The tangled tale of PTC
By WILLIAM C. VANTUONO, Editor-in-Chief
Why is PTC so expensive? So complicated? So time-consuming? Delving into its past may provide some answers.
20 Railway Age October 2015
their opinions. Our intent is not to point fingers, or to stir a pot that has been boiling with intensity for quite some time. Rather, we hope to add some useful, constructive dialogue to a highly complex technological undertaking that perhaps was underestimated some seven years ago, when the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 became law. Agreeing to disagree
Just three short years ago, Railway Age Contributing Editor Ron Lindsey—one of this industry’s more controversial and outspoken individuals—had this to say in our April 2012 issue: “Regrettably, the technicians that are handling the extensive complexities of delivering an interoperable PTC solution are neither charged with, nor have they been provided with, the necessary management directives and the proper resources to address both the tactical and strategic perspectives. Specifically, the railroads’ technicians have significantly expanded the technical issues of PTC, and therefore the capital investment, beyond what is required, and they have done so without the necessary strategic perspective that could perhaps justify their activities.” It is not unusual for brilliant minds to butt heads. Over
Bruce Kelly
A
s this is being written, it appears the odds are more than even that Congress will be extending the Dec. 31, 2015 deadline for implementing Positive Train Control. On September 30, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee introduced H.R. 3651, the Positive Train Control Enforcement and Implementation Act of 2015, which extends the deadline for at least three years (p. 1). The railroad industry breathed a collective sigh of temporary relief, but the question remains: How did it come to an 11th-hour scenario in the first place? The industry has been spending a tremendous amount of hard-earned capital on a technology they believe will not deliver much more than a marginal improvement to a safety record that is already outstanding, and that has been steadily improving for many years. Some of the experts who have been involved with PTC are questioning why, in their opinion, it has morphed into an overly complicated, overly expensive and overly timeconsuming initiative whose original intent was to deliver not only improved safety, but measurable business benefits. Railway Age has asked several of these skilled and dedicated people to go on the record with their experiences as well as