Files
Abstract
The railroad industry has since the mid-1980s been investigating the potential of a group of technologies
collectively known as communications-based train control. These communications-based systems have been
applied to both passenger and freight operations, and also to rapid transit and “people-movers” (low-capacity
automated systems typically used at airports or for downtown circulation). In the railroad industry, the term
“positive train control” (PTC) is now used, reflecting the capability of such system to positively enforce
movement authorities, conveying a safety benefit not found in most current railroad systems. However, the
sorts of “human factors” accidents prevented by PTC are (fortunately) uncommon, and their elimination
produces a relatively small annual savings. The cost of implementing PTC, by contrast, may be quite large.
The purpose of this analysis was to quantify the “business benefits” of Positive Train Control (PTC) for the
Class I freight railroad industry. Positive Train Control is a concept, rather than a single technology or
system. It can include many different capabilities, covering a range of railroad functions. The three
components of PTC are the on-board computer (OBC) with Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS)
location capability, a dedicated wireless digital data link between locomotives and a control center, and the
central office hardware and software at the control center. Through use of a digital data link and real-time
train location information, PTC can be a train control system. The digital data link and the OBC can be used
for positive safety enforcement, stopping trains if movement authorities are exceeded. The same data link
may also be used to transmit work instructions to train crews, receive acknowledgment of completed work, or
transmit locomotive diagnostic information in real time. This report does not address the safety benefits of
PTC. These were previously quantified by the Rail Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC), which identified
nearly a thousand “PPAs” (PTC-preventable accidents) on U.S. railroads over a 12-year period, and
determined the savings to be realized from each avoided accident. The RSAC finding was that avoidance of
these PPAs was not, by itself, sufficient (from a strictly economic point of view) to justify an investment in
PTC.
The Congress of the United States then directed FRA to conduct a separate evaluation of the business benefits
of PTC. These are the savings railroads (and shippers) might expect to see if PTC is deployed on the U.S.
railroad network. Examples of potential business benefits include:
line capacity enhancement
improved service reliability
faster over-the-road running times
more efficient use of cars and locomotives (made possible by real-time location information)
reduction in locomotive failures (due to availability of real-time diagnostics)
larger “windows” for track maintenance (made possible by real-time location information)
fuel savings
This paper presents the results of the analysis. It is important to recognize, however, that the state of the art in
making these estimates is not sufficiently mature to make exact answers feasible. What is presented here are
the best estimates now possible, with observations as to how better information may be developed. Benefits
were estimated in the above areas and the cost of deploying PTC on the Class I network (99,000 route miles
and 20,000 locomotives) were calculated. The conclusions of the analysis were as follows:
Deployment of PTC on the Class I railroad network (99,000 route miles, 20,000 locomotives) would
cost between $2.3 billion and $4.4 billion over five years
Annual benefits, once the system was fully implemented, were estimated at $2.2 billion to $3.8
billion
Internal rate of return was estimated (depending on timing and cost) to be between 44% and 160%