The track circuit triggering issue (CN, Amtrak)

[AmtrakMaineiac]

Here is the schedule from 1980, shortly before the service was discontinued due to Conrail (which had taken over the RDG and its trains) having been relieved of the need to run passenger trains

 

[jis]

That is why I said most of its existence as a Reading service. Aldene Plan scrambled everything naturally since its purpose was to remove everything from Jersey City so it could be shut down. That happened in 1967. The Reading service involved was the Crusader, in the change of terminal for CNJ trains from Jersey City to Newark Penn Station which happened in 1967,

 

[Amtrak25]

CN's lone RDC has been travelling all over Canada. How's the shunting going on with that ?

If the IC thing becomes permanent, look into weighing down some VL baggage cars with cinder blocks or sand bags if that could be done without structural damage, yet make them sufficiently heavy to please CN.

Caltrain is thinking of selling their Gallery cars to Peru. Maybe Amtrak ought to snag them for axle count.

 

[joelkfla]

n a lengthy statement to Trains News Wire, CN says, “Extensive testing up to this point indicates that the random loss of shunt detection events experienced by single-level passenger equipment in the US is due to the absence of sufficient contact area between the wheels of passenger trains and the rail head.

Does CN have a different railhead profile?

 

[west point]

The use of MHCs might not be getting approval from CN. Another thought is Amtrak changed its wheel profiles since MHCs were last used. It may be FRA will require MHCs to be tested with a new wheel profile?

 

[John Webb]

Why is it that lightweight streetcars the world over have no problem triggering signal systems and yet Amtrak/CN cannot seem to get their heavier equipment to do the same?

 

[jis]

Why is it that lightweight streetcars the world over have no problem triggering signal systems and yet Amtrak/CN cannot seem to get their heavier equipment to do the same?

It depends on what technology is used. Streetcars (especially modern ones) may not be using track circuits, so that may be less relevant as a comparison. The devil is in the details. Even the details of a track circuit based system may cause them to behave very differently.

It seems that CN's own track circuit systems do not suffer from this problem. It is in a recently acquired railroad where this problem seems to prevail.

 

[west point]

What I previously have ignored and has not had much discussion is the lower speed provision. Axel count cars are not required if train speed is limited to below 60? I cannot get a sense of why shunting is ok below that speed. Anyone with an idea why?

 

[jiml]

It seems that CN's own track circuit systems do not suffer from this problem. It is in a recently acquired railroad where this problem seems to prevail.

That is an important observation. It came to mind when someone earlier mentioned that CN has an ex-RDC track geometry car that is frequently seen on their tracks here. It seems to get around without any problems.

 

[George Harris]

What I previously have ignored and has not had much discussion is the lower speed provision. Axel count cars are not required if train speed is limited to below 60? I cannot get a sense of why shunting is ok below that speed. Anyone with an idea why?

If the speed limit is less than 60 Passenger and 50 freight, no functioning signals are required by the FRA. Hence there are line with 59P/49F speed limits. In the past, Rock Island had a single RDC car train that ran between Memphis and Oklahoma City. The line had ABS from Memphis to some point west of Little Rock, and maybe around Oklahoma City. I rode the thing Memphis to Little Rock in 1962, and can tell you that they definitely ran at the 70 mph speed limit.

 

[MARC Rider]

The one set they had with 4 conventional coaches and a pair of FP7's was generally used on the Philadelphia to Reading run on weekday peak hours which was probably the run with the highest ridership. They generally ran it on the trip to Bethlehem for the midday run. When I worked in Fort Washington I used to walk down to the station during my lunch hour to watch it go through.

I yeah, I remember that set. That was one of my favorite joy rides when I was in high school. I'd take the ~5PM out to Norristown and then ride home on an EMU local. Fortunately, my mom liked to serve dinner around 7 PM, so I was able to make it home for dinner. According to the departure board at Reading Terminal, they called it the "King Coal," and it went to Reading and Pottsville. In its heyday, the Reading "King Coal" ran all the way to Shamokin, but was discontinued in 1963 (according to Wikipedia), a little before my time.

 

[west point]

As understood the main problem is crossing gate activation.

 

[Thirdrail7]

. I thought Amtrak already had a bunch of trainlined Material Handling Cars in storage that they could deploy with adequate number of Sand Bags loaded in them to reach the requisite axle load.

You mean the cars that were retired because all of the freight railroads and Metro-North slapped 60mph speed restrictions on them?

 

[George Harris]

Does CN have a different railhead profile?

No. Virtually all of their tracks are in either 115RE, 132RE, or 136RE, which are the three most common rail sections found in track in the US, Canada, and probably Mexico as well. Current crown radius in all three is 8 inches. In the past the as-rolled radii of 132 and 115 was 10 inches and of 136 was 14 inches, which got revised sometime in the past to 10 inches, then 8 inches. After a few years of in service wear and particularly after the first surface grinding, the original radii becomes essentially meaningless, which the rationale behind the current 8 inch crown as it best matches the worn in crown shape. (By the way, the current European main section, UIC 60 or 60EN as it is now known had its crown radius reduced a few years in the past from 300 mm to 200 mm. 200 mm is essentially 8 inches.)

Saying all this to say that rail head shape has nothing to do with CN's signal contact issues.

 

[Willbridge]

As I've mentioned before, in 1981-82 CN required VIA to run the Saskatoon<>Edmonton Railiner as a three-car train due to track circuit concerns on the main line. This brought out a smoking RDC-4 to add to the needed RDC-2 and RDC-1.



The extra expense and some maintenance issues led to their replacement with an A-unit and conventional coaches.

These were run through to Winnipeg by overnight parking in Saskatoon. That in turn led to creation of the Panorama. In comparison to Amtrak's current approach, VIA Rail tried to make something worthwhile out of a necessity not of their own making.

 

[GDRRiley]

Interesting, that makes sense as rusty rails certainly wouldn’t conduct current well. But on well used mainlines shouldn’t be a problem.

That is 100% the issue on the coast line but it doesn't seem likely for CN

 

[Amtrak25]

You mean the cars that were retired because all of the freight railroads and Metro-North slapped 60mph speed restrictions on them?

I thought that was only when they were empty ?

 

[PeeweeTM]

In the Netherlands we have some issues with loss of shunt, too.



But on a more serious note, at Maasvlakte the issue normally is a residue from salt, sand and stuff from the iron ore an coal terminals being rolled on the rail head.
They are testing axle counters at the moment and as expected, that looks promising.
Just the procedures during track maintenance need some attention, with road/rail vehicles being added to the track, but forgotten to be told to the computer...

The 'old' JADE-system used in the Rotterdam harbour doesn't see a big difference between a 26 tonne 4 wheeler with composite brake shoes and a 126 tonne 12 wheeler with composite shoes. Both just within acceptable limits.
But if you compare those to an electric 84 tonne 8 wheeler with disc brakes, that electric current really helps making contact. Of course, that is...

 

[railiner]

You mean the cars that were retired because all of the freight railroads and Metro-North slapped 60mph speed restrictions on them?

IIRC, when Amtrak ordered those MHC cars new, they were equipped with “passenger trucks”, salvaged from retired REA Express cars, and were able to run at track speed on Amtrak long distance routes they were used on…

 

[Amtrak25]

IIRC, when Amtrak ordered those MHC cars new, they were equipped with “passenger trucks”, salvaged from retired REA Express cars, and were able to run at track speed on Amtrak long distance routes they were used on…

Those were the 1400's with the REA trucks. They were retired early on. The 1500's had ordinary GSI passenger car trucks.

 

[Thirdrail7]

You mean the cars that were retired because all of the freight railroads and Metro-North slapped 60mph speed restrictions on them?

I thought that was only when they were empty ?

IIRC, when Amtrak ordered those MHC cars new, they were equipped with “passenger trucks”, salvaged from retired REA Express cars, and were able to run at track speed on Amtrak long distance routes they were used on…

Those were the 1400's with the REA trucks. They were retired early on. The 1500's had ordinary GSI passenger car trucks.

It applied to empty and loaded. The 1400 and 1500 series were slapped with 60mph speed restrictions by most of the host railroads. Most of them are gone, but the ones that remain are relegated to MOW trains, and have are limited to 45mph.

Bringing them out of mothball wouldn't help anything.

The same goes for a lot of the older equipment that Jis thinks should get trotted out and slapped on trains. There are a lot of inspections, testing and costs associated with keep equipment roadworthy. As much as I'd love to see the old Heritage dining cars used as axle equipment, I recognize manufacturing parts to keep them in compliance with FRA guidelines may not be the best choice. It may be a better choice to use your existing fleet, which you can maintain, even though it is constrained.

 

[Amtrak25]

There are recently retired single level commuter cars that are road worthy, though would not help the Carbondale train situation:

1. EXO in 2022 retired their 30 or 35 700-series Bombardier cars, similar to the NJT Comet II's,
2. Somebody bought 13 UTA Comet I cars, now earning revenue for some shortline with storage fees.
3. California has all 3 Horizon dinette cars in storage since Covid started and has no intention in putting them back to work on Bakersfield trains.

 

[jis]

I think what should be fixed is the gate actualization mechanism so that they do not require extraneous cars. What I was suggesting was tongue in the cheek anyway,. None of that is a solution worthy of a technologically advanced country, which for some odd reason seems to be incapable of fixing anything anymore.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

It’s not about fixing a problem, it’s about how and who is going to pay for it.

 

[GDRRiley]

1. California has all 3 Horizon dinette cars in storage since Covid started and has no intention in putting them back to work on Bakersfield trains.

Those went back to amtrak and we may use them if we dediced to start new services before we get new rolling stock