[PRCo] Re: Cab Signals vs Wayside Signals - Baltimore & Lease Back Financing

[Phillip Clark Campbell]

Mr.Schneider;


I spoke of Muni-Boeing - easy to confuse the two words isn't it (Boeing - BART) or maybe you are just giving another example with BART which is interesting.  I rode the Muni L-car from Parkside to downtown (only rode BART for the experience.)

As I remember the Boeing cars allowed for '3-top-speeds' - 50, 25, 10.  When 'about' 1,000-1,200-feet behind another car in the subway the top speed would drop to 25.  If traveling above that speed the op had 3-seconds to put the car into full service brake didn't he.  At 'about' 500-feet, 10-mph is the top speed and again the operator has 3-seconds to respond with full service brake.  If the operator meets the demands and slows to less than 10-mph he can apply power and move immediately behind the car in front and can even ram it at 10-mph if inattentive.  Thus cab signals do not rule out low-speed accidents do they and they can still run off the end of the track unless other measures to prevent same are taken.

If the operator did not respond within 3-seconds then the operator lost total control of the car and it 'must' come to a complete stop.  With the distances between impedance above, full service braking is far more than adequate to prevent an accident and keep the cars at a good distance.

If the computer sensed that full service braking was insufficient - slide, for instance - then the computer puts the car into emergency even though an emergency doesn't exist.  In emergency, the car 'must' come to a complete stop before power can be restored.  This was a bone chilling stop and could cause accidents on board, especially with elderly and most especially if they are standing.  Thus ops found that putting the car in neutral over rode emergency but allowed for full service braking using only the disc brakes  (track brakes are cut out and neutral bypasses the motors so no dynamic) - smooth stop and 'dead' car.  Going into neutral totally kills the car - it 'must' stop and it 'must' be restarted.

Very interesting the differences you note below, especially coasting in neutral - I honestly don't understand the advantage here to bypass the deadman.

We have the rules of today because of mistakes in the past don't we.  Remember the early 1900s accident with a low floor running away in the tunnel on Christmas Eve day - alcohol was involved, motorman was apparently 'angry' because he had to perform the conductor's job by putting the trolley pole back on the wire, and how on earth did he lose the trolley in the tunnel?  Too fast through the junction with a dewirement at the frog?  Back then may 'spotters' rode the car to 'insure' compliance and the spotters were needed because many violated rules.  I very seriously doubt a transit company operated without a rule book; they still exist today don't they.  If people of the past were so good then why the high accident rate with equipment?  Shouldn't be any accidents at all.  Washington car sees a skirt running, dumps sand, backs up on single track - rules violations?  Disastrous head on accident between 2 Brill 37s happened didn't it.  'If' people of the
 past performed any better it is because they knew they were likely watched.

Rules started with The 10 Commandments and even earlier but it is possible that the situation relative to the 10 is even worse today isn't it.  Our justice system can't display 'it' because it is 'religious' but the Constitution doesn't say freedom 'from' but freedom 'of' religion doesn't it.  Our government was set up with a system of 'checks and balances' because the founding fathers recognized the frailty of mankind that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, doesn't it.  These checks and balances are against the highest people in the land over 200-years ago.

Management is just as bad as the worker; look at the fiasco today created by greedy people in very high places with tremendous educations.  Michael Milken, Enron, Kenneth Lay and his sudden death is very suspicious and there a multitudes like these in high places.  This loan-lease back problem with AIG and transit agencies is just one example of highly paid / highly educated people taking serious risks which 'generally' work in an inflationary economy.  Here is the URL again:

http://thetransportpolitic.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/short-term-thinking/

Alcohol testing of safety sensitive employees nationwide resulted from airline pilots and railroad engineers being intoxicated on the job.  Pilots are certainly well educated and highly trained.  Even after mandatory testing there are news stories where alert people have prevented totally inebriated pilots from boarding planes.

Better trap better mouse.  No;  imperfect world.  'We' can't make anything failsafe and thus someone is able to find the weakness and exploit it.  Sometimes it is called loopholes isn't it.

People are people are people any where any time.  As I said above, we have the rules of today because of mistakes in the past don't we.


Phil






----- Original Message ----
> From: Schneider Fred <fwschneider at comcast.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 5:43:18 PM
> 
> I have no idea how you could override ATO system on BART.   I know  
> that road manual only allowed 25 mph so that you could not accelerate  
> beyond that.   If you could switch to that above 25 and then have  
> complete control and coast, I don't know.   I only ran a BART train  
> once and that was in yard manual control at Hayward in 1972.  I don't  
> remember a whole lot about it.   I also have no reason to believe  
> that 10 or 20 or so different systems all behave the same when when  
> different signal and component designers were involved.
> 
> What is obvious to me is that the world has changed.   IN 1910 or  
> 1920 or 1930 we wrote a rule book.   We assumed, and most often  
> rightfully so, that our platform staff were intelligent and could be  
> counted on to do what the rule book and the supervisors told them to  
> do.   In many instances companies didn't even need rule books because  
> their staff had brains and could put two and two together and achieve  
> four without having someone do it for them.   If we had some dufus  
> who was unable to cooperate, he no longer worked for us.   But most  
> men had this strange belief that they wanted to come home at night  
> and see their wife and children.   They weren't O. D'd on drugs.
> 
> Life became better.   We protect the jobs of the idiots.   They have  
> rights too, you understand.
> 
> Whenever we have a better mouse trip, we always seem to create a  
> better mouse.   I remember the engineer on the Erie-Lackawanna who  
> was coasting an MU train downhill one day.   I was in the cab  
> (unofficially).   He had shifted the reverse key into neutral (off)  
> because that killed the deadman without applying air on those cars.    
> He could negate the intended protection it offered and blissfully  
> coast down hill.   He was the better mouse.
> 
> Now, very sadly, we have gotten to the point where even a rule book  
> doesn't work.   We now need to have superimpose global satellite  
> navigation systems on top of other mechanical operating systems to  
> stop a train because just making a rule that says you may not text  
> message while running a locomotive makes no sense at all to the idiot  
> running the engine.   Therefore the designers attempt to produce a  
> fail safe system and, as we see in Baltimore, there is no such thing  
> as fail safe other than turning off the power and leaving the  
> equipment in the yard.
> 

> 
> >> ----- Original Message ----
> >> Fred Schneider wrote:
> >
> >> the signal system was changed when they did the
> >> double tracking.  From wayside signals with
> >> inductive train stop to a cab signal system.
> >> .... the principal downside to cab signals from
> >> an operations standpoint is that the operator
> >> has no way to act preemptively.  With wayside
> >> signals the operator has the ability to know that
> >> a speed reduction is in the offing and it allows
> >> him to apply brakes conservatively when he knows
> >> rail adhesion is poor.  Cab signals do not allow that;
> >> the signal aspect drops instantly without prior warning,
> >> and he has to apply braking immediately at a braking
> >> rate that has been chosen, most likely, by someone
> >> with no idea of the operating environment.
> >
> >> "Left to their own devices, signal engineers will always
> >> require that the train be placed in full service braking
> >> when it is given a more restrictive signal aspect, and
> >> if the rail adhesion is poor and the train cannot achieve
> >> the requested braking rate, their "Brake Assurance"
> >> feature will eventually dump the train in emergency.
> >> And then, since signal engineers do not consider the
> >> slide control designs on the railcar to be equivalent to
> >> their "Fail Safe" cab signal design, they will insist that
> >> after so many seconds of attempting to correct sliding
> >> wheels it is required that the slide protection be turned off
> >> (assuming that the rail car originally had slide protection in
> >> emergency) and thus force the train to slide to a stop with
> >> locked wheels.  For the signal engineer, flat wheels warm
> >> the heart, as they prove that their system worked."
> >
> >
> > On Nov 21, 2008, at 3:49 PM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:
> >
> >
> > Mr.Schneider;
> >
> >
> > Very informative summary from Mr.Anonymous isn't it.  I lived in  
> > San Francisco (Parkside) in the early 1980s when the Boeing cars  
> > were introduced and they used cab signals in the subway didn't  
> > they.  Operators found a way to overcome the bone chilling stops  
> > when the computer took over because it perceived the braking rate  
> > was insufficient thus dumping it into emergency.  The operators  
> > turned the reverser key to neutral which effectively puts the car  
> > in park doesn't it.  Thus only the disc brakes are applied to  
> > complete the stop which is then much smoother.
> >
> > Operators stated that they had 3-seconds to react when given a  
> > reduced speed by the cab signals which meant putting the controller  
> > into full service brake mode.  Once the car slowed to below the  
> > posted cab speed the operator could then apply power if needed.  If  
> > the computer sensed that the braking was insufficient then the car  
> > would be dumped into emergency and the astute operator would put  
> > the reverser in neutral.
> >
> > Some operators anticipated the speed change and slowed the car  
> > approaching the impedance bonds which made for a much smoother ride  
> > without bone chilling stops.  Other operators rode over the bonds -  
> > knowing that they would get a slower speed demand - and then placed  
> > the car into full service when that demand was realized.  By the  
> > time the computer returned control to the operator the car slowed  
> > well below the posted speed and had to be brought back up only to  
> > have the same happen at the next impedance bond.
> >
> > If the operator did not respond fast enough to speed changes then
> > control would be taken away from the operator altogether and the car
> > would need to make a complete stop before control was restored  
> > wouldn't it.
> >
> > I do not know if other rail cars could be put into neutral as the  
> > Boeings.
> >
> > I totally overlooked the fact that signaling is used.  This rules  
> > out sanding whether wayside or cab signals doesn't it.  Wayside  
> > signals replaced because of human error and accidents; cab signals  
> > cause other problems.  Every thing has 'side effects' doesn't it.
> >
> > In another post you mentioned Sacramento being caught up in the AIG  
> > fiasco.  BART has to come up with $40-million fast for the same  
> > reason - AIG.  Another news item said that SF Bay Area transit  
> > systems have 'several hundred' of such lease back loans.  What  
> > other systems are involved?  I haven't heard more.  Here are two  
> > quotes from the URL below:
> >
> > "San Francisco made several hundred millions of dollars worth of  
> > deals,..."
> >
> > "Transit agencies, then, are like crack addicts, addicted to the quick
> > benefits of loans, leases, and other poorly considered deals."
> >
> > http://thetransportpolitic.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/short-term- 
> > thinking/
> >
> >
> >
> > Phil