Even the old switches that date back to the 1930s near my house on the Erie have signal actuaters that are solid state. What could have gone wrong here?
In the limits of a of Signal Suspension - Signal Indications have no meaning - by defination the signals are out of service - no matter the indication that the signals may display.
PTC has claimed its first deaths, as the Signal Suspension was to allow the installation of equipment required to support PTC in the future on this line.
That is a spectacular stretch.
No stretch at all. If it wasn’t for PTC the signals that existed at Dixiana could have lasted for years without the need for replacement and a Signal Suspension to perform the work. For all I know there may have been some deaths among the signal gangs that are removing the old equipment and installing the new equipment.
Wow.
I don’t know the exact circuity used these days, but even with CTC, the old original relay track circuits would have seen that manual switch lined to the siding as occupancy and displayed red at both ends of the block. Now, that may have been a permissive red, but would have required the train to slow considerably, able to stop should they see a train or obstruction, and it would have been their warning to look for same.
BUT, signals apparently were suspended, meaning lots of them were likely showing red automaticly due to construction work, and crews had been advised to ignore them - that is what a signal suspension is.
Sheldon
They are even reporting on Fox News today the signals were out of service and that it was a manually thrown switch that was not aligned correctly leading the Amtrak train into the waiting Freight Train on the siding. So the News Media has finally caught up with your original comments…took them some time though.
Was it reported WHY the signals were out of service?
It was reported early on that there was a signal suspension while work was being done preparatory to cutover of PTC. The outage was intentional.
[/quote]
That is really funny coming from you…
Would make no difference at all, there was a signal suspension in place, so no matter what the signal did or did not show, it would be ignored.
Thanks, Larry.
There was an AP item in this morning’s paper (Salt Lake City Tribune) about the wreck which gave the reason why the signal system was not in use. There was also a little history of the whole matter from the wreck in California on, stating, not in great detail, why the railroads did not rush down to the corner store and buy everything necessary and put it into use immediately.
Perhaps the writer actually talked with someone who knew what and why–and had an understanding of what she was told?
I don’t see how operating negligence during a signal suspension for a PTC installation is the fault of PTC.
If it weren’t for the PTC installation, there wouldn’t have been a signal suspension…
Well sure that is true, just like saying “If it weren’t for the railroad, there would not have been a train collision.”
But obviously the existence of the railroad did not cause the collision as Balt implies by saying that “PTC has claimed its first deaths.”
BaltACD said this:
“PTC has claimed its first deaths, as the Signal Suspension was to allow the installation of equipment required to support PTC in the future on this line.”
On the other hand if PTC was already installed according to NTSB news video this accident might have been prevented depending on how the switch was implemented into the system.
If the railroads had implemented a lot safer safety system PTC wouldn’t be necessary.
If all had worked according to rules this accident would have been prevented.
So blaming PTC is just distracting from the real causes possibly lying at CSX.
Regards, Volker
Typical PR spin being cast upon the unknowing.
If the Signal System had not been suspended for PTC equipment installation the existing signal system would have prevented the incident.
We can spin it around again and again. There were less expensive system just look outside the USA to Europe or Japan. Even the simpler systems (compared to high-speed line systems) would have been good enough for the typical speeds.
For me it looks like someone with a bias (CSX) is blaming PTC.
Regards, Volker
Nah - In reality, whatever caused the temporary shutdown of the signal system was a factor in the incident. In this case, it was PTC.
ANY working signal system would have helped prevent this incident.
That is probably true, but so what? That is not at all the same as your original statement that PTC has claimed it’s first deaths. In that statement, you are blaming the crash on PTC.