Here's the thing Walter.
It's not government's money shelling out that $13B (or whatever the figure comes out to...) but rather it's a government mandate that the railways buy into the technology. So it's the railways spending this money.
And besides, this is all down in the US. So while the Canadian railways will be impacted, due to their lines running in the states, it won't necessarily mean that it's happening here.
Two things I expect will happen:
1) Expect to see two fleets of locomotives - one capable of leading freights in the US and another of units restricted to Domestic Canadian service or trailing/DPU service.
2) railway pricing to go up to cover the costs, especially on loads which require the PTC. This will inevitably be passed onto the end consumer.
On 2013-04-13, at 7:08 AM, Walter Pfefferle <email@example.com> wrote:
> I find it ridiculous with the very small number of passengers killed on
> trains spending $13 billion can be justified.
> Train accidents involving death of passengers are very few but get front
> page coverage and are hot buttons for politicians. The number of
> commuter train running each day in major centers is in the thousands
> with no deaths reported.
> PTC will do nothing to prevent people from drivers their cars or trucks
> into trains killing passengers and causing disasters which cause more
> deaths than train accidents. PTC would not have prevented the derailment
> in Mississauga caused by a hot wheel or in Florida caused by a boat
> hitting a bridge.
> I just think $13 billion can be spent better on health care and other
> areas that improve the quality of life than on some politicians pet project.
> *Walter Pfefferle
> Beachville Ont
> On 4/13/2013 8:17 AM, Jon Calon wrote:
>> The expenditure for PTC is for all trains on the affected lines, which
>> are (and correct me if I'm wrong) all lines carrying passengers or
>> dangerous goods on freight trains. Given how many placarded cars
>> travel around the states, that effectively means all trains will need
>> PTC installed.
>> The lives saved wouldn't just be the passengers aboard the trains but
>> also in the communities which the railways pass through. Still an
>> expensive proposition...
>> On 2013-04-12, at 10:23 PM, Knut <firstname.lastname@example.org
>> <mailto:knut%40kos.net>> wrote:
>>> How realistic is that $13 Billion number/
>>> Sounds like an awful lot considering the amount of passenger service
>> operating in the US (and Canada).
>>> For Canada, would it not make sense to just install a system like
>> that in the Quebec City to Windsor corridor?
>>> I assume the cost is related to the distance covered.
>>> PS - Of all the modes of travel, By foot, bicycle, motor vehicle,
>> bus, train, airplane, boat, I feel the safest going by train.
>>> On 2013-04-12, at 11:25 AM, James wrote:
>>>> I found that to be in interesting number, given the push for PTC on
>> railroads, which is expected to cost in the order of $13 Billion in
>> the US, and perhaps prevent something like three passenger deaths a
>> year, on average. (I'm using US statistics, since I haven't seen any
>> Canadian ones for comparison.)
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> For help, send an email to Canadian-Passenger-Railemail@example.comYahoo! Groups Links
|Reply via web post||Reply to sender||Reply to group||Start a New Topic||Messages in this topic (6)|