Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
RAILforum
»
Passenger Trains
»
Amtrak
»
Southwest Chief reroute?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: [QB] Straight from the Act: [QUOTE]Sec. 20157. Implementation of positive train control systems (a) In General- (1) PLAN REQUIRED- Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, each Class I railroad carrier and each entity providing regularly scheduled intercity or commuter rail passenger transportation shall develop and submit to the Secretary of Transportation a plan for implementing a positive train control system by December 31, 2015, governing operations on-- (A) its main line over which intercity rail passenger transportation or commuter rail passenger transportation, as defined in section 24102, is regularly provided; (B) its main line over which poison- or toxic-by-inhalation hazardous materials, as defined in parts 171.8, 173.115, and 173.132 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, are transported; and (C) such other tracks as the Secretary may prescribe by regulation or order. (2) IMPLEMENTATION- The plan shall describe how it will provide for interoperability of the system with movements of trains of other railroad carriers over its lines and shall, to the extent practical, implement the system in a manner that addresses areas of greater risk before areas of lesser risk. The railroad carrier shall implement a positive train control system in accordance with the plan.[/QUOTE]Part 173.115 seems to cover anything that goes "up in smoke". 173.132 seems to be anything that could take care of your "sniffles" - and then a little more. I must note my surprise in that the Act does not address 173.50, or "things that go boom". http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/hazmat/placards/ In short, I think the industry could care less, and likely even endorse, any PTC implementation over publicly owned lines such as the NEC that predominately handle passenger trains. After all, who will pay the bills? Now as far as HAZMAT, again I will defer to our member (and I know of one) more learned on this subject with better grounding in contemporary industry affairs than I who has not seen a railroad paycheck in almost thirty years. While Chatsworth would have been avoided with an active PTC system, I still have to question how either Weyauwega or Rockford could have been avoided even if such were in place. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
Home Page
Powered by
Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2
Copyright © 2007-2016
TrainWeb, Inc.
Top of Page
|
TrainWeb
|
About Us
|
Advertise With Us
|
Contact Us