Join the discussion on the following article:
Metrolink testing first train with PTC technology
It seems wholly appropriate that Metrolink, whose engineer’s carelessness largely brought on the PTC mandate, should be one of the earliest to roll out PTC. Let’s hope some solid lessons can be learned about bugs in the system, etc., that can help make implementation smoother for other affected roads.
@ROBERT BOLSTAD:
Speed - PTC is all about making it safer to run trains, so the end result is that trains with PTC can generally run faster than without, but obviously the underlying infrastructure has to be there too. To give you some idea of what this means, back in the 1950s there was a major train crash after which the ICC banned trains from running at over 79mph on track that didn’t have automatic train stop technology. ATS isn’t implemented everywhere - indeed, it’s relatively rare outside of the NEC. ATS is a subset of PTC. So PTC being everywhere will mean an instant potential speed up on some lines that are high enough quality for faster service, but are regulatorily restricted.
NEC - The NEC already has high quality signalling, it’s the curves, gaps between track, occasional grade level crossing, et al, that’s the cause of the Acela’s 70mph average speed. PTC will not make much difference.
I have a few questions for those in the know:
How fast can a PTC-equipped train operate? Is there a speed limit built into the standard or technology?
Does Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor signaling equipment have speed limits due either to age or condition of equipment?
I ask because I can’t help wondering if PTC will be used in the Corridor to complement, supplement or supplant the existing technology.