern PTC.
ATC? is that a older system before AWS and TPWS?
Edit: huh it is the predecessor to it... electric signal from a ramp between the gauge gets sent to the train saying if the signal is clear or if at danger sounds an alarm in the cab which forcess the brakes on if not responded to in a set period of time...
You know, I'm not sure where ACS-64 number 600 is going to get without a wire overhead, but coal is conductive so I guess it works!
So theoretically ETCS could be classified as a PTC system?
Given that you say there isn't a well defined technical standard and only a loose set of definitions, wouldn't that create a lot of variety in different implementations of PTC? Would that create several incompatible systems?
Personally I prefer ETCS as it's basically become an international standard at this point whilst being flexible enough for both passenger and freight.
I do have a thought about when it comes to adding PTC for maintenance equipment. Instead of equipping every piece of equipment with its own system, why don’t they implement some sort of “blocker” unit at both ends of the work zone? Something like a locomotive or a hi-rail truck to trigger the system at each end should be able to trigger the system, and effectively shut down the tracks for worker safety, as well as providing a physical barrier or obstacle before the work zone.
I would imagine it similar to how a road is shut down for repair work, with a Scorpion blocker truck protecting the workers in the roadway. I could be missing something, but it makes sense to me
So, on the subject of automation, the UK has run automated trains in London, on the Docklands Light Railway, since the late 80s. I understand early on, in the first 5 years or so, there were some issues, but it's been pretty reliable since.
I'm not, of course, suggesting that this means all trains should be automated, clearly there's a variety of use cases for a railway/railroad, some of which will be more appropriate for automation than others.
A bit that you didn’t cover: When running without PTC on track that requires PTC your speed is limited to 49 mph. I believe but will have to look up the rule [we do it so rarely] that key trains are even more restricted.
Surprised no one has truly implemented PTC in any of the train simulators out there, you think it would've happened by now!
Hyce does PTC measure distance in miles/feet or in meters? Example, our ATP used to measure in meters, even with the UK ECTS, though they use mph, the system measures in meters as far as I am aware. We use the measuring feature when the train dives underground and it becomes time to announce the station as one function.
I used to think ATP is not such a cool thing but then I rethought about my position and that no one complains about pilots getting extra safety features, we as train crews deserve the extra help too. Safety is a good thing.
Ah, that's the thing 4014 got in order to be able to run without a helper diesel? Interesting
Thanks for the informative video. It really is fascinating to see how different the philosophies are across the pond as to what is wayside and what is trainside problems.
That system is really cool honestly, and I can definitely understand the drivers worry about losing jobs, but I honestly don't think the public would allow trains to drive autonomously when its not like an airport shuttle or something.
PTC dont Work Ask Norfork South About its Allen Town Pa Failure, it failed to stop a train that ran a red block signal
Very unrelated-do you have a hyacinth macaw? Curious about the symbol.
Lot of information here. I think as a result I have vaguely determine that my hometown mainline probably had PTC isntalled on it, but the sidings for serving the coal power plant and particle board plant probably didn't...
Great video! Learn a lot!
There was a system developed in the 1930's that could sense when a train passed an approach signal and if some action was not made by the engineer such as reducing the throttle or setting brakes the engine would do that automatically.
The train knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.
In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation, the variation being the difference between where the train is, and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too may be corrected by the GEA. However, the train must also know where it was.
The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows. Because a variation has modified some of the information the train has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn't, within reason, and it knows where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn't, or vice-versa, and by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be, and where it was, it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error.
What does PTS do if the GPS system can't identify where it is due to a solar event causing GSP devices to not be able to detect the faint satellite GPS signals?
Hi Hyce great video bud keep up the great work 😁😁😁👍👍👍
I'm interested in hearing more about steam because many have claimed PTC is one of the reasons that the N&W J 611 can no longer run mainline excursions since "there's no way to put it in a steam engine". We know they'd got exemptions for ditch lights but seemed odd they couldn't have something like that for PTC given all the things you pointed out (and then also usually extra precautions and security along the route to keep people off the tracks who want to see it)
The managed to put PTC on the BigBoy so it’s possible for a steam train.
It’s likely just so expensive not many are going to bother. I think one of the big issues with BigBoy was getting good battery backups for everything since the dynamo wasn’t reliable for powering it all.
"The train knows where it is by knowing where it isn't..."
I play train sim world so I leaned it from there. I am more used to PZB, Sifa, AWS, AFB and the LZB one. Though I have one route that has PTC.
Edit. For those curious I will explain what each does to the best of my ability. Take what I say with a grain of salt. I learned this from a game and wikipidia. I don't have any real life experience.
Lets start with the 2 that are similar to what Hyce is talking about. PZB and AWS. First PZB. PZB or Punktförmige Zugbeeinflussung is basically a the german exuivaliant of PTC, but it runs differently. PZB tells you about yellow signals, redsignals and if there is a lower speed limit. The way PZB runs are by magnets on the rails wich are usually by signals and lower speed zones. There are two main things that tell you what to do in PZB. There is a 2000Hz magnet, 1000Hz magnet, and a 500Hz magnet. The 1000Hz magnet is usually before caution signals and lower speed zones. There are a few things you can and or must do when encontering a 1000Hz signal. There are three levers on trains with PZB. There is PZB acknowledge, PZB release, and PZB override. When you get the signal you HAVE to acknowledge it in 2 to 4 seconds. If you don't the train WILL come to a complete stop using emergency brakes. Once it's at a stop you can the move again after pressing acknowlage. If you do hit it in time then you will receive a message saying slow down to a certant speed before 23 seconds. after about 1250 meters (used to be 700) you can release the speed restriction only if it is safe to release. The most common place for a 1000hz is again before a speed drop or if its a yellow signal wich may be followed up by a red signal. That brings up the 500hz magnet. About 250 m before a train aproches a red signal it will receive a 500hz magnet. This is a forced speed limit and going over it will cause an emerganicy stop. Idk if it's like this in real life but it asumses your going atlest under 55 kph. over that and it will stop you now mater what. Even if you just entered it. These are found always before a red signal and makes sure you are going slow enough to stop before said signal. From my experience you cannot release it until you are passed the signal when its green or yellow. Lastly is 2000Hz. This one I have the least amount of experience with because its a magnet after a red signal. In train sim world if you pass a red signal any amount it fails you and you have to restart the mission. But from what I understand it's a emergency stop signal. It automatically. Next we have AWS. Its baciacly a dumbed down version of PZB. It mainly runs in the UK. I its just a sound that buzzes everytime you cross a yellow that you have to press an acknowledge button for and a flower like light will turn on until you pass a green. I think it also stops you when you pass a red also but I'm not too sure on that.
After that is LZB. You can have PZB with LZB, but you cannot have LZB without PZB. Altleast to what I know. From what I can understand LZB is just automation for high speed trains. The literally automate the driving part. Even the PZB stuff.
After that we basically have cruise control or AFB. Its just cruise control. There are two ways to turn it on. When your at a stand still you can just turn it on at 0kmp. When moving you need the throttle off and the cruise control set to max speed. Then you can turn it on. Set the speed and then set the throttle.
Lastly is Sifa. Sifa is just an awareness procedure also in Germany. It periodically sets off an sound that when heard you have to press a switch of some kind to acknowledge it. If you don't in time the train will have an emergency stop, BUT unlike the other systems if you acknowledge it even after the alarm and then reset the throttle you don't have to come to a complete stop.
Not every country has these and if they do they may be named differently. I am just more familiar with the German and UK systems because that seems to be the most popular route typse in train sim world 4. That and Germany is very stricked about all that.
Again take all this with a grain of salt. I have knowledge from a game and wikipidia. I've got nothing compared to what the professionals know. They know this for a living.
AWS/TPWS is a bit more sophisticated than that.
AWS is used to warn the driver of yellow/red signals. Every signal on the UK network (excluding HS1 and platforms that can only be accessed from HS1) have an AWS transmitter fitted before the signal that emits a magnetic field if the signal is displaying anything other than a solid green aspect. This is detected by a receiver mounted on the leading bogey of the train, causing an AWS warning that will apply the emergency brakes if not acknowledged. The sunflower lights until a green signal to remind the driver.
TPWS is used for train protection. From an infrastructure perspective, TPWS and AWS are very similar. TPWS emitters work in two modes.
In overspeed mode, the emitter will apply the trains emergency brakes if the train is travelling too fast to stop at a red signal or slow down for speed limit.
In train stop mode, the emitter will apply the trains emergency brakes if passed at all.
TPWS can also be used to protect buffers.
A third system called ATO is also used in the UK, but it has not been expanded past its trial sites on the WMCL and Chiltern Main Line, and operates alongside AWS/TPWS
Glad I don’t gotta run with that, bad enough they got tattletale cameras looking at us….
PTC is why all the interesting, obsolete signalling tech is being removed from American railroads. I hope the Colorado railroad museum is enjoying that newly acquired wig wag... PTC and federal money from the 2020 Cares Act for implementation of PTC is why it was removed.
Interesting! I didn't realize that was the background behind that. We do love the wig wag and it's prominently displayed and operating.
Fun Fact - the Amtrak 91 Collision in Cayce, SC happened during a signals suspension to Install PTC. People claimed PTC would have prevented it. I have yet to find anyone who could adequately explain how PTC could have prevented an accident while PTC was intentionally shut down for maintenance.
Really? It’s not exactly rocket surgery. PTC -being active- could have prevented that situation. That’s the whole point. Are you genuinely confused by that, or just being obtuse or pedantic?
Do railroads use 220MHz these days? What happened to the 160MHz AAR band?
Yes, that's the frequency they chose explicitly for PTC. The AAR band is still in service for normal radio, so far as I am aware.
These comments are why I never want to be a hogger. There's no nuance or romance in railroads anymore, it's all just one conglomerate after another, and from the sounds of things, operating the locomotives is more paperwork than actual manual operation nowadays... God help you if you miss a decimal point or forget a zero.
There's sensible safety standards and then there's bureaucracy with big brother looking over your shoulder 24/7, and we are very quickly crossing over from one to the other as a culture. Including railroads. What few of them there are left.
I cannot be the only young man who looks at the prospect of working for one of 5 railroads, and then dealing with all of this nonsense 24/7, just to randomly get fired anyway, and says "fuck this, I'm just running trains on my PC"
Toooootally get that. It's definitely different. Hopefully not in a bad way, but time will tell.
Something interesting about our railroad and work culture versus what is done in Japan is that the Japanese make sure that the people who operate the trains are operating under and enforcing the rules more effectively.
We have to use technology to make sure that happens instead of making training more effective, because that takes timez and time is money.
I suppose you could argue that our systems are much more vast and our workforce matches proportionally. I still find it to be a bit ironic.
Definitely. There's a huge cultural difference for sure which plays a role too..
@@Hyce777 Agreed. Japanese culture has always fascinated me, and I started learning the language earlier this year.
But you're supposed to be on vacation, sir!
Now I've got a question about PTC's natural evolution, fully automated trains without an engineer on board.
There's no way this goes wrong provided you have the existing PTC things in place, and add on to it from there, with the caveat that if you have anything other than automated trains running on the same network, all the safety goes out the window because humans are unpredictable and fickle things, while machines will only ever do EXACTLY (and only) what you program them to do.
Point is, if something goes wrong with fully automated trains, a human's ultimately to blame for it, 100% of the time. The machine is never at fault, for the machine is fully deterministic. If it's not fully deterministic, it wouldn't work in the first place in any case.
One of the main issues with full automation is who gets blamed in an accident. If there’s a person in at least partial control then that’s someone that can also take the blame as they’re supposed to be the one paying attention and making sure things are safe. If it full automation with no person then when it crashes it becomes the responsibility of the company. And, they don’t want that.
Same with self driving cars. Unless laws change they’re going to still say the driver is supposed to be paying attention and able to take over. Otherwise crashes would be the fault of the car and companies would get sued over every crash.
No system is perfect so there will be accidents. Isn’t like suddenly removing the people makes things perfect.
fascinating as usual Hyce! One layman question I had, when you explained about GPS "dark zones" where the system can use speed in axle revolutions to still know where the train is and make informed decisions about safety...I am assuming this includes some way of knowing whether the train went through or diverged on a switch? Lacking GPS location, to the very figurative way a train can "turn" when a switch provides more than one path, just "how far the train wheels turned" isn't going to narrow down where the train ended up. I can only figure this is an obvious thing that was solved for but I'm asking anyway.
I would imagine the system should know the position of switches the train is headed towards. If so it would basically assume the train went the right way at the switch. Then when GPS picks back up it can then verify it’s in the right place.
99.9% is 10 minutes of failure every week
While i have my opinion on PTC I think overall it can be a good tool, and thats all should be. Did I wish it did things differently, absolutely and I would love to have that discussion. EMS / Trip Sodomizer should be completely thrown out, it wastes fuel like you would not believe, damages freight and the amount of wear and tear on the equipment is exponential.
I have only heard bad things about trip sodomizer. I'd bet you've got a great understanding of PTC and how it could be better lol
So i have a question about PTC, can a locomotive that is not equipped with PTC still lead a train, if a trailing locomotive has PTC would it still work on the mainline, or does it have to be equipped on the leading unit only?
Lead must be equipped.
18:20 Another thing here is, and you can learn this in a lot of different places, is a computer is absolutely a dumb instrument. If the GPS is distorted badly enough, it will not be useful for surveyors, drivers, pilots, or guided missile cruisers.
And when it comes to rail traffic, yeah, it's a new system that reduces the load on the crew, and SEEMS like it can take over the job. If we trust the machine enough to let it do that. I don't think we should. The machine only is reliable so long as everything is working and is setup properly. But it's a system on which enough relies I think that we'll always be in need of intelligent human controllers who can verify the machine isn't going to yeet itself into a brick wall because GPS accuracy is getting thrown off by high levels of interference or latitude. With hundreds of tons of cargo or dozens of lives at risk around their operation... human checks on a possible fault in the computer is good to have.
Rio Tinto in Australia didn't think it was problem...and they've only had 2 derailments in over about 6 years of FULLY AUTONOMOUS operations, since starting in 2018.
And the military can turn off civilian GPS at any time needed for national defense. However, distorting GPS for a guided missile cruiser is harder than you might think - military GPS was designed with electronic warfare firmly in mind.
With all this PTC stuff thats available, is there anything that senses a car on a rr crossing or other obstruction. Seems like sensors could be setup to signal red lights if there is something blocking a sensor while the train is inside the crossing 'block'. Do you know of any 'smart' rr crossings with extra safety features besides the arms?
Wabtec is developing that tech, it's what I alluded to as more crossings 2.0 things.
So its like the German PZB if I understand that correctly?
except PTC uses sattelite to able to intervere the train
So PTC could've prevented jersey being set to the house track?
Yup.
*mentions FRA regulation*
*looks ominously at SCOTUS having just overturned Chevron*
Is there a history of the courts overruling the FRA before the 1980s that worries you?
The courts before the 80's don't concern me. The current court(s) do b/c they're packed with corrupt fascists.
Ok I watched the whole video and I understand the safety overlay idea and that there are mandatory 2 man crews. But regulations can change as technology gets better, I honestly believe railroads will automate. Not the entire system but I can see it being done to a point where mainline trains run crewless to certain points then have a crew take over for more complex sections or operations.
I will not be surprised if that's what happens some day.
18:45 wait superliners out of 30th 🧐
There was a example of why ptc is necessary on some new track in the PNW a few years ago, it's always a stupid story.
Yeaaaah I used to work there. Lol
Still can't see other trains in front tho.
I love how easy it is for me to understand your videos
Thoughts on trip optimizer and how it interfaces with PTC?
I've never had any experience with it, and all the colloquial knowledge I have leads me to believe it's pretty garbage... Lol
Dead reckoning has killed many mariners. I guess it works better when handled by computers and/or on land.
To err is human, but you need a computer if you really want to fuck everything up.
Yeah when it's simple math based on wheel rotations and you can't steer it makes a lot more sense. Lol
Got a question regarding Montezuma Mondays: since Brett also has CAD files on the Montezuma could he host Montezuma Mondays while you’re on your trip to Croatia?
I don't need to put that evil on him. Lol
CN's wording for it is zero is possible
I’m curious about two things.
1) what are the exact requirements/restrictions on inhalation hazard, especially anhydrous ammonia? Our interchange partner is a class 3 shortline that runs quite a bit of AA but isn’t required to have PTC.
2) In theory could PTC be implemented on a line that doesn’t have any signals? The system could still enforce switch position, crossings and train position based on authority (mile post A to B for example).
As Hyce stated there are exceptions, one of them being the fact that the line you interchange with is a Class 3 and not a Class 1(Class 2 don't have PTC either unless they also have commuter or intercity passenger trains on them).
For 1) - check 49 cfr part 236. It's a very fun read... Lol
2) I'd figure it could, yeah.
I'm shocked it took till 2008 for something like this to be implemented!
You mentioned that steam locomotives doesnt have PTC, does 4014 have it? Since it's actually traveling cross state lines and such?
4014 just had PTC installed last month
4014 has PTC, and has had flavors of it for a few years. There's been varieties of other systems around for 100+ years, but kinda sporadic and not required.
I have always wondered why the IHB and BRC in Chicago are not required PTC. They both transportation PIH and TIH tank cars.
On BRC it exists only between two interlocking locations [Belt Junction and 80th St] where Amtrak and Metra cross the BRC.
On the IHB it doesn’t exist at all. They were required to put split rail derails at CP Ridge and CP Canal. Both of those plants have diamonds that passenger trains cross.
You touched on communications. Fun fact: CDMA, one of the very first telecommunication protocols for Cell Phones was primarily invented for transportation logistics(started with studies for Ships in the 1950's at MIT). It ended up in the SPRINT Telephone Network. Sound familiar? It should, Southern Pacific Railroad Internal Network Telecommunications.