On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:03:57 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote:

Well, he's not a troll in that he's making it up as he goes - it appears he
really is hoping to do for his company what he says (source: Google).

I have a clear history for anyone to Google.

However it's a job which really equates to:
Government fleeces tax-payers
Bureaucrat gets hold of budget allocation
Bureaucrat needs to succeed - ie. unload allocation
Ari and co. want to be under the hopper when the jackpot payout commences

Not too much wrong with that synopsis, Ken.

A valid way of doing business, but still a crock.

Ken

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.
--
Drop the alphabet for email

"Ari Silversteinn" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:03:57 +1300, Ken Taylor wrote:

Well, he's not a troll in that he's making it up as he goes - it appears
he
really is hoping to do for his company what he says (source: Google).

I have a clear history for anyone to Google.

Sure do, I was pointing that out. Hence I don't think you're a troll.

However it's a job which really equates to:
Government fleeces tax-payers
Bureaucrat gets hold of budget allocation
Bureaucrat needs to succeed - ie. unload allocation
Ari and co. want to be under the hopper when the jackpot payout
commences

Not too much wrong with that synopsis, Ken.

A valid way of doing business, but still a crock.

Ken

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.
--
I'm really not criticizing you, per se, but I don't think the concept is
well thought out.

You refer elsewhere to this being an auxiliary warning system on a loco -
level crossing lights/bells/boom gates not enough? They usually are, so why
the worry now? (Okay, we know it's the moolah....).

You also refer to 1,000W being available - it's just not enough for what you
want to do. Period.

Good luck with them getting their act (I would have said something else!)
together, but don't bet the bank on it. I'm actually an ex-bureaucrat myself
and to call me cynical of governmental abilities would be an understatement.
But if you do come up with something useful (I bet it ends up being a
spin-off rather than the initial concept seen here), I hope you get
something out of it.

Cheers.

Ken

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.

You refer elsewhere to this being an auxiliary warning system on a loco -
level crossing lights/bells/boom gates not enough? They usually are, so why
the worry now? (Okay, we know it's the moolah....).

The number of unmarked or unworkable crossings is greater than the ones
quadrant marked and useable.

You also refer to 1,000W being available - it's just not enough for what you
want to do. Period.

3 watts per frequency?

Good luck with them getting their act (I would have said something else!)
together, but don't bet the bank on it. I'm actually an ex-bureaucrat myself
and to call me cynical of governmental abilities would be an understatement.

Well, if in the process we get paid, then wtf, you know?

But if you do come up with something useful (I bet it ends up being a
spin-off rather than the initial concept seen here), I hope you get
something out of it.

Cheers.

Ken

Thanks, Ken, it would be nice to do something that would save lives and
limbs and also make a few asspennies
--
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 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

"Ari Silversteinn" wrote in message
.. .
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

It may be a fine project which will produce the goods, but let's look at the
way you've brought it he
- you wanted help to get up a truck-mounted transmitted to over-ride all
AM/FM communications in an area. You wanted to drive the truck at up to
70mph through a disaster/emergency area, for no adequately explained reason
(the RF is going for a mile or two outside the area, so why drive the
truck?). You got told why it's impractical as described.
- you suddenly changed it to a loco mounted project. You struck gold on this
one as there are people here who clearly have industry experience. You're
not poo-poo'ing their skepticism, but certainly not fazed (may not be a bad
thing....). Why not pour the funds into controlling all these uncontrolled
level crossings instead of producing a 'box' to go on every loco that may
drive through the US?
- you are trying to get commercial advice in a Ham group - is this the right
venue?? I'd have thought not, though it's certainly cheap.
- having ten agencies etc etc on your side may get the project through, but
is it the right solution to whichever problem it's attacking?
- 'nay-sayers' are a pain-in-the-arse, agreed - no-one likes them! - but
sometimes you need to hear the other side.

Cheers.

Ken

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.

wrote:

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.

Never down in Oakland/the CITY, worked in K.Falls for years,
started in Eugene, in '68. Finally moved here to Sparks, about
12 years ago. Yeh, remember Brigit- bet she doing better than
most - had Dave Stubbles in Roseville, until they laid him off
about 7 years ago then he went to makeing big $$$!!-- and the
two Mikes-- Rosemond - he back in Eugene, and Barnecascle- he
in Elko, NV- got a year until retirement! Guess Bob Hall
still retired in K.Falls, and Jim Haas also there (he took my
job when came to Sparks). All retired (except for the two mikes).
Think you Kaiser D ?? have fun-- Jim (A.J. Foster) NN7K

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 17:51:49 GMT, Jim - NN7K
wrote:



wrote:

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.

Never down in Oakland/the CITY, worked in K.Falls for years,
started in Eugene, in '68. Finally moved here to Sparks, about
12 years ago. Yeh, remember Brigit- bet she doing better than
most - had Dave Stubbles in Roseville, until they laid him off
about 7 years ago then he went to makeing big $$$!!-- and the
two Mikes-- Rosemond - he back in Eugene, and Barnecascle- he
in Elko, NV- got a year until retirement! Guess Bob Hall
still retired in K.Falls, and Jim Haas also there (he took my
job when came to Sparks). All retired (except for the two mikes).
Think you Kaiser D ?? have fun-- Jim (A.J. Foster) NN7K

Oops, sorry, I meant to take this personal stuff offline.