Steam & Excursion > PRR 5711 and 5809 mainline careers ending?

The Philadelphia Chapter PRRTHS has announced their 50th anniversary inspection trip from Phily to Altoona and return in May. The ad (link to view on their website) states that this may be the last chance to ride behind Bennett Levin's E8s due to the federal PTC mandate. Does anyone have more info on the matter?

Sure hope they don't get put out to pasture. How will this affect other historic equipment? 844? 611?

Dave

Posted from Android

Any engine in service could see the end at anytime.No one really saw the retirement of up 3985 coming. See them while you can.. Never know if Class 1's will decide to no longer allow them to run either.

Equipping heritage diesel locomotives with PTC is a very expensive undertaking. Modern power, even if not designed specifically with PTC in mind, is at least much more compatible with on-board electronics generally. Also the costs of designing the PTC installation on, say, a CSX CW44AC gets spread over a large number of units whereas for Bennett Levin it is two. It is even worse in this case, given where the units usually operate as they will need to be, I assume, equipped with both ACSES and I-ETMS.

If you think this is bad, don't even think about steam. Unless some provision --which does not currently exist in the law -- is made to exempt from PTC requirements the occasional operation of non-compliant heritage locomotives, then that will be the end of that. There is also the issue of liability. If there should ever be a PTC-preventable accident involving a heritage locomotive operating under a waiver there will be a certain class of lawyers eager to argue negligence for knowingly operating an "unsafe" locomotive.

The advice to see and ride behind 5711 and 5809 now is good advice.

Gordon

Man, another problem for rail fans and steam in particular. It would be nice if the safety crazies quit for a while.

I would assume they just had ACSES installed... as Amtrak requires it installed on any locomotive destined to lead on the NEC or PH (Philly-Harrisburg) Line...

MH2198 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would assume they just had ACSES installed... as
> Amtrak requires it installed on any locomotive
> destined to lead on the NEC or PH
> (Philly-Harrisburg) Line...

But that would mean no more west of Harrisburg or Conrail Shared Assets. It would satisfy the requirement on ACSES-equipped lines of Amtrak and the NE commuter agencies.

Gordon

tomstp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Man, another problem for rail fans and steam in
> particular. It would be nice if the safety
> crazies quit for a while.

I don't think that the relatives of the folks killed in the Philly Amtrak derailment or the Cascades derailment or the recent CSX collision would agree with you. I love steam as much as anyone but PTC is a much bigger issue.

LJG

If you search, you'll see that Fort Wayne Railroad Historical Society is already working to address the PTC problem. Last I saw, they are working on getting an exemption for the requirement to cut the power off (steam), but the electronics will still apply the brakes. They, along with several other mainline steam operators, met in Fort Wayne a while back on this issue.

LJGross Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think that the relatives of the folks
> killed in the Philly Amtrak derailment or the
> Cascades derailment or the recent CSX collision
> would agree with you.

Or the families of 24 people killed in the the Chatsworth collision that relied on the 25th fatality to get them safely to their destinations.

This discussion is about what effect PTC will have on heritage equipment, not about whether PTC is more or less important than heritage equipment.

If PTC is likely to cause heritage equipment to be retired, then why restore a Big Boy, or build a new T-1 if they won't be able to run them anywhere? I saw the Ft. Wayne Society mentioned, are other groups working on this issue as well?

puddlejumper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This discussion is about what effect PTC will have
> on heritage equipment, not about whether PTC is
> more or less important than heritage equipment.
>
> If PTC is likely to cause heritage equipment to be
> retired, then why restore a Big Boy, or build a
> new T-1 if they won't be able to run them
> anywhere? I saw the Ft. Wayne Society mentioned,
> are other groups working on this issue as well?

Yes.

PTC will be a long and arduous process for "heritage" and steam operators. There are so many factors involved that are complicated enough for Class 1 railroads. For "heritage" or mainline steam operations, the complications will be compounded at least by a factor of two.

As I've said before concerning steam operators, I recommend that they not spend a dime on PTC at this time. The same advice goes for the operators of "heritage" diesel locomotives.

Conduct research, but certainly do not commit to any kind of PTC equipment purchases. Technology, equipment, configuration parameters and communications paths are changing on almost a daily basis. With each change comes additional cost which is something the "heritage" and steam community cannot afford.

Yes,
I have cautioned the T1 project, since the inception, of the necessity to include this capability, as well as, complete electronics monitoring and recording instrumentation.

We have plenty of capacity and space to include multichannel radios, required Event Recording capaciity, as well as complete power recording & complete ‘realtime’ cylinder indicator traces....all 4 cylinders, both strokes of each piston, also boiler water-level recording, remains wate in the tender, feedwater feed rates, and boile presssure traces.....including drawbar strain gages — Both buff and drag forces ... there will be constant flue-gas monitoring and recording as well start of the art, rugged, displays for the crew’s use including maps, track profiles, signals and up-to-date timetable instructions and Train Orders information,

And of course, cab & instrument video cameras, for live viewing by the crew and passengers, of the cab activities....
I expect that public audio will be selective, and time-budgeted to allow the crews to talk freely, over the cab noise, when needed.

The T1 will be the MOST thoroughly instrumented ‘test-bed’; also, we sure don’t want to be the only loco, out on somebody’s private Rails, WITHOUT the most capable of required safety & communication instruments & appliances. We want to know others’ physical locations as well as broadcasting our own direction, speeds and locations.

Failure to prepare for the obvious improvement and betterments, is our BIGGEST CHALLENGE. We are in no rush to get this built the wrong way & without the best of 21sr century electronics and forward-looking approach to high speed safety.

The optimum fuel choice is still a matter of active consideration, No rush-decision, or past-practice will dominate that primary choice. There are many fuel choices and applicable regulations that will ultimately determine that choice...
We have the advantage of lots of firebox volume, modern drafting appliances and access to many testing sites...

Our capacity to include all necessary electronics, and modern mechanics is limited only by our ability to conceive of the necessary facilities, state of the art equipment and knwoldgeable vendors and experts —- the electronics s primarily a software challenge.
I intend that we include the capacity to plug into land-power, while waiting for trip preps and idle periods.

I am pushing for an electronics rack and cold, dirt-free electronics-rack locker in one of the tender’s front ‘water legs’, behind the crew.
We have all the space we need, we just need to do adequate planning.
Can we be creative enough to include the future expansion capacity that we will need?

Where will we run it?...we don’t want an under-equipped, antique-perceptioned loco to be that limiting factor...
As the older generation of RR staff lawyers and ‘stuck’ managers, reach the age of retirement we will wish them well, and then, we will welcome their replacements with eager anticipation, cooperation and support...Just as we are seeking powerful and willing $upporters at this early stage.

We believe that this beauty will be inspiring for the future, just as we believed that the 4449 would be a terrific inspiration to proudly haul the American Freedom Train, lo these many decades ago...And, indeed, the 4449 WAS and remains a wonderful pace-setter for loco restorations and loco resurrection —— look at the immense number of locos that became operational as a result of ththe 4449’s wonderful,example...
The 5550 will be the NEW leader of inspiration and design for the 21st Century.

Visit our recent accomplishments and future projectS at the Trust’s Official web site — you will be AMAZED...

W

(If you know of someone who’d like some more information, or an update so that they can talk to an honest voice, send me a PM with the contact information...
We are whittling-down the ‘Six Deegrees ...’ so that in some cases, there’s only a fouple steps to get us across the finish line..).



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/18 15:49 by wcamp1472.

Thank you for your answers.

Wes I am particularly impressed with that explanation of the T1 groups intentions. It didn't occur to me that the T1 will be able to incorporate all of these modern technologies as built and will not be a retrofit like every other heritage locomotive in the U.S.

Posted from Android

I think there should be a way for PTC to be operational on a trailing locomotive and have a portable PTC display and audible alarm in the cab of the steam locomotive or historic diesel. But that’s not up to me and I’m certainly not smart enough to design something like that.

Posted from iPhone

jointauthority Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think there should be a way for PTC to be
> operational on a trailing locomotive and have a
> portable PTC display and audible alarm in the cab
> of the steam locomotive or historic diesel. But
> that’s not up to me and I’m certainly not
> smart enough to design something like that.

All well and good, except just how would the PTC equipped unit trailing behind, make a penalty brake application on the steam locomotive in the lead?

Yes,

We are currently exploring the capabilities of the production of immense Sand Casting molds and cores made directly by 3D printing technologies...
Imagine going from a 2D drawing to a 3D printed Sand casting pattern .... the old ways of many crafstmen, pattern makers, building wooden patterns and sand casting core patterns,

To now, being able to go directly from the digitized PRR drawings, to immense 3D mold pieces of sand molds & patterns, ready for the pour...
The cost savings is immense....!!!!

How many patterns/molds for castings of a piece do want?
On the 3D printer control screen, simply type-in the desired quantity, and hit: ‘Print’.
5, 50, 500 ??? !!!

It’d be like Lucy, of the old ‘Desi & Lucy Show,’ at the candy production line —— stuffing the boxes...the machine keeps going..’ til she and Ethel are overwhelmed —- with product all hitting the floor ...

So, yes, it really is a Challenge —— to be keeping up with today’s expanding possibilities and technologies ...
Please follow us, and support our continuing progress.

W.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/18 16:26 by wcamp1472.

kevink Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LJGross Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I don't think that the relatives of the folks
> > killed in the Philly Amtrak derailment or the
> > Cascades derailment or the recent CSX collision
> > would agree with you.
>
> Or the families of 24 people killed in the the
> Chatsworth collision that relied on the 25th
> fatality to get them safely to their destinations.

All well and good, but you cannot idiot proof the world no matter how hard you try. As long as dumb people, lazy people, careless people and people not doing their job roam the earth, innocent people will continue to die.

Through the train line brake pipe, like I said I’m not smart enough to figure out how to do it, but I bet it can be done.

HotWater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jointauthority Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I think there should be a way for PTC to be
> > operational on a trailing locomotive and have a
> > portable PTC display and audible alarm in the
> cab
> > of the steam locomotive or historic diesel. But
> > that’s not up to me and I’m certainly not
> > smart enough to design something like that.
>
> All well and good, except just how would the PTC
> equipped unit trailing behind, make a penalty
> brake application on the steam locomotive in the
> lead?

Posted from iPhone

Egad, the Brits run steam at 80 mph on mainlines with far higher traffic levels all the time.