Hi, Guys.
I watched from a distance on the climate change thread. What I noticed is that rather than just saying why you didn’t like the article, a lot of you started pitching more tech articles that you want to see done in the magazine. OK, hit me with more specifics.
I’ll be attending the Transportation Research Board in January; the annual show-and-tell event at the Transportation Technology Center in Pueblo, Colo., in March, and Wheel-Rail. What do you want me to bring back?
~SS
OK Steve, I’ll be the first. MoW has always been of interest to me given that without the people who do that task the railroads would be stopped dead in their tracks [pun intended]. Having made friends with a (now retired) track foreman and learned a lot from him I think Mud Chicken has lots to offer if he has the time and inclination to do so. I also know a few signal maintainers and find their jobs of interest. Actually, any “behind the scenes” operation would be of interest.
Where are the railroads finding the trained people to design install and maintain all the new PTC equipment? Who is training them? Are the employees sucessful in thier jobs?
Are there tech schools specializing in this training?
RSS
Randy
Cool! I’d like to see how technology and systems developed for foreign railroads that have entirely different operating requirements can/will be adapted to our own rail lines. So often on these forums someone will throw out there “Well, in Europe, it’s done like that. Why can’t we just do it that way?”.
I would like to see coverage of the pros and cons of running longer freight trains. This would include new ideas and inventions for expediting long trains when they break down, and also how this might include the use of independent contractors to respond to breakdown emergencies.
I would like to see more on signaling improvements or innovations in the area of reverse CTC on a double track mainline. Attempts to squeeze more train capacity out of existing fixed tracks without having to lay more track. I am guessing someone has done some work in that area given the increasing choke points nationwide.
Basically anything on increasing rail network fluidity.
Great idea!!
I found this drawing showing antenna installations … probably can fill a few pages explaining this.
If there was a regular tech section that may propel me from being an occasional newsstand purchaser to a full subscriber.
Count me in, along with Norm 48327. MOW and ‘things’ MOW! Areas that are as necessary to railroad operations, as locomotives. But, because they seem to be done while keeping the railroad ‘fluid and operational’ seem to happen at times when railfans are only able to catch the equipment between trains or moving from one area to another.
I woud enjoy seening some articles on the ‘current state’ of the machines that do the work and save some of the labor while accomplishing their tasks.
The stories of the men who steer and accomplish the various maintenance tasks . Also, how the railroads manage the ‘tasks’ for those MOW Gangs, is it all done with computer tracking programs, or how critical arte the on-site inspections by roving track inspectors?
I am curious about some of the ’ third-party] (?) contractors that preform those MOW functions of inspections, track welding, and heavy maintenance tasks. I know that in many cases the railroads used to have their own equipment and job asignment; at what points does it become cost effective for the railroad to out-source some of those tasks. What kind of work life do the men, and women who preform those various MOW jobs have ? Do they generally work on one railroad, or do th
I want to see coverage of how technology could be applied to measure and evaluate freight train load distribution overall in order to be correlated with track profile, train speed, total tonnage, and operating control status in order to calculate on a real-time basis, the statistical probability of an “emergency” brake application causing a derailment; and present this information to the engineer on a cab display. This would be a great new tool for engineers.
Pretty much already exists.
http://www.nscorp.com/content/nscorp/en/bizns/archives/Summer2014/article3_augbizns.html
That is a step toward what I am referring to, but stops short. What I am referring to would collect all the information that LEADER does, but not for the purpose of saving fuel.
What I refer to is a system that will automatically determine whether it is safe to make an emergency application of train brakes. This would relieve the engineer from having to mentally calculate this decision.
The system I refer to would either tell the engineer whether or not an emergency application should be made, or it would lock out the option for an emergency application when it determines that it is too risky.
Heh… good luck with that. But thanks for the laugh.
Build it that way, and you can be certain you’ll be on the receiving end of massive lawsuits, and probably enormous judgments, sooner rather than later.
You have the haptics entirely backward: the system should automatically determine ‘maximum safe service braking’ – at the valves or consist sections, not by advice or lights to the engineer – but should never, never, never “lock out” the emergency brake or the engineer’s ability to select it, rightly or wrongly, at any time.
Now, if you care to follow MMA into a fast track to expedient reorganization, you can actually establish training that teaches engineers not to apply emergency brakes based on reported train composition or dynamics. Keep in mind that the derailment-detection system acts in much the same way, probably through much of the same equipment, as this train-analysis module. Would you have the emergency automatically and unexpectedly locked out if a derailment is reported or suspected? That’s a really poor idea as the default, no matter how “preferable” it might be under particular circumstances.
“I can see a LPG truck highcentered on the crossing 1/2 a mile ahead, but the train won’t met me dump it because I might throw a flatcar of lumber on the ground?”
Well, I did say “either or”, so the concept could choose one or the other. But actually, it would probably be some blended protocol where the engineer could override the lockout decision of the system.
In any case, the whole point
This is the wrong thread to take up this discussion.
What we would have Steve Sweeney do is ask around to see what the consensus at the tech conferences might be about (1) derailment detection and (2) restriction of emergency braking when that might induce or exacerbate derailments, and then work that up into an article – probably as a sidebar to a discussion of ECP brakes and their potential.
That will add something new to the discussion instead of more around and around and around she goes.
How about autonomous trains?
I don’t suscribe so I don’t know if this has been covered before.
Yes, autonomous train operation would be a great topic for technical articles.
I also want to see much more detailed and in deep coverage of the practical application of ECP brakes to trains operating in North America. This would explain variations in the control systems of ECP brakes including wire and wireless, and power supplies independent of the locomotive. It would also explain the logistics and approaches to converting over to ECP brakes in the North American system.
For as significant as this technology is, it seems like news and detailed articles have barely scratched the surface in the last 10-15 years.
What about an adaptation of the current automotive technology that uses computers to determine when, and with what force, to stop an impending collision between an’equipped car’ and other traffic?
Could not the same type of system be engineered to work in a railroad environment? I think that this is one of the aims of PTC ( to control the operations of different trains, to avoid them occupying the same track space) Could not the system be able to accept the ‘in-puts’ from several loco on-board systems (information that is already available, but not ‘linked’ to the operating enviroment)? By gettting a system that would analyse the information, an engineer could ‘be assisted’ in the making of a decision to stop or reduce train air, in order to possibly stop and application of braking to avoid a rolling derailment?
A ‘gateway’ to an autonomous train operation?
What used to be the Rail Applications Special Interest Group (RASIG) was chaired by Bengt Muten. This seems to be the successor:
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/2399643
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9941774/RAS/RAS-Newsletter%202015_V1.1.pdf
https://www.linkedin.com/in/muten
Job ad for Rail Operations Analyst:
http://careers.gannettfleming.com/jobsearch/job-details/rail-operations-analyst/3921/1/1/
There are also several proprietary-type modeling applications out there. About 5 - 8 years back there was a discussion of one with Railway Man/ 1435mm - I can’t remember its name right now, though.