Passenger Trains > Caltrain thoughts

Passenger Trains > My thoughts regarding Caltrain/JPB

Date: 09/02/11 11:47
My thoughts regarding Caltrain/JPB
Author: caltrainhog

Now that it is official that TransitAmerica will be taking over the Caltrain contract, I have a few thoughts and questions. First, I'm not surprised that Amtrak lost the contract. Being on the property for 19 years, I could sense that the "winds of change" were coming the last year plus. I believe it was more than just the bottom line. I think the JPB does not like the Amtrak management team that is on the premises now. With that being a possibility, I would like to make some observations:

1. Amtrak over the course of 19 years did a great job operating Caltrain. When they took the service over in 1992, they were short on man power. The start of the new service to Gilroy was new. Also taking place the first few months was the taking out of service Fourth St., Santa Clara, and College Park towers implementing CTC at those locations.

2. During the 19 years, there were many construction projects, that Amtrak handled without a major incident. Work projects were completed in a professional way.

3. Dealing with the JPB can be difficult. If I were a manager of TransitAmerica, I would investigate the JPB members and their method of management style. Most of the folks who make up the JPB don't know how to operate a railroad. They pay consultants to advise them on how to have the system operated.

Here are examples of mistakes made over the years that has cost millions of dollars:

1. The speed signal system that was put in place during the period that the railroad was shut down on weekends for, if I'm not mistaken, 22 months. They took out most of the route system signals that allowed the SP to run the "fleet" at 3 minutes apart. The system now has several blocks that are too long. There places where I'm working on a clear signal and I come around a curve and encounter a yellow over yellow which means I have to be at a slow speed,(20mph), at the next signal. Going from 79 mph to 20 mph in one block can be difficult, especially in the fog! At CP Army northbound, they should have gone back to route signals because I get a approach limited signal twice, which means to be at limited speed (50mph), at the next signal. Well after the second approach limited signal, I have a curve rated 40 mph, but the previous signal gives a 50 mph speed for that location! They won't change it for what ever reason. The reason for the speed signals is, this is what was told to us engineers, that we won't smart enough to remember the speeds for the turnouts. Instead of speed signals, they should have put in more control points. There are places on the PCS where they are needed to get trains around a situation.

2. CEMOF! The mechanical facility is a joke! It's too small! At one point, we were operating 98 trains a day with hopes of up to 120 trains a day. If the JPB ever gets new equipment, they desperately need it, where are they going to store it? Who ever design the facility should give their fee back. The S&I tracks, just two of them, the pits are too deep, the mechanical forces have to use ladders to fix things. Another thing is the platforms that allows personal into the cab of the engines are too high to use! We spot the engines so the ladders of the engines can be used to get into the cab. Here's the winner, if a MP 36 engine is spotted for oil, to get into the cab, one must use the stairs to the platform, sit down on the platform and duck your head to get into the cab. It is a dangerous way to get into the cab!

3. When our gallery cars were refurbished, someone from the JPB thought putting in clothe seats was a great idea! It didn't take long for some of our riders to "soil" themselves and the seats! They had to spend more money to replace them with vinyl material. At about the same time, the locomotives were to be up graded. I will say, they used their money wisely by putting in dynamic braking in all the engines and putting in separate HEP motors in all but five enigines. However, the traction motors were not replaced, if I recall, just four traction motors were replaced out of the fleet.

4. During the construction of the CTC project, they spent a lot of money at the Bayshore station which is not utilize by many riders. The four main tracks between CP Tunnel and CP Brisbane, CP Hendy and CP Bowers are nice but to have a train sit at Bayshore and Lawrence just to have a Baby Bullet train go around them is a waste. Just have the Bullet leave ahead of the other train in the first place.

5. When the grade separation between Whipple Ave and Belmont occurred, they should have put in another control point and main line. Matter of fact, besides more control points, they should have put in another main line where the old center siding was south of Cal. Ave station and between Hayward Pk and San Mateo. They should have added another main track from Coast northward.

6. There are more issues with the JPB, but I will end with this one, which I wrote before in November 2010. IMHO, Amtrak's finest moment was dealing with the Giants World Series victory celebration. They planned for only 3 specials that day. Needless to say, 3 extras were not even close to accommodate the passenger loads that day. We handled it just like World Cup of 1994, and every situation that arose over the 19 years here on the PCS.

As I conclude, the JPB would be better off listening to the "troops in the trenches" than paying big bucks to consultants. If I were a manager with the new operator, I would.......... I'm saving those ideas just in case the JPB wants to hire me as a consultant. :)


Jim Riche
Castro Valley, CA

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] [ Private Reply ] [ Edit ] [ Delete Post ]

[ Subscribe To Thread ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 

Jim Riche
Castro Valley, CA

So Jim, do you plan on staying on with JPB and TA, or jumping ship over to Oakland?

> There places where I'm working
> on a clear signal and I come around a curve and
> encounter a yellow over yellow which means I have
> to be at a slow speed,(20mph), at the next signal.

Where?

Usually double yellow is preceded by
approach limited-- right?

caltrainhog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> . . . . The reason for the speed signals is,
> this is what was told to us engineers, that we
> won't smart enough to remember the speeds for the
> turnouts.

I tried, but in the end I just could not help myself from chiming in and pointing out that the not all of the turnout speeds correspond to the speed signal indication. The best example is the East Siding and West Siding between Redwood City and Atherton. The signal system will give you Medium Approach (or maybe a Medium Approach Medium? I've not seen that one, but maybe it's possible), which instructs you to proceed at "medium speed," or 35 mph, through the switches in the control point, even though the actual turnout and siding are only good for 30 mph.

Although it's a different pet peeve, it's astonishing on at least a couple of levels that you can also get an Approach Limited into a Medium Approach at CP Common when heading into the City.

> even though the actual turnout
> and siding are only good for 30 mph.

You mean that's timetable speed there?
So you're saying they should use 20 mph
aspects instead?

caltrainhog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> As I conclude, the JPB would be better off
> listening to the "troops in the trenches" than
> paying big bucks to consultants.


Speaking as a professional design consultant, any consultant who does not speak with and listen to the "troops in the trenches" is not doing their job properly.

Z

you just hit the nail on the head and you just explained why the JPB is in the condition they are in. Heck they worry about polictical correctness more than they do in having money spent on batteries for a cab car.

We maybe should have a night called.."Thanks for the memories".
We could list for the troops:"you won't beleive it night". Twenty years with the JPB and their operating wisdom. Could be interesting.

Oh no. Several places, such as at CP Center southbound, you will be working a clear signal, and suddenly have an approach slow. At CP Common, southbound, you routinely get "limited clear" which means 50mph until clearing all control point switches. That would be fine, except that the switches at CP Common are rated at 35mph. Jim is right, they should have stuck with route signals. Jim, you forgot to mention the 2 new signals installed maybe 2yrs ago that are still bagged and covered. I was told they didn't "sync" with the road crossings as intended. That new signal just south of Redwood could speed up the commutes both ways, if it was only working.

"...... do you plan on staying on with JPB and TA, or jumping ship over to Oakland?"

Caltrain Amtrak employees have system seniority and can exercise it elsewhere as they see fit? Not sure about freight rights for any remaining former SP employees.

sphogger

sphogger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "...... do you plan on staying on with JPB and TA,
> or jumping ship over to Oakland?"
>
> Caltrain Amtrak employees have system seniority
> and can exercise it elsewhere as they see fit?
> Not sure about freight rights for any remaining
> former SP employees.
>
> sphogger


Yes, they can. I started with Caltrain and now in Portland. Oakland and Sacramento will feel the effects.

jrwadman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Several places, such as at CP Center
> southbound, you will be working a clear signal,
> and suddenly have an approach slow.

Signal 122 is clear, and CP Center is Appr Slow?
Meaning you're lined into the Millbrae siding?

> At CP Common,
> southbound, you routinely get "limited clear"
> which means 50mph until clearing all control point
> switches. That would be fine, except that the
> switches at CP Common are rated at 35mph.

The original turnoutss are #20, aren't they? The two
they added are #14? And you still get red over
flashing green when you're lined thru the #14s?

Jaanfo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So Jim, do you plan on staying on with JPB and TA,
> or jumping ship over to Oakland?


I don't know yet. Hey, after this thread, they might not want me back :) Anyway, I always wanted to finish my career on the commutes, kind of like the old days when a player played his whole career with one team and city. The points that I wrote about are just a few things that have bothered me about how this place is operated. Trust me, there are more things, how many times has the San Bruno station been moved, the removal of the old horns that were very loud and replaced by horns that are terrible! In my experience, the old horns got one's attention when one was around the tracks, the new versions don't seem to get folks attentions especially with back ground noise and of course, head sets on the ears! If it is true that back a year or two ago, the JPB told Amtrak to furlough 4 engineers and ship the two student engineers to Oakland because of money issues, it cost thousands of dollars in OT to operate the service because of shortage of engineers. We pleaded not to furlough these folks, we needed them. Of course, they were furlough and now they are back except one went to the east coast. IF it was true that they advised Amtrak to furlough, it was a big mistake!!! I will say, the JPB has come up with some good ideas, two bike cars per train, baby bullet service on the weekends, ( A couple of us told them years ago to implement weekend service because the people love getting to the City in about an hour compared to 1 hour and 35 minute trip, if you are lucky). Every day I see a pot signal between main track 4 and the siding at Geneva that is on the wrong side!. The signal should be on the right side of the siding, not on the right side of main track 4!! Another opps by the designers and consultants. As other folks have mention about our signal system, I didn't want to write more because I knew I would be long in words anyway. I have a feeling that the JPB thinks that most of us will stay with the new operator. I might be wrong, but I think 40% of the engineers will leave for various reasons, for instance, many of us have much to lose in seniority that probably won't be compensated by the new operator. Work conditions, discipline procedures, management styles, pay and benefits, etc.. Also working a double everyday is not what I would like to do for my last 9 years on the railroad. Doing about 200 miles making from 72 to 96 stops is not easy especially when the equipment is not cooperating the way it should everyday is no easy cup of tea. Now, I know there are folks out there that are saying, "boo-hoo". I know that other rails understand the conditions that are place on our shoulders everyday regardless what train is under our charge that day. Our jobs demand being perfect everyday!!! If we mess up, we could be on the six o'clock news and front page of the newspaper. If we survive, we face major discipline up to and including termination! The icing on the cake is to be placed under the microscope with the FRA, PUC and our bosses at any given moment. Our passengers depend on us to get them to work and back safely. There are more issues I have that will come out later. I use to love being an engineer!! I lost the joy with several fatalities and lawyers who try to blame us for the tragic outcome. Those who know me will tell you so. That's enough for now. I have typed many sentences that I have deleted because there are too close to the heart.

Jim Riche
Castro Valley, CA

TA has started new operations. But to take on a major operation like the PCS hasn't been in their porfollo. How they won out over Amtrak is surprising since Amtrak is the Government. They really expect the employees to stay on. VRE went through the same set up. Metrolink went through a change in carrier and at the end Amtrak had to come to the rescue to save the operation. TA will have their hands full with this one. This is not the middle of New mexico with the road runner. I just think the JPB wanted a operator that they could power over and micro manage. Should be interesting, TA meets the Garden Club as we transission.

timz2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > even though the actual turnout
> > and siding are only good for 30 mph.
>
> You mean that's timetable speed there?
> So you're saying they should use 20 mph
> aspects instead?


Yes, the timetable speed is 30 mph though the turnout and siding, and the signal gives you an indication for 35 mph. I'm no signaling expert and I don't have experience with how things work under speed signals on other railroads, so I'm not sure if this situation is commonplace. Do other railroads with speed signals even have to have a timetable section listing the speeds for every turnout on the railroad, or do they rely on the speed signal system to convey this information to engineers? I honestly don't know.

From my limited experience, though, I don't think the signal indication should tell you to take a turnout at a speed higher than the timetable speed. If that means using a 20 mph indication for a 30 mph turnout, so be it... If you're fine with the speed signal system giving inaccurate speed information, why not use route signals instead?

The original turnoutss are #20, aren't they? The two
they added are #14? And you still get red over
flashing green when you're lined thru the #14s?

I couldn't tell you what they are, but the turnout from Main 3 to main 1, and the southernmost crossover from Main 1 to Main 2 are longer than the others. Also, signal 122 will be green, CP Center will be approach slow, signal 138 will be approach, and CP Trousdale will be red. All the while staying on Main 2.

That new control point CP something or other in San Bruno between Linden and I-380, how has that helped things if any. I think Jim told me it was specifically for the grade seperation project?

jrwadman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh no. Several places, such as at CP Center
> southbound, you will be working a clear signal,
> and suddenly have an approach slow. At CP Common,
> southbound, you routinely get "limited clear"
> which means 50mph until clearing all control point
> switches. That would be fine, except that the
> switches at CP Common are rated at 35mph. Jim is
> right, they should have stuck with route signals.
> Jim, you forgot to mention the 2 new signals
> installed maybe 2yrs ago that are still bagged and
> covered. I was told they didn't "sync" with the
> road crossings as intended. That new signal just
> south of Redwood could speed up the commutes both
> ways, if it was only working.

When CP Center and CP Trousdale were put in, they were #20's, 50mph, only 20mph turnout was CP Bart.

The other weird set up is CP Sierra, with a #20 50mph turnout on the south end, and a 15 mph turnout on the north end of the control point, yet the signals don't jive when you would cross 2-1 going south through the north turnout, as you'd get a medium clear if i'm not mistaken.

So as Jim R said, the speed signals were and are a worthless pile of crap, it was a consultant that sold the JPB on the idea that the engineers were "too stupid" to remember the speeds of the turnouts. Mind you were were going on territorial experience with route signals prior to all that knowing all the speeds of the turnouts, and never any incidents or issues.



jrwadman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The original turnoutss are #20, aren't they? The
> two
> they added are #14? And you still get red over
> flashing green when you're lined thru the #14s?
>
> I couldn't tell you what they are, but the turnout
> from Main 3 to main 1, and the southernmost
> crossover from Main 1 to Main 2 are longer than
> the others. Also, signal 122 will be green, CP
> Center will be approach slow, signal 138 will be
> approach, and CP Trousdale will be red. All the
> while staying on Main 2.

I'd attend that, bring those in that retired and on the injured list.

golden-spike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We maybe should have a night called.."Thanks for
> the memories".
> We could list for the troops:"you won't beleive it
> night". Twenty years with the JPB and their
> operating wisdom. Could be interesting.