".... in the event a steam-locomotive engineer had been incapacitated,....."
Then the fireman would cross the cab and take over the controls.

This reminds me of an old story my grandfather told me eons ago in the steam era.
One of the regular engineers on the "Buffalo" missed a signal due to inattention or distraction and the device applied the air. Only the conductor had a key for the box.
As the conductor arrived at the headend only to find the engineer step out from between the tender and the baggage car with a burst air hose in one hand and a wrench in the other. The conductor said nothing to this engineer, unlocked the box and reset the control returning to the train. The engineer returned to the cab and hid the broken air hose where he kept it!

Thanks for the idea !! That might just come in handy in the future....
.

Regardless if the throttle is open or closed, a PTC penalty is going to put the train into a penalty application (through a magnet valve in the air line) and the train will come to a stop. Even if the throttle is wide open (steam or diesel), it's not going to move that train very far (if at all) with all the brakes applied.

PTC is really a excellent program as it can show you signal indications 5 miles out which is very helpfull, grades, and which mile post you are at. PTC allows a 2 mph buffer over the speed limit with out issues. At 3 mph over you will get a warning the train will be stopped in typically 20 seconds or less unless you back down to the speed limit. 4 mph over the train goes into penalty with out warning and it is reported to the PTC home office. You can expect a meeting with a mananger when you get back and probably a write up. The penalty application works very well at slowing a train down rather quickly.

As I said in an earlier posting, with a full service or emergency application the train is going to stop in a hurry regardless of the throttle setting.

Ross Rowland

Ross Rowland deserves to be listened to and believed, in no small part because he has actually operated a large modern locomotive in passenger service subject to positive train control (on NJT without 80mph limitation, IIRC).

As far as effectiveness of a penalty brake application is concerned, triggering the magnet valve will stop the train, and do so about as effectively whether or not the throttle is left open, or if the reverser is not centered. That was clear from the history of automatic train control practice even before the Esch Act.

My concern is that we care about the locomotive condition, as well as whether we can stop it on command. I don't know of any modern engine that has a Decelostat-type arrangement to control the independent driver brakes during a penalty stop from high speed, and I'm concerned that in addition to potentially overheating driver tires, there may not be enough of a 'window' between the Scylla of too strong an application flatting drivers a la 844, and the Charybdis of drivers with steam and 'cruising' cutoff spinning if the applied driver braking plus adhesion does not hold them.

As you'll all recall, "speed control" of a locomotive above a few mph can be achieved (albeit with some common issues) with the throttle fully left open -- therefore, the only device that needs attention along with the magnet valve is the same as it was for Sprague's company in the 1920s: a means of smoothly centering the reverse over a period of a few seconds. With any of the air servo reversers, and with the Hadfield steam reverser, a sinple valve-and-dashpot arrangement does this nicely, and it could be argued that with a little proportional sensing, multiple coded speed regulation could be implemented with very little expense or technical difficulty.

Let's keep in mind that unlike a "regular" freight or passenger train, with one or perhaps two crewmembers in the cab, any steam locomotive that will operate in an environment requiring PTC will undoubtedly have at least 4 people in the cab, and at least one of them will be "supervision". If a penalty application occurs (either a full service or an emergency application), it is at least 99% likely that one of those people present will close the throttle.

Howard P.

This is true. This is very true. On the other hand, it seems that it should be far more than 99.9% likely that with four people in the cab there would be no chance for a penalty application in the first place...

I love you all, but it has been demonstrated many times that human beings are fallible. No matter how many are in a given situation. PERIOD.

Brian Helfrich

We know that, of course. How many people were in the cab when what's-his-name ran the Talgo off the 35mph curve at 78mph?

My point is that four people are far more likely than two people to respond to the rather annoying progressive sequence of alerts leading up to an actual PTC penalty brake. (And only the progressive application of the actual penalty set has the deleterious consequences to the engine...)

The problem:


Today's Mass "Entertainment" Media - That No One Their Right Mind Would Believe - Shark Lawyers, Social Media Echo Chambers, Unobtainium Insurance - it used to be simply too expensive to pencil out but now? Apparently even Amtrak will not take the risk anymore.

Trust in other folks doing the right thing has been destroyed. Yes it started as a political divide, but the slippery slippery slope has turned vertical.

But hey - a Narcissist Dictator will solve all the problems - let's elect one.

Brian Helfrich

Not necessarily for UP, since Mr. Dickens is not only the usual engineer, but also director of the operation (and a fallible human like the rest of us) as the "supervision" in the cab. I don't know from the cab ride videos I've seen recently if the crew members who sit behind him are Road Foremen or simply pilot engineers for that subdivision? Again, what I've seen are videos from people who were the fourth person in the cab, fortunate enough to have been invited up for a ride, so I don't know if on other occasions there is additional UP supervision as the fourth person or not? So if they have a non-railroader guest in the cab and Mr. Dickens is the supervising employee as well as operating employee, then either the pilot or the fireman would have to have presence of mind to intervene in an emergency if Ed drops the ball for some reason, and they're not pressed up against the backhead of the boiler from forward momentum.

And if that "supervision" allows the penalty to happen, it's at least 99% likely said person will be fired...

The way it works for the 4014~ the trailing diesel locomotive has the guts of the PTC. There is an ethernet cord that runs from it to the PTC display screen in the 4014 cab.

There's Ed at the throttle, the conductor of the crew piloting the train, Ed's fireman... and sundry other hangers on.
The engineer of the crew piloting the 4014 across it's division is setting back in the trailing diesel, watching the screen back there.
The conductor gives heads up to Ed and keeps that crew apprised of what's in store for them ahead.
As you've seen in the in-cab videos, the display in the 4014 is just like the one back in the diesel. What you don't see is anyone in the cab pushing any buttons on the display.
The engineer back in the diesel does all that. The crew in the 4014 has their hands full running it... the engineer back on the diesel tends to all the button pushing when the PTC system requires input or acknowledgement of a slow order, a form B, or whatever.

PTC doesn't initiate a "penalty"~ penalty is a controlled full service application of the brakes. A penalty application occurs when you don't acknowledge the "alerter" function~ the "deadman" pedal. I don't know if 4014 has an alerter. I don't think it does.

PTC big holes your train.

The chances of a PTC "enforcement" event occurring in the 4014 because nobody's paying attention~ zero.
The chances of a enforcement event occurring due to an anomaly in the PTC universe are much more likely.
Giving your track warrant up before your train is clear of the limits of the TW.... getting out of your limits (impossible!!!),someone opening a switch or fouling the track ahead of your train... a rail breaking and throwing the signals red in your face...and probably dozens other scenarios... they'll all cause immediate emergency application of your brakes in PTC.
Speeding... the system will start warning you that you're pushing it. Getting close to the end of your "limits"... it gives you plenty of warning about that, too.
When they first "turned it on" on my division, they let us enable it to get used to it before they started punishing violators

I pushed the envelope trying to see what I could get away with before they started enforcement actions.

I would purposely try to get past a red signal (In twc territory...we were the only ones out there... a switch engine delivering cars to a customer on the main line) and it was impossible... it won't let you get out of your limits.
It really won't let you mess up. The worse thing you can do is give up your track warrant while you're still in those limits. That gets a lot of men fired.

Bad Order, thanks for the explanations. I left CSX before the California accident that started the whole PTC thing, so I've never been in a cab under it. I also only operated under CSX's version of track warrants during signal suspensions for signal work, so not a lot of experience there. I'm from the era of getting everything going on as part of our train messages, and having to constantly update each other with job briefings as the trip progressed, and the dispatcher calling us with updated messages for changes. Lots of room for someone to drop the ball, especially at 3 am nearing the end of a 12 hour day. I can't imagine doing it with the distractions of unfamiliar pilots and "visitors" in the cab as well, although Mr. Dickens has been doing it for so long he probably knows most of the various crew people he deals with every year, and from what I have seen on the YouTube clips he is nothing but gracious with all of the various visitors he has to deal with.