This appeared under the news feed in my Scottrade Account due to my long position in Norfolk Southern

Norfolk Southern Considering Ceasing to Ship TIH Commodities, Declining to Host Passenger Trains on its Network, Effective Jan 1

Wednesday 09/09/2015 05:12 PM ET - Dow Jones News

Dow Jones News has only provided a headline at this time.

I haven't been able to find it elsewhere, and won't subscribe to DJNW for a single article.

Is anybody aware of this consideration of a policy reversal?


Apparently it's related to that solution in search of a problem, PTC.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/09/reuters- ... dline.html

BNSF CEO basically sent a letter to Congress stating that they will not violate the law when PTC is supposed to go into effect. Which means lines without functioning PTC will have to stop movement related to the PTC implementation. IE passenger, hazmat shipments, ETC. This will effectively gridlock the BNSF rail network, as trains and cars stack up from non-PTC ready lines.

I have seen that UP also put out a memo to their shippers basically saying the same thing. Now NS has apparently gotten 'onboard' with the same ideas.

The railroads simply want more time to comply with the law, as it is expensive, signal maintainers and engineers that know the PTC systems are in short supply, the FCC has delayed approval for PTC radio towers, etc etc.

Basically the railroads are saying we won't break the law, so if the laws effective date isn't pushed back they will shut down operations that violate the law. Which will cripple the national rail network. Which will cripple the economy, etc.

Don't worry, it isn't about the steam program...

A news article about the letters BNSF and UP sent to Congress this week:

KETV - BNSF, Union Pacific say 'meltdown' in nation's rail grid is looming - Railroad shutdown imminent as safety deadline approaches, industry warns (Sept 10, 2015)

CSX is also reported to have sent a similar letter to Congress.

NS Letter:

http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscor ... 150909.pdf


When it comes right down to it, Congress made a dictate (now doubt at the behest of potential vendors making lavish promises and even more lavish campaign contributions) to implement an unproven idea, based on non-existent technology and assumed that their will could overcome any design or implementation barrier.

The worst part of this is that it centralizes and complicates the control of the national rail network, creating the potential for a "Black Swan".

No, it's not ABOUT the steam program. That said, such a situation would definitely affect the steam programs. No passenger trains of any sort and backlogs of freight awaiting transportation and lawsuits from shippers for violation of contracts. Railroads take a big economic hit and Amtrak as we know it gets killed off.

(biting sarcasm)

Wonder what vendors are lining up to supply PTC equipment for steam locomotives ?

AFAIK-NONE !!

Dave

How does Conrail 2.0 sound? :)

It sounds like the railroads are making note to the government about the ability to move to PTC at the deadline readiness, which is sounding impossible.

Making such deadlines seems to be stupidity, but then making such laws the railroads might not respond in making the progress to PTC, I agree the law creates an operational gridlock because of the law, we have a functioning rail system as it stands, to block up its functioning because of stupid laws creates a mayhem.

lets just turn off the signal systems, hire a bunch of manual signal operators, and run by sight, thats how we did it in the past if thats what the law causes.

BTW if the government wanted to dump the Amtrak service maybe they would just mandate the railroads to return to operating their own passenger trains. The railroads ran their own, so what? They had proud passenger trains. But I wonder if you could get the kind of routing the current Amtrak runs do crossing several railroads with one train. The government has to smarten up to the circumstances as well as the railroads.

This is what happens when the government mandates technology that doesn't exist, is prohibitively expensive even by their own estimation, isn't necessary by their own admission, and to top it off they instituted a deadline.

CD

As for steam locomotives, member R. Rowland has posted in the past that his ex Chesapeake & Ohio
614 is already equipped for Automatic Train Control. How much more must be done for Positive Train
Control? I suspect that any additional parts will be the same as for a Diseasal.

This whole matter is already being discussed among top technical and operations personnel on at least two major railroads who employ associates of mine.

One is Amtrak.

If "necessary," a shutdown WILL happen.

. . . and it was all brought about by a passenger train engineer who was texting while he was supposed to be watching for signals.

No, it was brought about by the dangers inherent in train operations, along with fatigue and frequent boredom endured by the operating crews. If you're not a working railroader, have somebody call you at 3 AM, drive for 11 hours, including some stops for a couple of hours "in the siding", with no reading material or radio to keep you awake. If you do OK, repeat for months at a time, on a random schedule.

The exact incident that caused it doesn't really matter. Had it not been for that incident, it could have been the LIRR engineer that fell asleep. Or the recent Amtrak incident with the engineer that, well, nobody knows exactly what happened, but he exceeded the speed limits and there was no failsafe backup. Or an engineer on drugs, or drunk or any number of potential causes.

That single incident, while indeed a defining moment, was simply the last straw. Had it not occurred, another incident would have, and we'd be in the same situation.

The latest sarcasm I've heard from a technician is "Why don't the Feds just assign the same shmucks who made the ever-crashing Obamacare website to do PTC? They'll get it done by the deadline, and it'll work just as well--except you can't crash a train trying to buy health insurance....."