|
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 02:24:25 -0700, Jim Richardson wrote:
they'd be better off with bells and lights at the crossing for the latter... Many crossings have none. I was thinking of putting the bells and lights on the train... More people have ears, than radios. Few of the ones without ears, use radios :) lol -- Drop the alphabet for email |
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 10:08:49 GMT, Wayne P. Muckleroy wrote:
I think you will find that the FCC has the FINAL call on frequency band usage. I can't see them authorizing such intrusive use of the normal broadcast bands, especially after the broadcast industry gets wind of your proposal. They got wind. Intrusive? Matter of subjectivity. A 30 sec message that envelopes a 3500 sided square? From a technical standpoint, broadband transmission of a signal is not hard. A simple VFO sweep of all the normal broadcast bands is all that is required. Obviously, the appropriate modulation techniques would have to be used for each band. That's the way we see it, more or less. Another approach would be the use of a local (LOW power) sweeping UP/DOWN converter. In this method, you could transmit a specific (authorized) signal from the site. This signal would be received and detected by a local receiver. This information would be used to modulate and rebroadcast the signal within the vehicle. However, this would require onboard equipment. Which mat make this impractical in the short run but there has been discussion about mandating this type of installation. I have my doubts but then we have seat belts and airbags. I still think that your biggest hurdle will a legal one. Wayne- (KC8UIO) I agree. Thanks, Wayne. -- Drop the alphabet for email |
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 10:08:49 GMT, Wayne P. Muckleroy wrote:
I can't see them authorizing such intrusive use of the normal broadcast bands, http://www.fcw.com/article88522-04-11-05-Print *This* is intrusive. -- Drop the alphabet for email |
On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 19:40:18 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:
The Republicans are going to take care of all those problems! Darned Democrats anyhow! - Mike KB3EIA - Now look who is the troll. -- Drop the alphabet for email |
If ANY such is to be performed, for railroad equipment, it must be well
thought out, and, further, must face multiple Federal Agencies, and at least one private one (A.A.R., The American Association of Railroads) The additional federal agencies a Federal Railroad Administration, O.S.H.A., and others-- One must also be aware of the facts that MANY frequencies would have to be involved, because of safety concerns (much like airlines), against interference. (No, it is NOT just about Train to train/work crew, and Dispatcher communications that is involved. Other equipment that railroads use a 1) Track Carriers, for Crossing grade signals, dragging equipment, high-wide load, hot box detectors, Broken Rail detection, not to mention some telephony communications, 2) Remote controlled helper engines (unmanned engines on the end of trains to push-assist, and brake), 3) "FREDS" ("Friggin Rear End Devices"), some of which provide telemetry to the engineer of brake pressure, status of tail light, ect.- the new generation is conversant -2 way, also capable of dumping the brake pressure (emergency brake application, via remote control) and, other options (control of Railroad Central Traffic Control, or CTC. Also, on ALL track circuits, in signaled territory, the use of Insulated Joints is mandated, by the Federal Railroad Administration and can cause derailments, and other problems if NOT adheared to!and, 4) G.P.S. equipment As to the Engines, tho, they have considerable power, they supply unorthodox voltages (a typical engine uses 600 volt, circuits, and the electronics used on them is in the 68-72 volt range- further, the newer engines are A.C. , the older diesels were D.C. In sum total, then, this isn't a job for sidewalk superintendents! ONE item the railroads is STILL looking for is a concensus, for a Run-Away vehicle (by their work crews), that would alert a track gang of that runaway comming at them, causing considerable injury! They are STILL looking for such a foolproof device! Translation: DON'T hold your breath, or you will get awful blue!! Jim NN7K Retired Communication Tech, Southern Pacific, and Union Pacific for over 30 years!! Ari Silversteinn wrote: Indeed it is both. Considering we gave away a central DB technology to DHS-NOLA, then they failed to use it, we are hoping to make money this time around *and* that they will get their acts together. On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 08:26:12 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote: I'm really not criticizing you, per se, but I don't think the concept is well thought out. By it's very nature, it cannot be, it is a dynamically moving target and will be for some time I would imagine. |
Thanks Jim, but I wouldn't bet on the facts getting in the way of this
'project'. Cheers. Ken "Jim - NN7K" wrote in message ... If ANY such is to be performed, for railroad equipment, it must be well thought out, and, further, must face multiple Federal Agencies, and at least one private one (A.A.R., The American Association of Railroads) The additional federal agencies a Federal Railroad Administration, O.S.H.A., and others-- One must also be aware of the facts that MANY frequencies would have to be involved, because of safety concerns (much like airlines), against interference. (No, it is NOT just about Train to train/work crew, and Dispatcher communications that is involved. Other equipment that railroads use a 1) Track Carriers, for Crossing grade signals, dragging equipment, high-wide load, hot box detectors, Broken Rail detection, not to mention some telephony communications, 2) Remote controlled helper engines (unmanned engines on the end of trains to push-assist, and brake), 3) "FREDS" ("Friggin Rear End Devices"), some of which provide telemetry to the engineer of brake pressure, status of tail light, ect.- the new generation is conversant -2 way, also capable of dumping the brake pressure (emergency brake application, via remote control) and, other options (control of Railroad Central Traffic Control, or CTC. Also, on ALL track circuits, in signaled territory, the use of Insulated Joints is mandated, by the Federal Railroad Administration and can cause derailments, and other problems if NOT adheared to!and, 4) G.P.S. equipment As to the Engines, tho, they have considerable power, they supply unorthodox voltages (a typical engine uses 600 volt, circuits, and the electronics used on them is in the 68-72 volt range- further, the newer engines are A.C. , the older diesels were D.C. In sum total, then, this isn't a job for sidewalk superintendents! ONE item the railroads is STILL looking for is a concensus, for a Run-Away vehicle (by their work crews), that would alert a track gang of that runaway comming at them, causing considerable injury! They are STILL looking for such a foolproof device! Translation: DON'T hold your breath, or you will get awful blue!! Jim NN7K Retired Communication Tech, Southern Pacific, and Union Pacific for over 30 years!! Ari Silversteinn wrote: Indeed it is both. Considering we gave away a central DB technology to DHS-NOLA, then they failed to use it, we are hoping to make money this time around *and* that they will get their acts together. On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 08:26:12 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote: I'm really not criticizing you, per se, but I don't think the concept is well thought out. By it's very nature, it cannot be, it is a dynamically moving target and will be for some time I would imagine. |
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 22:51:50 GMT, Jim - NN7K
wrote: If ANY such is to be performed, for railroad equipment, it must be well thought out, and, further, must face multiple Federal Agencies, and at least one private one (A.A.R., The American Association of Railroads) The additional federal agencies a Federal Railroad Administration, O.S.H.A., and others-- One must also be aware of the facts that MANY frequencies would have to be involved, because of safety concerns (much like airlines), against interference. (No, it is NOT just about Train to train/work crew, and Dispatcher communications that is involved. Other equipment that railroads use a 1) Track Carriers, for Crossing grade signals, dragging equipment, high-wide load, hot box detectors, Broken Rail detection, not to mention some telephony communications, 2) Remote controlled helper engines (unmanned engines on the end of trains to push-assist, and brake), 3) "FREDS" ("Friggin Rear End Devices"), some of which provide telemetry to the engineer of brake pressure, status of tail light, ect.- the new generation is conversant -2 way, also capable of dumping the brake pressure (emergency brake application, via remote control) and, other options (control of Railroad Central Traffic Control, or CTC. Also, on ALL track circuits, in signaled territory, the use of Insulated Joints is mandated, by the Federal Railroad Administration and can cause derailments, and other problems if NOT adheared to!and, 4) G.P.S. equipment As to the Engines, tho, they have considerable power, they supply unorthodox voltages (a typical engine uses 600 volt, circuits, and the electronics used on them is in the 68-72 volt range- further, the newer engines are A.C. , the older diesels were D.C. In sum total, then, this isn't a job for sidewalk superintendents! ONE item the railroads is STILL looking for is a concensus, for a Run-Away vehicle (by their work crews), that would alert a track gang of that runaway comming at them, causing considerable injury! They are STILL looking for such a foolproof device! Translation: DON'T hold your breath, or you will get awful blue!! Jim NN7K Retired Communication Tech, Southern Pacific, and Union Pacific for over 30 years!! Jim, I don't recognize the name, but did you ever work out of the SF GOB? I spent 30 years there myself. FWIW, I also hear from Brijet occasionally. You probably know her (wherever you worked) as she was in charge of CDC for some years. I spent a decent amount of time down there troubleshooting problems on the remote lines to the zone offices. Ari Silversteinn wrote: Indeed it is both. Considering we gave away a central DB technology to DHS-NOLA, then they failed to use it, we are hoping to make money this time around *and* that they will get their acts together. On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 08:26:12 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote: I'm really not criticizing you, per se, but I don't think the concept is well thought out. By it's very nature, it cannot be, it is a dynamically moving target and will be for some time I would imagine. |
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 22:51:50 GMT, Jim - NN7K wrote:
If ANY such is to be performed, for railroad equipment, it must be well thought out, and, further, must face multiple Federal Agencies, and at least one private one (A.A.R., The American Association of Railroads) The additional federal agencies a Federal Railroad Administration, O.S.H.A., and others-- One must also be aware of the facts that MANY frequencies would have to be involved, because of safety concerns (much like airlines), against interference. (No, it is NOT just about Train to train/work crew, and Dispatcher communications that is involved. Other equipment that railroads use a 1) Track Carriers, for Crossing grade signals, dragging equipment, high-wide load, hot box detectors, Broken Rail detection, not to mention some telephony communications, 2) Remote controlled helper engines (unmanned engines on the end of trains to push-assist, and brake), 3) "FREDS" ("Friggin Rear End Devices"), some of which provide telemetry to the engineer of brake pressure, status of tail light, ect.- the new generation is conversant -2 way, also capable of dumping the brake pressure (emergency brake application, via remote control) and, other options (control of Railroad Central Traffic Control, or CTC. Also, on ALL track circuits, in signaled territory, the use of Insulated Joints is mandated, by the Federal Railroad Administration and can cause derailments, and other problems if NOT adheared to!and, 4) G.P.S. equipment Thanks, solid points. We have identified the FCC assigned to RR frequencies and they are outside of the AM/FM bandwidth. As to the Engines, tho, they have considerable power, they supply unorthodox voltages (a typical engine uses 600 volt, circuits, and the electronics used on them is in the 68-72 volt range- further, the newer engines are A.C. , the older diesels were D.C. All this is convertible though, correct? In sum total, then, this isn't a job for sidewalk superintendents! Nope, sure isn't. ONE item the railroads is STILL looking for is a concensus, for a Run-Away vehicle (by their work crews), that would alert a track gang of that runaway comming at them, causing considerable injury! They are STILL looking for such a foolproof device! What's the issue, this appears not to be a huge deal? Translation: DON'T hold your breath, or you will get awful blue!! Jim NN7K Retired Communication Tech, Southern Pacific, and Union Pacific for over 30 years!! Thanks, Jim, not holding any breaths. This isn't an in-house project, it's a coordinated effort that has all the complications and need for input as you have pointed out. We are asked to be Tech Central of sorts. Ari Silversteinn wrote: Indeed it is both. Considering we gave away a central DB technology to DHS-NOLA, then they failed to use it, we are hoping to make money this time around *and* that they will get their acts together. On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 08:26:12 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote: I'm really not criticizing you, per se, but I don't think the concept is well thought out. By it's very nature, it cannot be, it is a dynamically moving target and will be for some time I would imagine. -- Drop the alphabet for email |
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 11:59:01 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote:
Thanks Jim, but I wouldn't bet on the facts getting in the way of this 'project'. Cheers. Ken Why do you say that? Here's a "heads up" for you, Ken. There are over ten FedGov agencies, several legal teams and the rail lines that are working with diligence on this, and similar, projects with the full intent of attempting to pull this off. While you sit on the sidelines and nay-say. If I had a dime for cheap comments like yours, I could fund this project out of petty cash. So goes the nature of those who do and those who comment about the doers. -- Drop the alphabet for email |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com