NJT Hoboken Crash

[wazzou]

What I have read is that there is no PTC and plans were to have it in place sometime in 2018.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/train-crashes-new-jersey-transit-hoboken-station-article-1.2811435

[djconway]

Not sure it that is the terminal my nephew uses or not, but I will keep all in my thoughts and prayers.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I know for sure that when the news is talking about technical aspects of railroading (like PTC), you should absolutely ignore them. They NEVER get it right.

Wait for the NTSB investigation to complete.

[Dave V]

What I have read is that there is no PTC and plans were to have it in place sometime in 2018.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/train-crashes-new-jersey-transit-hoboken-station-article-1.2811435

Okay then...  I should already know not to listen to CNN with anything technical.  I'm surprised they didn't identify the wreck scene as the remains of MH370.   

[bbussey]

No PTC on NJ Transit.  They hope to have it in place in 2018.  I wouldn't bet the farm on it though.  But this horrible incident might speed up the process.

[Wutter]

An interesting post that I saw today relating to the accident:

http://position-light.blogspot.com/2016/09/ptc-and-stop-end-terminals.html

Also has a pictorial comparison of the end of track bumpers.

[nkalanaga]

Shades of the PRR's "Federal Express" at Washington in 1953.  That turned out to be a frozen angle cock, leaving most of the train without brakes.  It was also in January, but, very rarely, angle cocks have been knocked closed, or open, by flying ballast..

[lock4244]

Why not install automatic retarders on the tracks? Expensive, but it would allow any equipment to operate into the station, requires no special equipment on board. Retarders are very effective in slowing freight cars quickly, and given the trains are at restricted speed into the station, may have prevented this accident.

[peteski]

Why not install automatic retarders on the tracks? Expensive, but it would allow any equipment to operate into the station, requires no special equipment on board. Retarders are very effective in slowing freight cars quickly, and given the trains are at restricted speed into the station, may have prevented this accident.

Would retarders be enough to slow/stop the train which was still be being pushed by a 3000 hp loco?  I'm assuming that the loco was not coasting.

[Lenny53]

If my understanding is correct the train was running cab car first pushed by an unmanned loco (one man crew) in the rear?

[peteski]

If my understanding is correct the train was running cab car first pushed by an unmanned loco (one man crew) in the rear?

Correct about the configuration - I don't know the number of crew but I assume it was a single operator in the cab car (and maybe a conductor overseeing the entire train).

[nkalanaga]

Lock4244:  Automatic retarders wouldn't help.  The BN had them in Pasco's hump yard, in the 1970s, to replace the "skate tenders", to keep the cars from rolling out the far end of the bowl tracks, if they were humped a little too fast into an empty track.  They worked fine for that.

However, they were ALSO designed so that the cars in the bowl tracks could be pulled from the far end, for assembling trains.  The switchers would run right through the retarders, and could pull the cuts out through them, with no noticeable extra effort.  They were designed to stop a couple slow rolling freight cars, not a fast moving train, and especially not if the train was under power.  There is no adjustable force on the ones in Pasco, just spring-loaded brake shoes.

The biggest problem with retarders, and it affected the hump retarders as well, is that they only brake the wheels that are actually IN the retarder.  If it's a multi-car cut, the cars outside the retarder keep pushing/pulling on the ones in the retarder, and there isn't enough braking force to overcome it.  In one extreme case, involving multiple grain hoppers, the brake shoes were pulled out of a hump retarder at Pasco.  The computer tried to stop the cut, but the momentum was too great, and the computer wasn't programmed to release the cut if it couldn't be stopped.  The hump retarders were about as long as two grain hoppers.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Who knows? I'm sure the NTSB will figure it out and make recommendations as appropriate.

[lock4244]

Lock4244:  Automatic retarders wouldn't help.  The BN had them in Pasco's hump yard, in the 1970s, to replace the "skate tenders", to keep the cars from rolling out the far end of the bowl tracks, if they were humped a little too fast into an empty track.  They worked fine for that.

However, they were ALSO designed so that the cars in the bowl tracks could be pulled from the far end, for assembling trains.  The switchers would run right through the retarders, and could pull the cuts out through them, with no noticeable extra effort.  They were designed to stop a couple slow rolling freight cars, not a fast moving train, and especially not if the train was under power.  There is no adjustable force on the ones in Pasco, just spring-loaded brake shoes.

The biggest problem with retarders, and it affected the hump retarders as well, is that they only brake the wheels that are actually IN the retarder.  If it's a multi-car cut, the cars outside the retarder keep pushing/pulling on the ones in the retarder, and there isn't enough braking force to overcome it.  In one extreme case, involving multiple grain hoppers, the brake shoes were pulled out of a hump retarder at Pasco.  The computer tried to stop the cut, but the momentum was too great, and the computer wasn't programmed to release the cut if it couldn't be stopped.  The hump retarders were about as long as two grain hoppers.

I am willing to bet that a retarder for this specific purpose would be more than adequate. You're using as an example retarders designed for use in a freight hump yard, and at best built in the 70's. I think we've come a long way since then. To be effective, they'd obviously have to run the length of the station tracks, and would never be able to stop a train moving at 60mph, but 15 or 20 mph more than likely. Even if they couldn't stop a train completely, hitting the bumper at 5mph is better than 15mph. In suggesting this I meant using the idea of retarders modified to purpose, not re-purposing old stock from a freight hump yard, lol.

I suspect they'd be very expensive to design, build, and maintain, which would in all likelyhood make them impractical, but as a concept I think they'd do the job.

[bbussey]

Why not install automatic retarders on the tracks? Expensive, but it would allow any equipment to operate into the station, requires no special equipment on board. Retarders are very effective in slowing freight cars quickly, and given the trains are at restricted speed into the station, may have prevented this accident.

That takes money that doesn't exist due to Christie installing unqualified overpaid cronies to run the department as well as diverting funds to other areas.  The department still hasn't recovered from incompetence during Sandy due to moving most of the equipment to LOW level areas where it was flooded out and irreparably damaged, instead of moving most equipment to high-ground points north and west.

No one lost his job over that fiasco, so the same buffoons are in charge now which is why NJT is dead-last in the nation at hitting the benchmarks for PTC.  There is absolutely no way in hell that it gets implemented here by the end of 2018, unless this tragedy jump-starts the process.