3 ms·
Relatively new technology... that’s been around since the 50s. And what you’re saying is backwards thinking. The problem isn’t that the old way of driving trai
by zaroth 9y ago
Relatively new technology... that’s been around since the 50s.
And what you’re saying is backwards thinking. The problem isn’t that the old way of driving trains isn’t perfect. We already know that.
The problem is we still have humans driving the trains. In 2017. It’s ridiculous.
- subway 9y agoI don't disagree, but to suggest somebody go to jail over a single incident that could have been prevented by a technology already under deployment is equally ridiculous. In 2005, PTC was a technology found almost strictly in yards and on local or regional lines where a single railroad operated both the rolling stock and track infrastructure. Seeing that in 2017, 12 years later, Amtrak is at 49% coverage on locomotives, and 67% on track coverage, the situation (from a PTC deployment standpoint) seems hardly criminal. https://www.fra.dot.gov/app/ptc/ https://www.fra.dot.gov/app/ptc/
- AstralStorm 9y agoATP you mean, not PTC. They are complementary. ATP systems ate designed to be dirt cheap to deploy. Somehow most of US track does not have any such support despite extremely low cost and maintenance of these. Part of ERTMS level 1. Also a similar system is deployed in India. Poland has an even simpler one, well used inductive ATS. German legacy system is similar. These are even deployed in Canada so not far. Are as old as 1900s. US has that old inductive system as well. If used right, it can control speed too. US regulators foolishly allowed the railways to not install this basic protection. Similarly, timed trip stops are not used.