![maxresdefault[1].jpg](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/cef8ab_8d4e0ddce355463e8edabd7c8937b6f6~mv2_d_2500_1406_s_2.jpg/v1/fill/w_124,h_70,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/maxresdefault%5B1%5D.jpg)
I haven't devoted much verbiage to Positive Train Control (PTC) lately. One reason is that I never thought we'd get this close to the congressional deadline for implementation (last day of 2015) without Congress giving in, just a little. Another reason is that most people will never know exactly what PTC is or why Congress is so hellbent on having it; and therein is most of the problem. The rest of the problem is that a concept that seems so promising for saving lives may turn out to sound the death knell for the Passenger Train in America.
Giant commuter rail systems and even more giant freight railroads are threatening to stop running passenger trains on January 1, 2016, if Congress doesn't act to give implementation (about) another 2 years. This threat has been formally sent to Congress, and Congress hasn't done a thing about it but sit on its collective ass and let the Federat Railroad Administration (FRA) know that it's okay to start imposing fines of up to $3k per train as of one-one-sixteen.
If you are looking for something simple to compare the PTC situation to, think of it as the passenger train's "defective air bag." Back in the day, the Feds were looking for a way to make cars safer when independent-minded citizens didn't use their seatbelts. Some car makers came up with "positive restraint" systems, and others with air bags. Eventually, the air bags won out. When you think of it, air bags are ridiculous and could only have been invented by a committee and gotten government approval from a low-IQ body like Congress. How does it make sense to detonate an explosive device in your face at the moment of impact in a low- to moderate-speed collision and expect it to prevent injury? Take it from an insurance professional, it doesn't. Statistics are the bullshit they feed you by filtering it through an engineering degree.
Back to the comparison. The air bags in Congress decided, after about two seconds of deliberation when the news media were crying for something to be done about all the carnage from passenger train accidents, that PTC was "the answer." There was no real technology available, just a congressional "idea" that complete collision avoidance would be possible if the railroads just put their minds to it and used "technology." To set a deadline for a successful implementation of non-existing technology might also be compared to deciding to send a man to the moon's surface; except that on the old earth's surface, we are dealing with an almost infinite number of (pick any or all) routes, vehicles, schedules, weather variables, delays, maintenance, updates, levels of training, proximity to the general public, and the idiot factor. The idiot factor is defined by example as the guy who runs the gates at the crossing because he's late for (name it) and the train can stop anyway. Believe me when I tell you that implementing PTC nationwide is far more complex than space flight.
Which brings us to the death knell. As I write this, there has been some legislation introduced in Congress to extend the PTC (which most congressmen do not understand or want to) deadline for another 3 years. Whether it will pass is anybody's guess, given the usual intransigence of Congress. But is three years enough? Will those systems that haven't yet implemented it look at the costs and throw in the towel? If a shutdown becomes reality, will some carriers come back from it? How much business will be lost to (pick any or all) trucks, buses, airlines, barges? How many shippers will be put out of business due to diminished availability of rail? The questions are almost as endless as the number of variables that PTC must deal with.
I know, I know! If it saves one life, etc. etc. But will it?
© 2015 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com
