RTS May 2023

BRIDGING

THE GAP

Critical infrastructure that comes with its own challenges

ALSO:

CYBERSECURITY FOR TRANSIT

TRACK UNDERCUTTING HUMAN FACTORS IN TRACK INSPECTION

This Year’s ASLRRA Show

Vol. 119, No. 5

Print ISSN # 0033-9016, Digital ISSN # 2160-2514

EDITORIAL OFFICES

1025 Rose Creek Drive Suite 620-121 Woodstock, GA 30189 Telephone (470) 865-0933

Website www.rtands.com

DAVID C. LESTER Editor-in-Chief dlester@sbpub.com

KYRA SENESE Managing Editor ksenese@sbpub.com

CORPORATE OFFICES

1809 Capitol Avenue Omaha, NE 68102

Telephone (212) 620-7200

Fax (212) 633-1165

ARTHUR J. MCGINNIS, JR. President and Chairman

JONATHAN CHALON Publisher

MARY CONYERS

Production Director

NICOLE D’ANTONA Art Director

HILLARY COLEMAN

Graphic Designer

JO ANN BINZ Circulation Director

MICHELLE ZOLKOS Conference Director

CUSTOMER SERVICE: 402-346-4740

Reprints: PARS International Corp.

253 West 35th Street 7th Floor

New York, NY 10001

212-221-9595; fax 212-221-9195

curt.ciesinski@parsintl.com

The 2023 American Short Line and Regional Railroads Association held its annual gathering in New Orleans April 2-4. is was the rst one I’ve attended, and I was struck immediately by the size and quality of the event. e importance of the short line industry is well-known to RT&S readers.

e ASLRRA annual meeting is the industry’s premier annual event, featuring a combination of short line railroads, suppliers, Class I railroads, and regulatory bodies – all in one place.

is year’s gathering saw more than 1,800 attendees, second only to the 10th Anniversary Year meeting in 2013. e exhibit hall boasted over 250 reserved booths with information and displays about equipment, technology, and services available to short lines to improve and streamline their operations. Robust education, featuring 12 industry tracks, was o ered, and the event had a record number of sponsors. Committees met to determine priorities for the year, and the conference wrapped up with receptions, port tours, and the infamous round of golf.

While it may seem obvious, the networking opportunities alone at gatherings like the ASLRRA meeting (and others like AREMA and NRC) are worth the cost of attending. Meeting colleagues with problems and challenges like yours, learning about solutions to problems you may not have considered, and identifying people and resources you can call

upon with questions or for advice during a crisis is invaluable. ere are opportunities to make business deals and see the latest o erings from industry suppliers.

If you’ve ever worried that these events consist primarily of partying and golf, I can assure you that they do not. While there are receptions and some recreational opportunities, the seriousness, focus, and depth of suppliers, presenters, and railroad representatives are intense. For example, let’s say that you run a small short line railroad and have never worried about a lubrication program to prolong the life of your rail. If you have a problem with an abnormally worn rail, you choose to replace it, which is usually less expensive than a lubrication program. en, one day when you realize that the track miles and tonnage hauled by your road have grown to the point that replacing rail isn’t quite as inexpensive as it once was, you decide it may be time for a lubrication program.

While you can check around and see what suppliers o er, attending an industry event like the ASLRRA conference allows you to meet several lubrication vendors and determine which lubrication method is right for you. Should you have lubrication devices attached to locomotives or a system that dispenses lubricant on the rails with a spread distance of several miles? Which lubricants are the most e ective, and which are the most environmentally sound?

ese gatherings are essential in our postCOVID world where, even though we’re getting out more, the hybrid work style that includes time working from home limits our personal contact with others. Even though technology companies continue to o er collaborative so ware tools for remote meetings, many believe you can’t replace face-toface contact when learning about products, making deals, and deciding who you would rather do business with.

DAVID C. LESTER Editor-in-Chief

FRA Tools and Training for CWR Management

Advanced Tools for Managing Continuous Welded Rail (CWR)

Radim Bruzek, R&D Program Manager, ENSCO, Inc., Springfield, VA

Robert Wilson, Program Manager, Track Research Division, Federal Railroad Administration Office of Research, Development, and Technology, Amherst, MA

Proper Continuous Welded Rail (CWR) management is a challenging but important aspect of railroad maintenance. Railroads must properly manage Rail Neutral Temperature (RNT) and rail stresses in CWR track to minimize the risk of track buckling and pull-aparts. According to incident reports submitted to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and listed in its Safety Database (https://railroads. dot.gov/safety-data), there were over 100 mainline derailments in the last 10 years

caused by buckled track (T109 cause code only). e average direct cost of these derailments was $720K per incident, which is a higher average cost than most other track-caused derailments. e highest direct cost T109 derailment was over $3.2 million. ese direct costs do not include injuries, fatalities, emergency response, evacuations, and legal costs. e number of incidents and their impact on operations shows how important it is to better manage CWR through more e ective CWR policies and procedures, industry training on those procedures, and consistently improving CWR procedures through new R&D technology developments.

FRA de nes CWR as rail welded together that exceeds 400 feet in length. Once rail is installed this way, it remains CWR regardless of the number of joints or plugs installed subsequently. Welded rail can experience both tensile and compressive forces because it is restrained from expanding and contracting. Typically, tensile forces occur in cold winter temperatures and o en lead to pull-aparts and rail breaks. Compressive forces occur during warm summer temperatures and may cause track buckles, which are also called sun kinks.

RNT is a rail temperature at which the net longitudinal force in the rail is zero and is o en associated with the temperature at which the rail was installed. Railroads

typically desire a relatively high RNT to avoid track buckling. To accomplish this, the rail o en needs to be arti cially lengthened by mechanical stretching or heating to replicate being installed at that higher temperature. A er installation, the RNT can change and therefore RNT management is a key aspect of proper CWR management and buckling prevention. Variations in RNT can be caused by a rail break or rail aw repairs that do not return the rail to the desired RNT. Other events that can cause RNT changes include track maintenance (tamping), curve movement, and undesired longitudinal rail movement caused by wheel/rail forces (o en referred to as “running rail”). RNT currently cannot be easily estimated in a non-intrusive manner. For example, two predominate RNT measurement methods are cutting the rail and measuring the gap or using a VERSE machine that requires removing all the fasteners in a span to pull the rail upward.

e development of an accurate, nonintrusive, RNT monitoring system that can measure RNT continuously along the track remains a high-priority industry need. FRA is actively researching several concepts to help address this need in the future.

CWR management is regulated by Federal Track Safety Standards 49 CFR § 213.118 and 213.119. Section 213.118 requires railroads to create and use CWR procedures and conduct an annual training program.

Figure 1. CWR-SAFE Buckle Module User InterfaceIntegrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model.

Section 213.119 requires compliance and stipulates the procedures’ content. To aid railroads, FRA developed a generic plan, called the FRA Generic CWR Plan, that can be used as a starting point for the railroads to create their own plan. e intent is that if a railroad adopts this document and the procedures as their CWR Policy, they will automatically ful ll the requirements of the provisions stipulated under Sections 213.118 and 213.119. Since its release, the CWR Generic Plan has been customized and adopted by many railroads.

e track buckles when the compressive forces in the rail exceed the lateral resistance of the track. e actual rail temperature is critical to determining how high the compressive forces in the rail are and depends on many weather parameters (e.g., solar radiation, ambient air temperature, and wind speed). e lateral resistance of the track, or its track buckling strength, depends on track con guration and condition (e.g., track alignment, tie and fastener types, and ballast shoulder).

FRA funded the development of three web-based so ware applications, each one designed to address a speci c aspect of CWR management and buckling prevention. e rst application is CWR-SAFE , which calculates track buckling strength and buckling safety based on track conditions. e second application, RNTRESTORE , addresses RNT management by calculating proper rail adjustment parameters. Lastly, the Rail Temperature Prediction Web-Application provides nationwide predictions of rail

temperatures. All three web-based soware applications are primarily intended for FRA and industry eld personnel and can be accessed from both computer and mobile devices.

CWR-SAFE

CWR-SAFE is intended to help reduce track buckle derailments by providing valuable, scienti cally based track buckling risk information. e CWR-SAFE application was developed through extensive eld testing at the Transportation Technology Center (TTC) using several computational models, including those developed by the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. CWR-SAFE is a set of three modules: Buckle, Indy, and Risk.

e Buckle module is intended for researchers to perform calculations to assess track buckling risk at a given location. e user enters detailed parameters that characterize the track structure properties and its condition, including initial lateral misalignments. e output from the application is the allowable rail temperature increase above the RNT. Additionally, it calculates whether a track buckle will occur based on the inputted parameters including the RNT and actual rail temperature. When the module predicts a track buckle, it calculates additional characteristics of the buckle event that are useful to researchers (e.g., critical temperatures, de ections, rail forces, and buckling energies). One drawback of this module is that it requires complex numerical quantitative inputs, such as vertical and torsional

sti ness, or the lateral load de ection curves that are di cult to obtain outside of a research application. e Indy module addresses this issue.

e Indy (i.e., industry) module is designed for practical industry use. e inputs are qualitative and descriptive, such as describing the anchors as strong, average, or weak, or describing the ballast crib as full or low. e module then determines numerical values for the track buckling strength calculation from the qualitative and descriptive inputs entered by the user. It calculates whether buckling will occur based on the calculated track buckling strength and the user input of RNT and actual rail temperature.

e last module, called Risk, is used for calculating the probability of track buckling and assesses safety thresholds for an entire track segment (e.g., a subdivision or line). e inputs describing the track conditions are statistical distributions of values carefully determined by researchers and industry professionals for the given track segment. e Risk module enables a macroscopic view of track buckling risk, while the Buckle and Indy modules are used for targeted analysis.

In summary, CWR-SAFE is a useful tool that o ers track buckling risk analysis and prevention for the railroad industry and the research community. It has many applications, including:

• Track buckling strength determination for buckling prevention

• Probabilistic evaluations for “risk acceptance” type buckling

Figure 2. RNT RESTORE User Interface

prevention practices

• Derailment investigations and analyses

• Parametric in uence research studies

RNT-RESTORE

RNT-RESTORE is an application currently in development that provides calculated parameters for proper rail adjustments. Scenarios the application can handle

include rail breaks or cuts on the same rail near each other, near xed structures, or in extremely frozen conditions. It can also graph RNT pro les for various stages of the adjustment process. RNT-RESTORE helps users visualize the impacts of their adjustment choices and allows them to create the RNT pro les they desire. is leads to more consistent and appropriate adjusted

RNT pro les, which is an important aspect of RNT management and improved rail safety and performance.

e user enters speci c parameters, such as the target RNT, safety range, and track information (e.g., rail, fastener type and condition, curvature, rail temperature at break or cut, and the measured gap). e application calculates the pre-break RNT to show both the pre-break and post-break RNT. e user then selects the action to be taken and the application calculates recommended adjustment parameters, including the return temperature when interim repair does not restore RNT to a safe range. In such cases, the application allows the user to select action for nal re-adjustment later and calculates the required adjustment parameters. e application graphs the achieved RNT pro les with the calculated parameters both in the interim and nal adjustment stage.

Rail Temperature Prediction Web-Application

Using ambient temperature to predict rail temperature has signi cant limitations and

Figure 3. Rail Temperature Prediction Web-Application User Interface

will o en predict lower than actual values, leading to unsafe operations. e Rail Temperature Prediction Web-Application provides nationwide predictions of rail temperatures using weather forecast data and an accurate prediction model. e application is intended to be used with a smart phone to provide eld personnel with rail temperatures at a speci c location. e predictions are in 30-minute increments with a forward outlook of 36 hours and spatial resolution of 6 miles. e predictions are based on weather forecast parameters such as air temperature, solar radiation, solar angle wind speed, and the material properties of rail. e application stores data for the past 7 days but older data is available upon request. e application also provides a very simple estimate of buckling risk based on user input of track buckling strength and RNT for a speci c location.

Future Work at the TTC

Further research is required to develop and advance non-intrusive longitudinal rail force technologies and management. Apart from the technology for non-intrusive measurement of RNT (a long-term goal of CWR

management research), there many other important research needs. ese include:

• Gaining a better understanding of RNT behavior near xed points such as bridges, switches, and grade crossings

• Investigating the e ect of excessive track/ train dynamics (e.g., braking, traction, and wheel ange heating) and their in uence on RNT

• Quantifying the longitudinal rail resistance in frozen ballast and high degree curves

• Evaluating the e ect of curve movement on RNT and its restoration

• Developing improved destressing procedures including “rail end e ects,” de-anchoring lengths, and curves

FRA’s TTC, operated by ENSCO, is wellsuited to conduct research in rail force management. FRA is currently developing a conceptual design for a dedicated RNT Management Test Facility at the site. is facility will enable experimental studies to evaluate rail stress and RNT behavior under both environmental and train action conditions, including those listed above.

II

One component of the test facility is a test bed for evaluation and validation of new and emerging RNT measurement concepts, techniques, and technologies in a realistic environment. is test bed will have the ability to set a known RNT to be used as ground truth when evaluating technologies. FRA will also use TTC for workforce development training on proper CWR maintenance practices with the ability to provide on-track experience. For this purpose, FRA has been developing a set of CWR training materials focusing on (1) CWR fundamentals, safety concepts, and best practices, (2) CWR adjustment and the new soware application RNT-RESTORE, and (3) in-depth rail break and longitudinal stress theory, buckling stability, and the underlying physics.

e three web applications described in this article are also accessible from mobile devices and available to the rail industry at no cost. For further information or to access the applications, please contact Radim Bruzek (bruzek.radim@ensco.com; 571-438-1866) or Serkan Sandikcioglu (sandikcioglu.serkan@ ensco.com; 919-864-6274).

Stories We’re Following and Think You Should, Too

Amfleet I: How Safe After All These Years?

By David Peter Alan, Contributing Editor, Railway Age

EDITOR’S NOTE: The commentary by David Peter Alan, found below, is not the type of story we normally cover in RT&S because it involves rolling stock instead of track or other infrastructure. However, David Peter Alan writes regularly for Railway Age, and the issue he raises here is controversial, but I feel is worth presenting to our readers. The views expressed in this commentary are those of David Peter Alan and do not necessarily reflect the views of Railway Age, Railway Track & Structures or Simmons-Boardman. DCL

Two veteran railroaders with 110 years’ experience between them have called for Amtrak to phase out use of Amfleet I equipment on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) for safety reasons. They claim that the speeds at which conventional trains run on the nation’s busiest passenger railroad line poses a risk to the cars and the riders in them, a risk not present at conventional speeds. Amfleet cars run as fast as 125 mph (FRA Class 7) there, while passenger trains on most lines elsewhere are limited to 79 mph (Class 4). Amtrak and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) both disagree with the claim regarding safety.

Long-Time Railroaders Raise the Issue

The warning comes from Paul H. Reistrup, who ordered the cars at issue when he was President of Amtrak in the mid-1970s. Reistrup began his railroad career in a civil engineering capacity with the Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) in 1957, and spent time managing passenger service there and at the Illinois Central (IC) before coming to Amtrak in 1975 to take the top job.

Joining Reistrup in this initiative is Scott R. Spencer, who started his railroad career in 1979 when a student at Northeastern University. His career included jobs at New Jersey Transit and SEPTA in Philadelphia, as

well as consulting in Alaska and as an adviser for high-speed rail in Taiwan. Today he is Chief Operating Officer of AmeriStarRail, which has a plan for enhanced service along the NEC and on other lines from Richmond, Va. to the Downeaster in Maine. He has also proposed a plan for an “Air Train” to La Guardia Airport in New York that differs from the existing Port Authority plan, and the “Baltimore Grand Slam,” a comprehensive plan for integrating rail transit in that city.

Reistrup and Spencer are particularly concerned about the speeds at which Amfleet I cars run on the NEC, especially since they will soon be 50 years old. Specifically, Reistrup referred to side sills being patched and diminishing buff strength. He said they could buckle from lateral motion during an accident. He noted that the FRA has a policy of requiring that most freight cars be retired at age 40, but no similar “retirement age” for passenger equipment, even though such cars are subject to vibrations and to wear and tear as they accumulate miles. Spencer agreed, expressing concern that “there are no overage regulations for passenger cars.” He analogized to a popular automobile: “A 1975 Mustang might be safe, but a 2023 model is safer.”

Spencer added that 70% of Amtrak’s NEC riders are on Amfleet cars. He told me he believes that “‘Safety First’ is not just a motto, it’s the way we run our careers” and “safety independence is very critical.” He pointed out that, since kinetic energy rises with the square of the speed of a moving train, higher speeds result in more-severe impact forces in an accident, saying “You have to respect the physics.” Note that the kinetic energy (in joules) is onehalf of the product of the mass times the square of the velocity, the physics behind Reistrup’s and Spencer’s concern.

Spencer said that he and Reistrip are calling attention to risks in the current NEC operation and infrastructure to prevent another wreck, like the one north of Philadelphia involving Train 188 on May 12, 2015, which killed eight people and injured more than 200. Spencer blamed the severity of that wreck in part on the immovable catenary poles along the line. Reistrup, now 90, agreed and said, “These poles in concrete are as old as I am.”

“We don’t want to wait for another wreck,” Spencer added. “We are in uncharted territory. When in doubt, take the safest route.”

Reistrup and Spencer believe that the AmeriStarRail plan they are promoting will get the mid-1970s-vintage cars off the NEC. They call for “hybrid” service with existing Acela equipment and new Siemens cars now on order. Their plan would extend the existing Acela equipment into 12-car trainsets with extra coaches to deliver “triple class” service, which would allow coach passengers to travel at the same speed as “extra fare” riders do on today’s Acela. According to Reistrup, this is an “equity issue” because coach passengers are relegated only to trains that are slower than Acela trains, for which the fares are higher. He also said that these “stretch trains” could hold 600 riders.

They claim that they can get private financing for the venture and, operationally, they would start by replacing the original late-1960s-vintage Metroliner cab cars in Keystone service between Harrisburg and New York immediately and running Siemens ACS-64 electric units on each end in pullpull operation, to protect passengers and crew. The cab cars run on Keystone trains today in push-pull operation.

While Reistrup and Spencer acknowledge that there will still be some Amfleet I cars on the NEC for a while longer, they hope to see that equipment cascaded down to slower

Photo Credit: David C. Lester

trains before they turn 50. Some of them are running today on New York State’s Empire Service, Midwest Corridor routes centered on Chicago, and California’s corridors.

Under Amtrak’s ConnectsUS plan for 2035, Amfleet equipment could be used for new state-sponsored trains and corridors that Amtrak hopes to develop. It is too soon to know how many new trains will start running under the plan (we know only about MobileNew Orleans so far), but there should be enough Amfleet equipment to run several routes if it is retired from service on the NEC before the new trains start running.

Spencer also suggested that some of it could be used on non-Amtrak routes with long running times that now use “commuter” equipment designed for local trains. One example is Long Island Rail Road service to Montauk and Greenport. Those lines require a three-hour running time to and from Penn Station New York, and Spencer said it would be much more comfortable for riders on Amfleet cars than on existing LIRR equipment. There are other relatively long non-Amtrak operations whose running time approaches those routes: the longest runs on Metrolink in Southern California, and the line between Hoboken and Port Jervis on NJ Transit, in cooperation with Metro-North on the New York State side, beyond Suffern.

Spencer told me he and Reistrup had expressed these concerns to the FRA and National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) on Jan. 4 but, at this writing are waiting for Amtrak to respond to their request for a meeting. “Although Amfleet cars, built in the 1970s, meet current FRA safety standards, they do not have the structural materials, safety features, technology and crash energy management systems found in the current Acela fleet or the next generation Alstombuilt Acela fleet,” they noted “That is why AmeriStarRail believes the safest course of action is to remove Amfleet cars from the high-speed Northeast Corridor service as soon as possible and replace them with newer safer, trainsets … It is unacceptable and unsafe for Amtrak to ignore the opportunity to meet and evaluate the unprecedented safety risks of operating half-century-old passenger cars at 125 mph when safer alternatives are readily available, without additional government grants. AmeriStarRail’ws solution offers equitable safety for the 70% of Northeast Corridor passengers who ride the aging Amfleet cars because they can’t afford to ride the newer Acela trainsets equipped with the latest safety technology.”

FRA, Amtrak Respond FRA IS SKEPTICAL OF REISTRUP’S AND SPENCER’S CLAIM, noting that, according to an FRA spokesperson, passenger cars are not subjected to the same age considerations as freight cars because “they are not subject to the extreme forces of loading and unloading associated with freight movements and switching operations. Generally speaking, the operation of rolling stock in passenger service involves considerably less wear and tear on all mechanical components. Amfleet I cars meet current federal safety standards set forth in 49 CFR 238 – Passenger Equipment Safety Standards. These cars are subject to extensive mechanical inspections, maintenance and repairs by Amtrak, and FRA approves those procedures in compliance with the aforementioned regulations. Regarding the overall safety of Amfleet cars, the manufacture date is far less important than the preventative and reparative maintenance that has occurred throughout the fleet’s lifecycle. The wheels, trucks, airbrake systems and carbody structural integrity are continuously monitored by Amtrak, and that work is reviewed by FRA. Specifically, Amfleet cars receive a daily shop and pit inspection, as well as a comprehensive inspection every 184 days.”

Amtrak also disputed Reistrup and Spencer’s warnings. Senior Public Relations Manager Beth K. Toll told me “there is no basis whatsoever for AmeristarRail’s claims that continued operation of Amfleet I cars on NEC trains is unsafe.” Toll also mentioned that Amtrak has ordered new cars for the NEC that will replace the Amfleet equipment, and that the new cars will be delivered, starting in 2025.

The NTSB did not return my request for comment.

A Deeper Dive

So, while Amtrak has discounted the validity of Reistrup’s and Spencer’s claims about the safety of Amfleet I cars at the speeds at which they are currently operated on the NEC, the issue could become moot in a few years, as the 1970s-vintage cars are retired completely or moved off the NEC to run elsewhere. With new cars being built and Amtrak expecting deliveries to start in about two years, the current practice of running the cars at high-performance speeds on the nation’s busiest and fastest passenger line may soon come to an end. In effect, while Amtrak confirms that it is safe to run those cars at the current NEC speeds, the railroad’s plans call for replacing them anyway.

There seems to be little reason to doubt Reistrup’s and Spencer’s sincerity in raising the issue. It is known that AmeriStarRail has proposed a plan for operating the NEC

and its branches that would include more frequencies than Amtrak currently operates. I have reported that plan here, and have also reported that Amtrak is not interested in working with AmeriStarRail to implement the plan. Reistrup and Spencer cannot endear themselves to Amtrak by criticizing the railroad over a safety issue. To the contrary, criticizing a prospective partner in a deal for any reason does not increase the likelihood of that deal being consummated.

Nonetheless, Reistrup has earned credibility as the former President of Amtrak and, especially, as the person who ordered the Amfleet cars in the first place. Spencer has had a long railroad career, too. They took what appears to constitute a substantial business risk by raising their concerns.

The Broader Picture

Looking broadly at the current situation, veteran railroaders have raised a safety issue, and the railroad and the regulatory agency in question have expressed skepticism. Regarding accidents that involved Amfleet cars on the NEC, including the 2015 wreck of Train 188, , there appear to be intervening factors, like the immovable catenary poles sturdily mounted along the line, and human error. If anybody is able to allocate fault or find proximate causation in the event of a railroad accident, it is the NTSB, and that agency did not respond to my request to comment.

Still, railroad safety is in the news, especially since East Palestine. Congress is talking about stricter safety regulations, and the Ohio legislature went further (despite federal pre-emption). The public is becoming increasingly concerned about rail safety, especially on the freight side. It is reasonable to expect that the public will become concerned about passenger train safety.

Virtually all trains, freight and passenger (including on the NEC), arrive safely at their destinations. Accidents are extremely rare, and safety has been steadily improving, but even a few are too many. It seems reasonable to expect that any suggestion to improve safety is worth considering.

If anybody has an interest in making sure that trains are safe, at least on the passenger side, it is the riders. During my interview, Spencer summarized his and Reistrup’s concerns with a question: “Why is the backbone of our most-important service running with half-century-old equipment?” A lot of riders in the NEC could be wondering about that, too—if they even know.

ERIKA BRUHNKE NRC Safety Committee Chairperson

NRC Tackles Tough Issue of Mental Health in New Safety Training Video

Over the past 29 years, the NRC has taken on a full range of on-the-job training topics through its safety training video series, from power tools, equipment operation, and common and critical work processes, to fall protection, fatigue, and job safety briefings. NRC member contractors and suppliers will tell you the videos are valuable training resources that increase awareness, improve skills, and help them develop a professional work force.

Earlier this year the NRC released its 29th video addressing perhaps the most sensitive training topic to date: “Safety and Mental Health: Fitness for Duty.”

The topic of mental health hits close to home for all of us. Greater than one in five of U.S. adults live with a mental illness of some degree, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.

The NRC’s Safety Committee, chaired by RailPros’ Vice President of Training and Media Services Erika Bruhnke, selected the video topic based on concern that sometimes the mind of an employee is overlooked when it comes to safety.

“When we think of mental illness, we typically only consider the extreme cases – such as schizophrenia, bipolar, and personality disorders – but the range is so much greater, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), anxiety, and depression,” explains Erika.

“The new NRC safety video utilizes the well-known process of fitness for duty to approach the topic of mental health in the workplace. Rather than just focusing on a worker’s physical ability to perform specific job tasks, the video explores the worker’s mental and emotional wellbeing,” explains Erika.

The video spotlights a supervisor observing an employee who doesn’t quite seem herself. Through the supervisor’s interactions, we learn the common signs and symptoms of mental illness and how to engage with such an employee. The video explores common activities and treatments to promote mental health.

Being mentally fit for work is every bit as important as physical fitness, emphasizes Erika. “We certainly would not

want someone with an obvious physical injury on the jobsite. It’s the same way with mental health. We want everyone to be alert to the signs and symptoms of mental illnesses so employees can get needed treatment and support and not put themselves and others at risk.”

It’s important to note that the 22-minute video is not a substitute for professional insight, intervention, or diagnosis. It’s simply designed to increase awareness among supervisors, co-workers, and employees and point to some next steps.

Thank you to Erika and the entire NRC Safety Committee for taking on this difficult but timely topic.

On a related note, I’d like to extend a big thank-you to equipment sellers and buyers and everyone else involved in supporting the NRC’s Annual Railroad Equipment Auction in Rosenburg, Texas, on April 27. We are particularly grateful to Maintenance of Way Equipment Services for hosting the auction at their facility. It was a tremendous event. Proceeds go toward developing NRC safety resources, including our annual video series. Nothing we do at the NRC is more important.

“Building a Safer and Stronger Railway Construction Industry Together!”

STEVE BOLTE Chairman, National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association (NRC)

BRIDGING THE GAP

Critical infrastructure that comes with its own challenges

By David C. Lester, Editor-in-Chief

Railroad Bridge Development

Railroad bridges’ form, function, and beauty make them particularly popular with nearly everyone who works in or follows the rail industry. In addition to enabling necessary right-of-way to virtually ignore the topography and other obstacles on a given line, the engineering design and build are exacting, and many liken them to works of art.

Early bridges were challenging to build because of the weight they needed to bear. Engineers worked to determine the best ways to design and construct them. Although most railroads began with some form of masonry arch bridge, as the industry learned more about the engineering and science of bridge building, they could design and build bridges that were cheaper

and better suited for crossing challenging topography. Indeed, building a masonry arch bridge was expensive and timeconsuming and didn’t always entirely ll the requirements of certain rivers or valleys they needed to cross.

Bridge builders subsequently discovered that wood was an excellent material for bridge building because it was easy to work with, inexpensive, and abundant. Indeed, wood was the most popular bridge-building material during the 19th Century. However, engineers also discovered that metal, initially wrought or cast iron, could handle heavier loads and, for the most part, were not as easily damaged by re. In the Encyclopedia of North American Railroads, William D. Middleton writes: “ e rst metal bridge in North America was built by Richard B.

Osborne, chief engineer for the Philadelphia & Reading, at Manayunk, Pennsylvania, in 1845. is was a 34-foot Howe truss span, in which cast iron members replaced the usual wooden diagonals and wroughtiron sections used for the vertical members and the top and bottom chords.”

Middleton discusses other types of truss bridges: “ e early railroad builders had plenty of other truss designs to choose from for iron bridges. In 1846, Squire Whipple, one of the foremost early bridge engineers, developed the Whipple truss, which was made from cast and wrought iron. At about the same time, Boston engineer omas W. Pratt and his father, Caleb, designed the Pratt truss, which reversed the web design of the Howe truss to place the diagonal members in tension and the vertical

Railroad bridges are viewed by many as works of art.

members in compression. One of the most popular truss forms was the Warren truss, rst built in 1846 by British engineers James Warren and Willoughby Monzani. is was designed with diagonals that were alternatively sloped in opposite directions, one in tension and one in compression. In the original design, there were no vertical posts, but these were added in later versions.”

Engineers designed other truss bridges, but as time progressed, Middleton writes that “bridge builders had little to guide them as they tried to cope with steadily increasing locomotive weights and operating speeds. But paralleling the increasing use of metal for bridge construction was the development of scienti c methods for the analysis of stresses and the proportioning of members in a bridge structure.” Middleton adds that “the rst American engineers to develop a thorough understanding of stress analysis in trusses were Squire Whipple and Herman Haupt, who independently developed and published their theories in 1847 and 1851, respectively.”

While bridge building continued progressing with the introduction of steel for use in parts or all of a given bridge, Middleton points out, “ ese spectacular achievements were not without their price, for failure, frequently with calamitous loss of life, was altogether too common. In the decade between 1870 and 1880, for example,

railroad and highway bridges collapsed at a rate of about 40 a year. One particular failure claimed wide public attention: the collapse of the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern’s bridge over the deep gorge of Ashtabula Creek at Ashtabula, Ohio, on December 29, 1876. One of two locomotives and all eleven cars of the railroad’s Paci c Express fell with the bridge, and approximately 90 people died, either in the crash or the holocaust that followed when heating stoves set re to the splintered wreckage of the wooden cars.”

Middleton adds that other types of bridges were developed over time, including suspension bridges, cantilever trusses, continuous trusses, plate girders, box girders, and draw spans. ese di erent types of railroad bridges are found across North America, and many are surrounded by spectacular scenery that inspires the soul and delights travelers.

Railroad Bridge Inspection and Maintenance

Railroads must inspect their bridges frequently, with most roads inspecting bridges at least twice each year and more frequently for older bridges. is inspection work has paid o , as the Association of American Railroads says it’s been about 60 years since a fatality occurred due to the structural failure of a railroad bridge on any U.S. railroad and points out that railroad

bridges are among the safest components of the nation’s infrastructure. While railroads must inspect the major, load-bearing components of bridges using hi-rail vehicles and drones, they must attend to other, less obvious items. For example, in the March RT&S, we highlighted the work underway on the Louisville & Indiana bridge over the Ohio River. As we reported, “this project’s scope is to replace the ties on the bridge, deck the pedestrian walkway, install new handrails, replace the electrical system, run conduit through the length of the bridge for electrical and ber optic cable, and install junction boxes. e bridge has a total of 25 spans, and each year, the team works on a speci c group of spans that are in the budget for that year. ‘We don’t have the dollars the Class Is do, so we have to spread the work out over time,’” said Ryan Barbato, LIRC Roadmaster, who joined the railroad in 2021 just as the project was getting underway. e LIRC bridge was part of the Pennsylvania Railroad, serving that road, the Penn Central and Conrail. Barbato added that while the bridge is a two-track structure, the LIRC only uses one track, so the annual tonnage rolling over the bridge each year is much less than its load design so that it will last a long time.

e Association of American Railroads says that “when it comes to railroad bridges, age can be an asset. Older railroad bridges were o en designed and built to carry far heavier trains than today.” e LIRC bridge is in this category, and even less is required of it since only one track is in service.

Major bridge repairs o en require large equipment to seat bridge footings and superstructure. However, small hand tools are also important for bridge maintenance. For example, Racine Railroad Products is one vendor o ering hydraulic- and gas-powered hand tools for bridge repair. e company’s Tie Drill features a telescopic drill bit guard with a built-in depth stop. e Lag Driver enables operators to screw and unscrew lag bolts quickly and e ciently. In addition, the company o ers Impact Drills and Impact Wrenches to facilitate bridge work.

Railroad bridges are works of art and engineering and, obviously, provide a critical and essential function for all railroads. With proper design, build, maintenance, and repair, bridges can last for centuries.

e oldest railroad bridge in the United States, the Carrollton Viaduct, still in service on CSX, was opened in 1829 and is just six years away from marking two centuries of service.

Photo Credit: Library of Congress

A span of the Carrollton Viaduct, opened in 1829 as part of the Baltimore & Ohio, is still in service on CSX, and is approaching its 200th birthday.

SIT AND LISTEN

Railway Age, Railway Track & Structures and International Railway Journal have teamed to offer our Rail Group On Air podcast series. The podcasts, available on Apple Music, Google Play and SoundCloud, tackle the latest issues and important projects in the rail industry. Listen to the railway leaders who make the news.

William C. Vantuono Railway Age

David C. Lester Railway Track & Structures

Kevin Smith International Railway Journal

BEST PRACTICES FOR TRANSIT CYBERSECURITY:

APTA’S OPERATIONAL TECHNOLOGY –CYBERSECURITY MATURITY

FRAMEWORK

Each agency is di erent in size, talent and financial resourcing. The OT-CMF attempts to help organizations move past the “one-size-fits-all” approach to security.

The security and stability of the nation’s public transportation systems are an important part of maintaining our way of life. As enterprise cyber-assurance projects proceed within U.S. transit, the hacking community chips away at protection strategies and any layer of protection that may have previously been e ective. Maintaining safety systems and digital control of transit assets is critical to maintaining public con dence and ensuring systems function as intended. Transit agencies must take a holistic approach to cyber protection to stay ahead of a digital disaster that is always waiting around the next corner.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a U.S. government agency that works with industries to develop best practices. NIST has

established well-known and accepted standards produced by many experts. The security goals for Information Technology (IT) and Operations Technology (OT) have been honed by organizations like NIST for several years.

e American Public Transportation Association (APTA) uses NIST standards to better de ne the critical actions transit agencies should take to secure transportation networks. Implementing NIST practices is a core component of a successful security program in the hacking “arms race.” Most people are familiar with basic IT requirements because routers and Wi-Fi are a part of our daily lives, but transit agencies must secure their OT or industrial control systems (ICS) with a lesser-known set of system requirements to meet safety and security goals across all ICS systems.

APTA uses NIST best practices to help transit agencies build OT protection programs. The focus is on “maturing” an organization’s cyber preparedness. The concept is not very different from my expectation for my daughter as she soon graduates college. We have discussions about preparedness and have found there are many things she has learned in the past four years:

• There are things that she knows she knows

• There are things that she knows she doesn’t know

• There are deep things she doesn’t know she knows

• There are things she doesn’t know that she doesn’t know

Like cybersecurity in transit agencies, we celebrate the first, I try to help her with

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/ KC2525

the second, we talk about the third, and the simple awareness of the last is a win as

by the organization in order to satisfy the system requirements.”

maturing control systems’ cybersecurity programs.

ter faces an ever-more-challenging world, APTA is concerned with the need for better cybersecurity preparedness in its member transit agencies, large and small. To help alleviate the problem, one of APTA’s many standards working groups, the Control and Communications Security Working mended practices and white papers for the industry for the past 14 years. e CCSWG tions Operational Technology from IT Enterprise Technology. Cyberattacks can

Most recently, in response to requests tation Security Administration (TSA) and others, the working group has developed curity Maturity Framework (OT-CMF) overview for launching and maturing an OT program. This framework enables and ment, measure, monitor, and mature their OT cybersecurity program, so they can respond to the evolving cyber threats undermining critical service delivery and safety. Transit agencies will be able to implement the maturity framework to use what “they know they know” to work toward understanding the threats presented from the unknown and always with the goal of maturing and reaching a high state of prepared resilience.

The OT-CMF draws from existing NIST standards like NIST 800-53 (Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations), and its overlay, NIST 800-82 (Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security), as well as NERC-CIP (National Electrical Reliability Council – Critical Infrastructure Protection) and various IEEE standards.

At this point, there is a need to differentiate the term requirements from controls. Whereas requirements are obligatory, controls are selected according to the organization. NIST 800-53 describes controls as:

“Controls can be viewed as descriptions of the safeguards and protection capabilities appropriate for achieving the particular security and privacy objectives of the organization and reflecting the protection needs of organizational stakeholders. Controls are selected and implemented

The CCSWG distilled the 965 controls in NIST 800-53 and 800-82 into 134 controls for the Cybersecurity Maturity Framework. Each control is numbered according to its topic. An example is provided in Figure 3.

Each agency is different in size, talent and financial resourcing, so the OT-CMF attempts to help organizations move past the “one-size-fits-all” approach to security. Within these controls lies the recipe for maturing individual transit agencies.

With careful, thoughtful work to build an agency-specific OT cybersecurity program, transit agencies can move their organizations up through the maturity levels. The goal is better identification of incidents, detection of anomalies, protection of systems, faster response and an organized approach to recovery.

Transit agencies that implement the OT-CMF will realize alignment with these goals with the following five objectives:

• Establish a common cybersecurity language to enable communication between the leadership and stakeholders.

• Create a consistent approach for

• Develop a common understanding of control systems’ cybersecurity best practices.

• Enable organizations to develop data-driven risk prioritization.

• Define a path to optimize cybersecurity investments and increase cyber resilience.

The CCSWG looked to industry standards and found that five levels of maturity existed. The OT-CMF isn’t just a tool for large transit agencies. It was designed with the perspective that all organizations must start to develop a cyber-maturity program from where they are now, so a “0” level of maturity was created to credit organizations for what they are currently doing to meet security requirements. The CCSWG calls it the on-ramp. A description of the six maturity levels follows:

• Level 0 Baseline (On-Ramp) – Establish a foundation and implement minimum OT-CMF recommended controls.

• Level 1 Initiate – OT-CMF recommended controls are adopted without formal processes or documentation.

• Level 2 Planned – Establish security

Figure 1 – Transit agencies must ensure that their cybersecurity plans address both the traditional information technology (IT) systems and the operational technology (OT) or industrial control systems ( ICS). Credit: APTA Control and Communications Security Working Group

YourGuidetoRailwaySignals isanexcellentguidefor trainingsignalpersonnelespeciallyrailwaycross-function managers,supervisors,andsupportpersonnel.High-quality graphicsanddiagramshavebeenusedthroughout. Complieswithallstandardsandcommonlyusedpractices.

RailwayGeotechnics

RailwayGeotechnics coverstrack,tracksubstructure,load environment,materials,mechanics,design,construction, measurements,andmanagement.Itiswrittenprimarilyfor professionalsandgraduatestudents.

TheTrackDataHandbook

Reprintedbypopulardemand,thisbookisavaluablereference forroadmasters,tracksupervisors,trackforeman,surveyors andothersinvolvedintheplanningandexecution oftrackmaintenanceandconstructionwork.

Fold-outdiagrams.Softcover.301pages.

FundamentalsofRailway TrackEngineering

Gainadeeperunderstandingoftheevolutionoftrack technology.Thisbookpresentstheknowledgeneededfor rationaldesignandmaintenanceofpassenger,freight,and transittrack.

DictionaryofRailway TrackTerms

Themostcomprehensivecollectionofdefinitionsrelatingto track.Over1500termsfromantiquatedforgottenslangto today'sjargon.Clearlyillustratedlineartenhancesthetext.

AllAboutRailroadingSecondEdition

AllAboutRailroading-SecondEdition isthebookfor anyonewhowantstolearnthebasicsoftoday’s fascinating,high-techrailwayindustry.

Figure 2– The OT-CMF draws from NIST standards. This is an example of a control from NIST 800-53..

YourGuidetoRailwaySignals

AllAboutRailroading $35.95

roles and responsibilities and a risk management program with documented policies, procedures, and processes with Key Risk Indicators (KRI) and Key Performance Indicators (KPI) aligned with the OT-CMF.

• Level 3 Operational - All OT-CMF recommended controls have been documented, implemented, and assessed at least annually. An improvement plan is reviewed and updated annually to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of controls.

• Level 4 Managed – Continuous monitoring and improvement have been put in place to manage the controls using automated tools and technologies that respond and adapt to the changing threat landscape.

• Level 5 Optimized – Full automation of monitoring and response using technological advances (A.I.) that continuously increase efficiency, performance, and real-time reporting.

At this point, the reader may ask, “How many agencies are at a Level 5 or even Level 4?” And the answer is probably none. Those are levels to strive for and can be reached with a focused effort.

The OT-CMF overview will provide guidance on:

• Must-have cybersecurity operations technology controls

• Should-have cybersecurity operations technology controls

• Implementing operations technology controls

• Measuring the success of operations technology controls

• Achieving higher operations technology controls maturity levels

Conclusion

The safety and security of transit environments are critical to maintaining commerce, and, just as important, confidence in public transit systems. The growth of digital systems has created opportunities to do things faster and more efficiently, but this increasing digitalization comes with added vulnerabilities. Leadership within agencies must have a better understanding of how to prioritize cyber-preparedness strategies across their organization. They need a harness that can be tightened and loosened based on data-driven requirements.

Just as agencies have developed a culture of safety, new approaches to

managing the IT and OT environments will need to be integrated into the culture of the transit agency to ensure smart growth, and just as the sector has created consistency through the development and adoption of standards across all transit agencies, approaches must be implemented to provide a feedback loop for sharing lessons learned. The OT-CMF

tool is a key tool in achieving these goals.

John B. Moore is the senior business development manager of U.S. Rail Infrastructure at Phoenix Contact USA.

Michael Echols is the APTA Facilitator for the CCSWG and CEO of Max CyberSecurity, LLC, located in Washington, D.C.

SIGNIFICANT ADJUSTMENT WHEN TRACK NEEDS

Undercutting Leaves Roadbed in Excellent Shape

By David Clark, Ph.D., P.E. Center for Transportation Research (retired) The University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Undercutting is a process that removes ballast from beneath an in-situ railroad track. Undercutters can typically extract between six and twenty-four inches of material in a pass.

Typically, undercutting is performed to remove poor quality, fouled, or degraded ballast so that the material can be replaced with fresh, good quality material. This restores drainage and strengthens the track substructure.

Another reason to undercut is to lower a track. Over time, addition of ballast during routine surfacing operations raises a track’s elevation. This can lead to “humped” rail-highway crossings and reduced clearances in tunnels and below overhead obstacles. The track elevation is lowered by removing excess ballast.

Undercutting can also remove ballast that has become contaminated from a

spill. Thus, it has a role in environmental remediation.

The classic undercutting approach employs a moving chain to carry away the ballast beneath the crossties. Large rail-bound undercutting machines use a chain loop that encircles the track. The chain is initially inserted in a prepared slot between two crossties and the ends connected. As the machine moves forward, the rotating chain loop cuts away the ballast and moves it to the shoulder. Instead of a chain cutter, some machines employ rotating cutting wheels inserted from each side of the track. These take less time to set up than the chain, potentially increasing productivity. Either type of machine may also have the capability to remove shoulder ballast.

One type of off-track undercutter consists of a crawler equipped with a boom mounted chain-bar assembly. The

bar is long enough to extend completely under the track. The chain bar is inserted in the ballast below the crossties and power applied. The moving chain carries the ballast out from under the track. Insertion of the chain bar is facilitated by removal of the shoulder ballast, which must be performed separately.

While some do not consider use of a plow or blade for ballast removal to be undercutting in the purest sense (technically, they scrape rather than cut), these methods can accomplish the same results. The track plow is a device inserted in the ballast layer below the crossties. It may be part of a larger machine or pulled by other means. As the plow moves forward, it lifts the track and pushes a layer of the old ballast underneath towards the shoulders. The skeletonized track left behind is

Article continues on page 21

Photo Credit: Ballast Blaster Undercutter Courtesy of DYMAXRAIL

UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF

HUMAN FACTORS

IN RAILWAY INSPECTION

By Bob Tuzik

Human Factors” are frequently cited as cause codes in railway incidents and derailments. But while track and mechanical inspection processes have evolved, the underlying causes of human error in the railway industry are not well understood. In fact, human-factorrelated train accidents per million miles have increased over the past 10 years, said Randall Jamieson, a Principal at Atticus Consulting Group LLC.

Jamieson and Daniel Smilek, a Principal at Atticus Consulting Group and professor of Cognitive Neuroscience at the University of Waterloo, where he heads the Vision and Attention Lab, provided their unique perspective on the role of human factors in inspection errors or failures, the limits of human cognition, and how these limitations contribute to errors and accidents in the rail industry at the 2022 Wheel/Rail Interaction conference. Using demonstrations to illustrate scienti c ndings in the eld of cognitive neuroscience,

they provide an eye-opening overview of the mechanisms of attention and perception that are relevant to track and mechanical inspection, including phenomena such as “inattentional blindness,” the “vigilance decrement” and “satiation of search.”

“Human factors” is a nebulous term in the railway industry. e underlying root cause of the majority of rule violations, inspection errors, and train accidents can more aptly be called “human attention,” Jamieson said.

Attention errors are very common. “ ey happen o en, and not just to the ‘bad apple’ employee, but to all of us all the time in many di erent ways,” Jamieson said. So o en, he said, that we don’t even notice our little mistakes, lapses of attention, or slips. And if we do notice them, we don’t dwell on what the error was or why it happened. “ at’s a big problem in our industry,” he said. “An examination of ve years of incident data at a west coast railway, for example, indicated that 93% of the incidents were identi ed as rule

violations by the local o cers conducting the investigations. A er going through the data, we determined that 67% of all the rule violations actually had an attention-related error of one kind or another as a root cause.”

And what’s the corrective action for a rule violation in which inattention is identi ed as the root cause, Jamieson asked? “Typically, the o ender gets disciplined through time o , or gets red. Neither of which address the attention-related error,” he said.

Atticus Consulting also looked at a swath of red signal violations on an east coast railway. Similarly, it found that 91% of the incidents were identi ed as a violation of an operating rule or procedure. A deeper dive indicated that 80% of the incidents were, actually, speci c attention-related errors.

Daniel Smilek identi ed ve primary attention-related factors that are involved in inspection errors:

• e limitations of the human eye

• e limitations of covert attention

Presenting experts at Wheel/Rail Interaction 2022 made it clear that there’s more to inspection than meets the eye. Education and training can help reduce errors and improve inspection e ciency.

• Biased expectations and mental sets

• Object characteristics that slow detection

• Satisfaction of search

“To really appreciate these factors, we have to understand that human attention performance isn’t something that just happens in your head,” Smilek said. “In fact, it involves three interrelated components — the mind, body, and environment — which we refer to as the ‘attention performance trinity.’”

e body component begins with the limitation of the human eye. “If your experience is anything like mine, you would probably say that you have a very high denition, very detailed, very clear image in your mind,” Smilek said. “It’s edge to edge, like you’re playing a high-de nition movie all the time. And it comes with surround sound, because you hear everything that’s going on. It’s very high de nition, and it implies this idea that our brain is processing all the visual information out there and giving us this conscious experience.”

Smilek then conducted a demonstration with a series of photographs that illustrated the limitations of what we actually discern and compute. e demonstration, which illustrated something referred to as ‘change blindness’ showed that we process a lot less information than we think, and that the experience we have of the crystal clear, edge-to-edge movie playing in our heads is something that is known as “the grand illusion of perception,” which is constructed by

the brain.

e “grand illusion of perception” can lead us to be overcon dent in our perception. And that can lead us to make errors. “It’s very important for people who are involved in inspections to understand these limitations so that they don’t become overcon dent in their ability to detect changes,” Smilek said. It’s also important to understand that when a colleague misses an exception or change in continuity, it’s not because he or she is some sort of ‘bad apple’ colleague, it’s because they have a limitation that we all share.

Another limitation, known as “covert attention limitation,” relates to the fact that just because you’re looking at something doesn’t mean that you are going to “consciously” see it. “ at’s because your brain can only process a subset of all the information that’s coming from the retina,” he said. e process of selecting that information is called covert attention. “You can think about it metaphorically, like a spotlight shining on one or two objects and selecting them for further processing,” he said. “If you’re looking at a rail, for example, an inspector might xate on a loose or missing bolt and some other aspect or subset of that. Studies have shown that you’re able to select one, maybe two objects, depending on how those objects are related, for covert attention at any given moment. at means that the things that are not selected by covert attention are not being processed to conscious awareness, so you could miss those completely.” If you’re not covertly attending, you will not be able to see the object. is is referred to as “inattentional blindness.” “So even though you’re xating on something, you’re not really attending to it, and therefore you don’t consciously see it.”

Going back to the rail with the missing bolt: “Assume that you have selected it with your xation, then something comes to mind,” Smilek said. “Well, it turns out that that same ‘covert attention’ that is needed to focus on the bolt is also required to bring your thoughts into consciousness. And as covert attention is a limited resource, something has to give. ere may not be enough resources le to perceive what’s right in front of you,” he said. “ at’s when you fail to see, and you make an error. When our attention is turned inward, which we typically call mind wandering, we can become functionally blind, which is why it’s called ‘inattentional blindness.’”

Visual inspection is also in uenced by your mental set, expectations, and prior knowledge. Expectation bias of what you’re going to explore can lead to errors. It can also help “experts,” who know exactly what they’re

looking for. But there’s also the chance that defects or aws are missed because they’re not exactly what the inspector was looking for. “Expertise is a double-edged sword,” Smilek said.

Target prevalence is another factor. When a target is infrequent — present only 2% of the time — people miss that target nearly half the time. is means that uncommon defects are more likely to be missed. Another parameter, ‘satisfaction of search’ indicates that inspection becomes less e ective a er a salient defect has been found. All of which is to say that what we perceive during the inspection process is tricky business with a plethora of opportunities for error. Or, as one conference delegate put it during the Q&A session following the presentation: “ at was fascinating and completely frightening all at the same time! Having identi ed these ve things,” she asked, “what do we do about it?”

“ e short answer is education and training,” Randall Jamieson said, “It’s important for employers, leaders, managers, and inspectors to understand more about the factors that either increase or decrease attention performance. If you are armed with some attention strategies that you can apply and practice, you can reduce the likelihood that you’re going to have attention-related errors.”

Bob Tuzik is Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of Interface Journal

is article is based on a presentation made at Wheel/Rail Seminars’ 2022 Wheel/Rail Interaction conference.

Randall Jamieson, Atticus Consulting Group LLC.

Daniel Smilek, University of Waterloo; Atticus Consulting Group LLC.

Photo Credit: Mike Yuhas

Continued from page 18

ready for the application of fresh ballast.

Bulldozers can be equipped with a blade extension designed to extend into the ballast underlying the crossties. As the machine moves alongside the track, the extension pushes the ballast out in similar fashion to the track plow.

Off-track undercutters need convenient access and adequate working space alongside the track. On-track machines may be better suited to work in cuts, fills, and tunnels. On-track machines offer higher productivity rates, but have more impact on train traffic.

Large production undercutters can be capable of cleaning the removed ballast and returning usable material to the track bed. Additional ballast may still be needed, and the track will have to be brought to the desired grade and tamped.

Smaller railbound undercutters and most, if not all, of the off-track undercutters waste the removed ballast. In cuts and tunnels, this must be loaded and removed. New ballast will need to be brought in so that the track can be

brought to grade and tamped.

Regardless of the method employed, undercutters should be accompanied by a tamper and regulator. The initial track surface left by undercutting may be suitable for low speed train operation, but tamping and regulating is generally needed to restore geometry to track class standards and stabilize the track.

Insertion and removal of the undercutting mechanism can be time consuming. This is necessary at the start and end of the day and to by-pass grade crossings, special trackwork (turnouts and track crossings), and bridges. Traditional undercutters are not suitable for special trackwork, but machines adapted for these locations are available.

During the undercutting process, care must be taken to avoid damage to buried cabling, wayside sensors, lubricators, and other infrastructure elements. Unknown objects in the track bed (old rails, crossties, timbers, etc.) can also damage the undercutter mechanism, especially the chain types.

TheRailwayEducationalBureau

TrackSafetyStandards Subparts A-F

TrackSafetyStandards, containstheTrackSafety Standards,SubpartsA-F,forClassesoftrack1-5.The standardscovergeneralinformation,Roadbed,Track Geometry,TrackStructure,TrackAppliancesand Track-RelatedDevices,andInspection.IncludesDefectCodes. Updated January6,2023.

BKTSSAF TrackSafetyStandards,SubpartsA-F $11.95 Only$10.75forordersof50ormore!

BridgeSafetyStandards

FRAPart237establishesFederalsafetyrequirements forrailroadbridges.Thisrulerequirestrackownersto implementbridgemanagementprograms,whichinclude annualinspectionsofrailroadbridges,andtoauditthe programs. Part237 alsorequirestrackownerstoknow thesafeloadcapacityofbridgesandtoconductspecialinspectionsif theweatherorotherconditionswarrantsuchinspections. Updated January6,2023

BKBRIDGE BridgeSafetyStandards $8.95

Only$8.00forordersof50ormore!

During undercutting, ties must hang from the rails. Ties that are not effectively fastened will drop free onto the track bed. Renewing ties before undercutting, or making provision to do so while the track is skeletonized, is advisable.

While some production undercutting systems advertise a rate of 900-1000 ft/hour under ideal conditions, actual productivity varies greatly. Factors include the type of equipment used, track and ballast conditions, and number of by-pass operations required.

Planning for an undercutting operation requires careful consideration of cost, productivity, and operational impacts. Concerns about these factors, and perhaps the general reluctance of track engineers to disturb the track bed, have traditionally limited undercutting to isolated locations where no other solution appears viable. Nevertheless, the method has a long history of success in improving track performance and deserves serious consideration for addressing under track ballast conditions.

FederalRegulations

WorkplaceSafety

ThisreprintincludestheFRA's RailroadWorkplaceSafety Standards addressingroadwayworkersandtheirwork environments.Theselawscoversuchthingsas:personal protectiveequipment,fallprotection,andscaffoldingfor bridgeworkers;andtrainingissues.Alsoincludessafetystandardsfor on-trackroadwayvehicles. UpdatedJanuary6,2023.

BKWRK RailroadWorkplaceSafety $11.50

Only$10.35forordersof50ormore!

TrackCalculator

The TrackSafetyStandardsCalculator isamustfor anyonewhoworksontrack.Thisslideruletype calculatorcontainsmanyofthedetailsforClassesof track1-5.Deviationfromuniformprofileandfromzero crosslevel.Differenceincrosslevel.Compliantwithpart213.

BKTCAL TrackCalculator $11.50

Only$10.75forordersof50ormore!

UpdatesfromtheFederalRegistermaybesuppliedin supplementform.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

GET PDHS AT YOUR OWN PACE WITH AREMA’S ON DEMAND EDUCATION

Access to important professional development content is just a few clicks away with AREMA Education. Our On Demand content spans many disciplines of PDH accredited courses that allow you to get your PDHs by learning from experts online without leaving your office.

BENEFITS OF LEARNING ONLINE

1. LEARN MORE Studies show that participants learn more while taking On Demand courses as you can skim through the material you understand and take more time in the more challenging areas.

2. GET INSTANT ACCESS

With AREMA On Demand courses, you don’t have to wait to learn and get your PDH’s as they’re available instantly after purchase.

3. CONVENIENT AND FLEXIBLE

Above all things, On Demand education is meant to take at your own pace and on your time. Study from anywhere in the world, whether from your office or the convenience of your sofa.

4. COURSE VARIETY AREMA On Demand education offers a wide variety of topics for all studies of the railway engineering community.

Register and Start Learning today at www.arema.org.

BECOME A MEMBER AND SAVE

Not an AREMA member? Join today at www.arema.org and get discounts on all AREMA Educational Offerings, from Virtual Conferences to our Webinars.

Message From The President

and the related impacts that appear to be underway, his words are just as applicable if not even more relevant today.

In my January message I noted how sustainability has come to the forefront of the railway industry. As the most safe and sustainable mode of land transportation, the industry is in a great position to lead. So exactly what is sustainability and why has the industry focused on it?

Looking for some inspiration on how to discuss the broad topic of sustainability, I found two quotes from eodore Roosevelt about conservation that speak to the importance of sustainability, relative to our environment and natural resources. I do not pretend to know what all was going on in the early years of the 20th century, but clearly Teddy felt there was exploitation of our natural resources that was not sustainable and detrimental for our future generations. Teddy said on various occasions:(1)

“The conservation of natural resources is the fundamental problem. Unless we solve that problem it will avail us little to solve all others.”

“Conservation means development as much as it does protection. I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use the natural resources of our land; but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob, by wasteful use, the generations that come after us.”

It has been well over 100 years since Roosevelt spoke these words, and clearly the world was in a whole different place at that time. But given the issues we are challenged with today, like climate change

Sustainability has many varied definitions. The EPA provides the following – “To pursue sustainability is to create and maintain the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony to support present and future generations.” It is most commonly framed by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).(2) All aspects of a quality life are addressed within these SDGs and include goals addressing poverty, hunger, education, equality, peace, clean energy, climate change, innovation, responsible consumption, decent work, economic prosperity, and so on. I encourage you to review all 17 of them at sdgs.un.org/goals.

Most, if not all, railroads and transit organizations have e orts in place that support many of these broad goals. In more recent years, they have been looking for ways to address climate change by reducing their carbon footprint. Additionally, all of the Class I Railroads have committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions through the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi). Many of the freight railroad’s customers are interested in reducing their carbon footprint, including the transportation services they use. Many communities touched and served by rail are also moving in this direction. In many cases it has been shown that more sustainable practices are also more economical –making it good business too. Rail customers, our communities, and good business practices are all pushing the industry to become more sustainable. A sustainability phrase o en heard is “People, Planet, and Pro t” – the three P’s. Sustainable development is a holistic, balanced approach to supporting the needs of humankind, maintaining a healthy environment, and providing economic prosperity. One goal is not achieved at the detriment of another, but rather they build upon each other to make progress.

e ability of railways to succeed requires partnership from the entire rail industry, including customers, consultants, and suppliers. An example of that is Railsponsible. is is an initiative that was established by railway suppliers in 2015 to promote

TRENT M. HUDAK AREMA President 2022-23

sustainable procurement. Go to railsponsible.org to read about their mission, vision and what they do.

As railway engineers we are responsible for designing, constructing, maintaining, and operating railway infrastructure. What are the sustainability opportunities with rail infrastructure? What SDG’s align best with our roles and how can we help to achieve them? Although the industry’s ability to make impacts with infrastructure development are more far reaching, perhaps we can be most impactful with four of them.

SDGs that might align most directly with railway infrastructure are:

Another perspective to see the extent of sustainability opportunities within the railway engineering space is to look at the broader view on how all construction, and the maintenance and operation of facilities/ buildings, contribute to global emissions.

is category generates over one-third of all emissions, as shown by the chart above.(3)

It is important to note that many best engineering practices routinely used by the railway industry are not only good engineering and business, but also very sustainable practices that contribute to the overall goals. e industry has, in many ways, been practicing and embracing aspects of sustainability for over a century. While the industry may not have termed its engineering or business principles in this way, it has incorporated elements of sustainable design, practice, and operations. As the industry’s awareness of sustainability grows, it stands ready to adapt to change, as it has done many times over its rich history

is past February AREMA released a podcast episode that is a great introduction to sustainability. In that episode Walt Bleser, our amazing host, talks with two

sustainability experts from Committee 13-Environmental, Dava Kaitala and Mark Coleman. I encourage you to listen to Platform Chats: Season 3, Episode 1 to hear Dava and Mark discuss this important topic.

In a future message I will discuss how AREMA will further support the industry’s de nition and advancement of sustainability as a pragmatic business value, and as a tenet of being a responsible steward of our precious resources.

Enjoy your journey until next month.

TRENT M. HUDAK

AREMA President 2022-2023

REFERENCES:

1. theodoreroosevelt.org

2. un.org/sustainabledevelopment

3. Global Alliance for Building and Construction, 2022

FYI

Registration is now open for the AREMA 2023 Annual Conference in conjunction with Railway Interchange. Railway Interchange is back after four years October 1-4 at the Indiana Convention Center. For the latest information about Keynote Speakers, Technical Presentations, Sponsorship, and more, visit www.conference.arema.org.

Did you know we have a wide variety of On Demand education for learning on your time? Browse our most popular webinars, seminars, and Annual Conferences to earn your PDH credits on the go. Visit www.arema.org to start your On Demand learning today.

Is your Library up to date? Order the new 2023 Communications & Signals

2023 MEETINGS

MAY

Manual today. With over 35 new, revised, reaffirmed, or extended Manual Parts, including over 500 pages of updates, get your copy of the 2023 Manual. Order online now at www.arema.org.

Don’t miss out on the conversation happening in AREMA’s Member Forum. The Member Forum connects you with other Members allowing you to send messages, start conversations, and more. See what everyone is talking about today: https://community.arema. org/home.

If you’re looking for a podcast to binge, listen to AREMA’s Platform Chats. It features guests from every aspect of the railway industry. Available on all of your favorite listening services.

Leverage the power of your trusted association’s Railway Careers Network to tap into a talent pool of job candidates with the training and education needed for long-term success. Visit www.arema.org/careers to post your job today.

NOT AN AREMA MEMBER?

JOIN TODAY AT WWW.AREMA.ORG

CONNECT WITH AREMA ON SOCIAL MEDIA:

UPCOMING COMMITTEE MEETINGS

MAY 16-17

Committee 15Steel Structures Pueblo, CO

Join a technical committee

Joining a technical committee is the starting point for involvement in the Association and an opportunity for lifelong growth in the industry. AREMA has 30 technical committees covering a broad spectrum of railway engineering specialties. Build your network of contacts, sharpen your leadership skills, learn from other members and maximize your membership investment. If you’re interested in joining a technical committee or sitting in on a meeting as a guest, please contact Alayne Bell at abell@arema.org.

For a complete list of all committee meetings, visit www.arema.org.

Advertising Sales

MAIN OFFICE

JONATHAN CHALON Publisher (212) 620-7224

jchalon@sbpub.com

AL, KY, TN, CHINA

JONATHAN CHALON (212) 620-7224

jchalon@sbpub.com

CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, ME,MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, NC, OH, PA,RI, SC, VT, VA, WV, CANADA: QUEBEC AND EAST, ONTARIO

JEROME MARULLO (212) 620-7260

jmarullo@sbpub.com

AR, AK, AZ, CA, CO, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, LA, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NE, NM, ND, NV, OK, OR, SD, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY, CANADA: ALBERTA, BRITISH COLUMBIA, MANITOBA, SASKATCHEWAN HEATHER DISABATO (CHICAGO OFFICE)

(312) 683-5026

hdisabato@sbpub.com

AMERICAS, EUROPE, ASIA, AFRICA, AUSTRAL ASIA NORTH AMERICA - CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, NC, OH, PA, RI, SC, VT, VA, WV, AND EASTERN CANADA. EUROPE EXCEPT GERMANY, AUSTRIA, GERMAN SPEAKING SWITZERLAND, EASTERN EUROPE, ITALY, AND ITALIAN-SPEAKING SWITZERLAND. ASIA EXCEPT JAPAN AND CHINA. JEROME MARULLO (212) 620-7260 jmarullo@sbpub.com

GERMANY, AUSTRIA, GERMAN-SPEAKING SWITZERLAND, LATVIA, LITHUANIA, ESTONIA, POLAND, CZECH REPUBLIC, SLOVAKIA, HUNGARY, SLOVENIA, CROATIA AND SERBIA SIMONE AND SIMON FAHR Breitenbergstr. 17

Füssen 87629

Germany

Tel: +49 8362 5074996 sfahr@railjournal.com

ITALY, ITALIAN-SPEAKING SWITZERLAND

DR. FABIO POTESTA

Media Point & Communications SRL

Corte Lambruschini

Corso Buenos Aires 8 V Piano, Genoa, Italy 16129 +39-10-570-4948

Fax: +39-10-553-0088 info@mediapointsrl.it

JAPAN

KATSUHIRO ISHII

Ace Media Service, Inc. 12-6 4-Chome, Nishiiko, Adachi-Ku Tokyo 121-0824

Japan

+81-3-5691-3335

Fax: +81-3-5691-3336 amkatsu@dream.com

IRJ PRO AND CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING SALES

JEROME MARULLO

(212) 620-7260 jmarullo@sbpub.com

A Requiem for the Kansas City Southern

By David C. Lester, Editor-in-Chief

The organizational structure of the railroad industry changed dramatically during the second half of the 20th Century. In 1950, there were approximately 130 Class I roads in North America, and today there are six.

is was generally a reaction to a decline in the industry’s fortunes that started not long a er the end of the Second World War, namely the expansion of the nation’s roadways and airways and the concurrent advancement of technology. Leaders of the rail industry felt that the merger of roads with complementary routes would result in cost savings that would o set the drain of rail co ers brought about by changes in the transportation industry.

During these years, famous railroad names like Southern Railway, Louisville & Nashville, Southern Paci c, New York Central, Missouri Paci c, and many others disappeared into the history books. ese “fallen ags” had their devotees, whether they were business people who rated di erent roads based on customer service, passengers who favored one road’s train over the others, or rail enthusiasts who had their favorite roads.

With the merger of Canadian Paci c and Kansas City Southern, KCS has joined the list of fallen ags. While the new company is “CPKC,” CP is the dominant partner in the transaction, with only the letters “KC” (for Kansas City) hinting that the old KCS may be a component of the new company.

Arthur Stilwell was the “founder” of the

Kansas City Southern, as he incorporated the Kansas City Suburban Belt Railroad in 1887. Stilwell served as president of the railroad and presided over its expansion into the Kansas City, Pittsburg & Gulf Railroad (KCP&G). Business was thriving, and the road needed additional locomotives and cars. Stilwell had approached George M. Pullman about investing in the line during the early days, which Pullman did, and now that the railroad needed new equipment, Stilwell approached him again. However, Pullman died before he could conclude the investment process. Sadly, the KCP&G went bankrupt and, on April 1, 1900, was reorganized as the Kansas City Southern Railway (KCS). Stilwell was no longer associated with KCS and went on to build another railroad which eventually went bankrupt, and Stilwell died on September 26, 1928.

In 1939, Kansas City Southern gained control of the Louisville & Arkansas Railway. Until 1992, these two roads operated as one but kept their corporate identities. Kansas City Southern thrived during the twenty years a er the end of World War II under the leadership of William Deramus and William Deramus III. However, it ran into trouble in the 1960s, with lots of its physical plant and rolling stock needing replacement, which the railroad could not a ord. e merger movement had already started, but no other, larger carriers pursued Kansas City Southern as a merger partner. Kansas City

Southern Industries was established in 1962 to allow the railroad’s leadership to invest in industries other than railroading to subsidize the railroad. Several companies did this in the 1960s and 70s.

Kansas City Southern acquired the MidSouth Rail Corporation in 1994, which connected the railroad with CSX and Norfolk Southern, with a line between Dallas, Texas and Meridian, Miss., named the “Meridan Speedway” because it linked southwestern and southeastern U.S. markets.

Under the leadership of Michael Haverty, Kansas City Southern extended its reach into Mexico in 1995 with an agreement between KCS and the TexasMexican Railway to provide a route between the U.S. and Mexico through Laredo, Texas through the International Bridge. Kansas City Southern eventually acquired the Transportacion Ferroviaria Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.; TFM became a wholly-owned subsidiary of KCS and was renamed Kansas City Southern de Mexico in 2005.

Kansas City Southern invested in the Panama Canal Railway Company in 1998 in conjunction with the widening of the canal. In 2000, Kansas City Southern Industries was renamed the Kansas City Southern Railway. In 2021, CP and KCS announced their interest in combining, and the Surface Transportation Board approved the merger on March 15, 2023. e new company, CPKC, began business as one entity on April 14, 2023.

Photo Credit: David C. Lester

REGISTERNOW

TheAREMA2023AnnualConferenceinconjunctionwith RailwayInterchangeisbackafterfouryears.Joinusto network,expandyourknowledgefromthenearly80Technical Presentations,findsolutionsintheExhibitHallfeaturingover 700companies,andmuchmore.

OCTOBER1-4>>INDIANACONVENTIONCENTER