Life on the Rails

[mongers]

Damn I miss using trains during this crisis. 

[Josquius]

I'm hoping corona doesn't screw trains for years to come and lead to society taking a step backwards towards cars.

[Savonarola]

My next project after Colombia was for Amtrak on the Wolverine line which runs from Detroit, Michigan to Chicago, Illinois.  The lead comms engineer had left GE just ahead of the GE/Alstom divorce; and in true GE fashion, IT wiped out his computer memory before I could download it.  So I was left with only documents that we had officially released to the customer to work with.  The project was already six years in progress when I had joined in 2015.  It had begun with the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act in 2009; the stimulus bill in response to the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent great recession.  Some of the stimulus funds were targeted to build high speed rail.  Initially funds were offered to Florida to build high speed rail from Orlando to Tampa.  Florida's governor (Chris Christie) turned down the funds and Michigan's governor (Jennifer Granholm) volunteered to take them.

It made more sense for Michigan to receive the funds as part of the Wolverine line (Gary, Indiana to Kalamazoo, Michigan) already had a high-speed system; also, the state of Michigan owns the line from Dearborn, Michigan to Kalamazoo (Amtrak maintained the line on behalf of Michigan's Department of Transportation).  As part of the acquisition deal Michigan was required to build a Positive Train Control system for the previous incumbent (Canadian National Railway or CN.)

The project was completed in April of 2019.  For rail ten years isn't a particularly slow project.  A number of the projects partially funded by the stimulus are still in bid phase; notably the Sacramento to San Diego line and the Los Angeles to Las Vegas "Gambling train."

The Wolverine Line uses standard rail and has crossing; so the maximum speed possible (by Federal Rail Administration standards) is 119 Miles Per Hour (190 KmPH.)  In order to go at those speeds under those circumstances the train system requires a Positive Train Control (PTC) system.

Positive Train Control means that the train has to receive a signal to move.  There are Negative Control Systems (though they're not called that) in which a train stops upon receiving a signal.  A stopped train is considered the safest train, so PTC is considered the safer system, and one that all Class One freight carriers in the United States are required to supply.

Sections of track are divided into sections called "Blocks."  Like a city block there's a signal at the beginning of the block, similar to a traffic light or stop sign.  In the case of trains the signal will say if the train can enter the block and if it needs to change speed.  There are places in the United States where the territory is not signaled; this is called "Dark Territory."  In Dark Territory the train is controlled by radio dispatch from a central office; and even in signaled territory a similar system is used as an added level of safety.

In 2008 there was a train collision between a Union Pacific train and a Metrolink Commuter train in the Chatsworth district of Los Angeles.  The Metrolink train engineer had been texting and the train through a red signal.  In the wake of this congress passed the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 which mandated a Positive Train Control (PTC) system on all Class 1 rail carrier territory.

One of the most basic PTC systems is the Harmon (now owned by Alstom) UltraCab system.  It works by sending coded signal down the tracks.  Most tracks are electrified with an AC signal; when a train approaches it completes the circuit which released the gate mechanism causing them to drop.  In an UltraCab system the entire block is electrified.  When a train enters a block the neighboring blocks are notified and broadcast a quicker pulse code so that when a train enters a neighboring block it automatically slows down.  If a train entered the same block as one with another train it would receive no signal since the first train would have already shorted the circuit.  No signal means that the train stops, which is why it's a Positive Train Control System.  This setup has some limitations; block sizes are limited to the distance the electrical signal can travel and speeds have to be limited to such that will give gates enough time to close before the train approaches.

The next advance is to use a radio system so that the train can report its location and a back office system can send speed restrictions and release the gates.  This allows for more flexible blocks (in fact blocks can be virtual and change in size if needed) and gates can be shut further in advance allowing for much greater speeds.  There are a number of different standards used in the United States: the Harmon standard (today owned by Alstom) is Incremental Train Control Services (ITCS); the Alstom standard is the Advanced Civil Speed Enforcement System (ACSES) and the Class One railroads developed their own standards called Interoperable Electronic Train Management System (I-ETMS.)  I-ETMS is the most commonly used system in the United States, but any of the standards meet the congressional mandate.

In the case of the Wolverine Line that I worked on the system required both an ITCS system as well as a I-ETMS system.  CN as a class one carrier uses I-ETMS; but I-ETMS doesn't permit for high speed.  Amtrak used ITCS between Gary and Kalamazoo, so ITCS was the only choice for them.  While these systems do mostly the same thing, they require completely different infrastructure and (to my consternation) different radio systems.

[Duque de Bragança]

Sorry Savonarola, I only heard tangentially about ETCS deployment issues in Europe, with some countries having already advanced standards of their own, e.g France and Germany, but still to be deployed for pan-European corridors (mixed systems) and newly-built high-speed lines (ETCS level 2 needed for +300 kph cruise speeds). Part of ERTMS efforts to provide interoperability. It's most likely clearer to you than nearly all people on the forum anyways. 

[Liep]

The deployment of ERTMS is off the rails here, delayed at least ten years and won't be finished before 2030, why are signals so hard?

[KRonn]

Sav, you do some interesting work. And also, I find trains pretty cool and fascinating. 

[Savonarola]

Sorry Savonarola, I only heard tangentially about ETCS deployment issues in Europe, with some countries having already advanced standards of their own, e.g France and Germany, but still to be deployed for pan-European corridors (mixed systems) and newly-built high-speed lines (ETCS level 2 needed for +300 kph cruise speeds). Part of ERTMS efforts to provide interoperability. It's most likely clearer to you than nearly all people on the forum anyways. 

Heh, only insofar as I can recognize the extent of what I don't know. 

We're trying to bid an ETCS system in Canada; but we have to make modifications because (among other things) it's impossible to get GSM-R channels in the Americas.  Any modifications aren't sitting well with our European colleagues.  One particularly sore spot has been our equipment is designed and tested to European rail specifications (for things like shock and vibration); but our client has told us we need to test to Canadian rail standards (which are more stringent.)  It's no big deal to test to a different standard; but the fear of doing so little as to make our equipment more durable is causing them to freak out.

[Savonarola]

The deployment of ERTMS is off the rails here, delayed at least ten years and won't be finished before 2030, why are signals so hard?

Yeah, that's rail. 

One induction that I took had mostly track workers who mostly had a background in highway construction.  The course leader explained the difference in that highway construction you hit the ground running and your last couple hours you start to fade away.  In rail there's never a solid plan, you dick around the first couple hours while the management figures out what to do and have to hurry up at the end in order to get off the tracks before the morning trains start running.

[Savonarola]

Sav, you do some interesting work. And also, I find trains pretty cool and fascinating. 

Yeah, I think trains are really neat too. 

[grumbler]

Sav, you do some interesting work. And also, I find trains pretty cool and fascinating. 

Yeah, I think trains are really neat too.

But the age of the neatest ones, the art deco streamliners, will never come back.  Bullets trains are no substitute.

[Savonarola]

The Alstom-Bombardier Transport merger was completed Monday.  On Tuesday we got notification that we needed to merge business processes... between Alstom and legacy GE Transport; a merger that happened five years ago. 

Two big developments (from my perspective) are that North America headquarters are moving from Rochester to Montreal and that we will be rebranding Bombardier rolling stock as Alstom rolling stock.

[Duque de Bragança]

Alstom-Bombardier › Siemens-Alstom?

[Savonarola]

Alstom-Bombardier › Siemens-Alstom?

Alstom-Siemens would have been a larger company and better able to compete with the Chinese worldwide.  Bombardier has had some problems for some time, and Alstom was able to buy the transport division rather than merge (as would have been the case with Siemens.) 

This does improve Alstom's position in North America, and it gives Alstom a large manufacturing capacity in Canada (both Montreal and Toronto are undergoing large expansions of their rail systems.)  I was a little surprised we're not keeping the Bombardier name, since there rolling stock is well regarded in the industry.

[Duque de Bragança]

There is already trouble in Paris/Île-de-France region with Alstom wanting to renegotiate a previous Bombardier contract.

https://www.railjournal.com/fleet/alstom-calls-for-e2-56bn-rer-line-b-fleet-contract-to-be-renegotiated/

Line B is a major rapid transit line.

[DGuller]

My understanding is that Bombardier is not a good brand name in NYC subway system.  I think they were even banned from bidding on the latest contract because of their prior performance.