efficiency test

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
yarrow

yarrow

Engineer
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Messages
2,235
Location
far ne washington state, 1/2 mile from canada
was on the cs today. we stopped at a red signal north of eugene, went ahead after a minute of so and stopped again. the conductor announced that bnsf had asked for an efficiency test which we passed and we would continue on as soon as the dispatcher cleared us. what is an efficiency test?
 
A signal compliance check. Used to see if the crew responds properly to a restricting signal. They set the signal to stop (or stop and proceed) and observe the train and crew. FRA gets in on the act also.
 
An efficiency test, is a federally mandated requirement for Railroads, under 49 CFR part 217, to monitor rules compliance of the crews, for both Federal Law, and Railroad Operating and Safety Rules. What you experienced, was a required annual stop test, or what the FRA calls an Operational Monitoring Observation. Each engineer has to be checked at least annually, on stopping within 1/2 the range of vision under the requirements of Restricted Speed or it's operational equivalent, or compliance with fixed signal indications. These are unannounced checks, and there are dozens of types of tests, to check everything from stopping properly for signals or restricted speed, to proper wear of PPE, to handling of switches and derails, to protecting shove movements, and even compliance with drug and alcohol prohibitions.
 
Shortline said:
An efficiency test, is a federally mandated requirement for Railroads, under 49 CFR part 217, to monitor rules compliance of the crews, for both Federal Law, and Railroad Operating and Safety Rules. What you experienced, was a required annual stop test, or what the FRA calls an Operational Monitoring Observation. Each engineer has to be checked at least annually, on stopping within 1/2 the range of vision under the requirements of Restricted Speed or it's operational equivalent, or compliance with fixed signal indications. These are unannounced checks, and there are dozens of types of tests, to check everything from stopping properly for signals or restricted speed, to proper wear of PPE, to handling of switches and derails, to protecting shove movements, and even compliance with drug and alcohol prohibitions.
Click to expand...
And if the test is failed, the train is going nowhere until a replacement crew comes out to take the train because a train crew that fails will not be running trains for a while to say the least.
 
The compliance with the red signal is important. But the compliance with moving at Restricted Speed is almost more important. They have to be able to stop within one half the range of vision. So if you put up an obstruction in a blind curve that's the crux of the test, to ensure they have the train controlled to be able to stop short of it.
 
yarrow said:
Medic981 said:
How often does a train crew fail this test?
Click to expand...
or, more to the point, how often do they run red signals?
Click to expand...
Very rarely. Even in times and places in North America where speed limits were regarded as suggestions, red signals were not. This may not be as true in other places, particulaly where there are more multiple track line so each track is essentially uni-directional. Some of the Brits I used to work with made the comment that is was so common there they even had an acronym for it: SPAD = signal passed at danger. Whether that was an exaggeration or is still true, I could not say.
 
The Brits certainly do have an acronym for it. SPADs were never that common, but they have always been very bureaucratic about reporting SPADs -- if you have a report with a line item for something, you get an acronym....

There is some real wonkiness in the traditional British signalling system which made SPADs more likely than in traditional US signalling (or German signalling, or Russian signalling). Particularly the way signals were handled at stations is *bizarre*, and I still don't fully understand it. (I spent some time learning about different traditionally signalling systems a while back; the German one is arguably the most elegant.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
George Harris said:
Shortline said:
An efficiency test, is a federally mandated requirement for Railroads, under 49 CFR part 217, to monitor rules compliance of the crews, for both Federal Law, and Railroad Operating and Safety Rules. What you experienced, was a required annual stop test, or what the FRA calls an Operational Monitoring Observation. Each engineer has to be checked at least annually, on stopping within 1/2 the range of vision under the requirements of Restricted Speed or it's operational equivalent, or compliance with fixed signal indications. These are unannounced checks, and there are dozens of types of tests, to check everything from stopping properly for signals or restricted speed, to proper wear of PPE, to handling of switches and derails, to protecting shove movements, and even compliance with drug and alcohol prohibitions.
Click to expand...
And if the test is failed, the train is going nowhere until a replacement crew comes out to take the train because a train crew that fails will not be running trains for a while to say the least.
Click to expand...
If it is unannounced and only the engineer can see it, why would the whole crew be blamed and replaced? Unless they know otherwise and fail to stop the engineer, conductors would have to consider the engineer capable of doing the right thing when required.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top