Now That ATCS Is Mostly Gone

[Dark_Hunter]

Now that ATCS is going away and if not most states have moved away from this system, which was used to monitor train traffic in the area.

What is used now to help track train movement?

 

[wa8pyr]

Now that ATCS is going away and if not most states have moved away from this system, which was used to monitor train traffic in the area.

What is used now to help track train movement?

The tried and true method of listening to the scanner and taking note of what you hear. Both the voice channels and EOT channels can provide useful information.

 

[UPCoffeyvilleSubMain2]

"Now that ATCS is going away and if not most states have moved away from this system, which was used to monitor train traffic in the area."

To be clear, ATCS isn't actually going away, its implementation physical network layer is changing to use undecipherable packets in a different radio spectrum, or going to fiber optic transmission medium which not detectable without breaching its security.

So ATCS is still there but is slowly shedding unencrypted radio in the 900 Mhz range which ATCS Monitor, the SW package, depends upon.

The system is there, but impossible to use to monitor train traffic where the radio transmissions aren't any longer being radiated.

"What is used now to help track train movement?"

If you mean "what is used by people who foremerly relied on the ATCS Monitor SW package and 900 Mhz radios to track trains?"

It's like the other poster said, we're back to rubbing sticks together by listiening to other radio emissions.

EOT, HOT, DPU, voice, etc are reliable but less exact for determining when the train might arrive. [ Edit: also PTC Mobile channels ]

I also have theorized the design of a system of directional microphones pointing in both north and south directions toward the UP main that goes just east of my residence.

Then I would try analyzing the sound to detect a distance train horn among the other noise then email me or text me.

But right now, I'm not highly motivated because the ATCS Monitor works great with the radios and unencrypted right here.

 

[ecps92]

"Now that ATCS is going away and if not most states have moved away from this system, which was used to monitor train traffic in the area."

To be clear, ATCS isn't actually going away, its implementation physical network layer is changing to use undecipherable packets in a different radio spectrum, or going to fiber optic transmission medium which not detectable without breaching its security.

So ATCS is still there but is slowly shedding unencrypted radio in the 900 Mhz range which ATCS Monitor, the SW package, depends upon.

The system is there, but impossible to use to monitor train traffic where the radio transmissions aren't any longer being radiated.

"What is used now to help track train movement?"

If you mean "what is used by people who foremerly relied on the ATCS Monitor SW package and 900 Mhz radios to track trains?"

It's like the other poster said, we're back to rubbing sticks together by listiening to other radio emissions.

EOT, HOT, DPU, voice, etc are reliable but less exact for determining when the train might arrive. [ Edit: also PTC Mobile channels ]

I also have theorized the design of a system of directional microphones pointing in both north and south directions toward the UP main that goes just east of my residence.

Then I would try analyzing the sound to detect a distance train horn among the other noise then email me or text me.

But right now, I'm not highly motivated because the ATCS Monitor works great with the radios and unencrypted right here.

Keep in mind the OP is not in the United States, per his Profile

 

[UPCoffeyvilleSubMain2]

Keep in mind the OP is not in the United States, per his Profile

I sure have done so, yes. I saw the profile NZ notation.

 

[wa8pyr]

Keep in mind the OP is not in the United States, per his Profile

The same tactics still apply, unless listening to the railroads on a scanner is illegal in New Zealand.

 

[iceman977th]

"Now that ATCS is going away and if not most states have moved away from this system, which was used to monitor train traffic in the area."

To be clear, ATCS isn't actually going away, its implementation physical network layer is changing to use undecipherable packets in a different radio spectrum, or going to fiber optic transmission medium which not detectable without breaching its security.

So ATCS is still there but is slowly shedding unencrypted radio in the 900 Mhz range which ATCS Monitor, the SW package, depends upon.

The system is there, but impossible to use to monitor train traffic where the radio transmissions aren't any longer being radiated.

"What is used now to help track train movement?"

If you mean "what is used by people who foremerly relied on the ATCS Monitor SW package and 900 Mhz radios to track trains?"

It's like the other poster said, we're back to rubbing sticks together by listiening to other radio emissions.

EOT, HOT, DPU, voice, etc are reliable but less exact for determining when the train might arrive. [ Edit: also PTC Mobile channels ]

I also have theorized the design of a system of directional microphones pointing in both north and south directions toward the UP main that goes just east of my residence.

Then I would try analyzing the sound to detect a distance train horn among the other noise then email me or text me.

But right now, I'm not highly motivated because the ATCS Monitor works great with the radios and unencrypted right here.

This feels like something J. David Aten would've written.. good god.

No, ATCS is not "still there" in the new system. ATCS Spec 200 is the transmission protocol that was used for wayside communication. They are completely changing protocols from ATCS, which operates on 900MHz primarily and uses FSK data, to the ITCnet system used by PTC, which operates on 220MHz using Pi/4 DQPSK (think a very dumbed down version of wi-fi or cellular transmissions) It's an ENTIRELY different protocol.

The only correct answer anywhere on NS, CN, UP, and BNSF is going to be the "old way" listening to radio traffic and finding a good friend at the railroad for intel. The railroads have 9 months to migrate from the current bandplan to the new bandplan or an entirely different protocol. CPKC does not appear to be switching to ITCnet currently, it sounds like they are using the new channels.

Oh, and enjoy the "old way" while you can. Documents have shown the AAR is looking into a way to transmit voice over ITCnet or a similar broadband radio system as well. So, there's a pretty good chance radio comms as we know it will disappear one day too. Not anytime soon, but eventually.

 

[UPCoffeyvilleSubMain2]

" They are completely changing protocols from ATCS, which operates on 900MHz primarily and uses FSK data, to the ITCnet system used by PTC, which operates on 220MHz using Pi/4 DQPSK (think a very dumbed down version of wi-fi or cellular transmissions) It's an ENTIRELY different protocol."


It doesn't matter whether the protocol changed or not, the problem for us is the radio emissions are going to encrypted radio channels or fiber optic physical media.

Code line signaling will continue for the foreseeable future but will not be able to be monitored.

That's all I meant. I didn't say nor did I mean to imply the underlying technical details were identical.

The net result is the same: no more useful ATCS monitoring will be possible eventually.

The invective is unnecessary to make your point

"This feels like something J. David Aten would've written.. good god."

 

[kg6nlw]

Also be aware you will see a decrease in voice traffic over time as we are using PTC more and more for things. Voice traffic will only be for certain things that PTC can not handle, yet.

Regards,

-Frank C.

 

[burner50]

Oh, and enjoy the "old way" while you can. Documents have shown the AAR is looking into a way to transmit voice over ITCnet or a similar broadband radio system as well. So, there's a pretty good chance radio comms as we know it will disappear one day too. Not anytime soon, but eventually.

Yeah? Railroads began deploying NXDN radios almost 20 years ago with the AAR's plan requirement to go to digital emissions.

Still hasn't happened.

 

[wa8pyr]

Yeah? Railroads began deploying NXDN radios almost 20 years ago with the AAR's plan requirement to go to digital emissions.

Still hasn't happened.

Got a reference (rule number, etc) for your statement that migration to digital is a requirement? The only mandate out there is the FCC narrowband mandate, and they’ve already complied with that as it currently stands; there was no mandate from the FCC to go digital.

Last time I checked, AAR (like NFPA) is an industry association, without the authority to mandate this sort of thing. All the AAR (or NFPA) can do is recommend; participation by the railroads is voluntary, meaning they can set their own deadlines, or even elect not to go digital.

 

[burner50]

Got a reference (rule number, etc) for your statement that migration to digital is a requirement? The only mandate out there is the FCC narrowband mandate, and they’ve already complied with that as it currently stands; there was no mandate from the FCC to go digital.

Last time I checked, AAR (like NFPA) is an industry association, without the authority to mandate this sort of thing. All the AAR (or NFPA) can do is recommend; participation by the railroads is voluntary, meaning they can set their own deadlines, or even elect not to go digital.

It *was* a requirement at the time... AAR backed off of it.

Yes, AAR is an industry association, but they hold an obscene amount of power. When the AAR decides how something is to be done, everyone will fall in line. To start, the AAR owns the UMLER system and operates the USDOT and FRA's specialized testing facilities. It's no coincidence that the headquarters of the AAR is in Washington DC in the capitol view building situated among other government offices like NASA, the USPS... Oh... and right across the street from the offices of many congress critters.

The AAR has enough power that railroads invested hundreds of millions into NXDN gear for such a requirement that was eventually removed.

 

[Dark_Hunter]

Thanks all for the feedback.

 

[iceman977th]

It *was* a requirement at the time... AAR backed off of it.

Yes, AAR is an industry association, but they hold an obscene amount of power. When the AAR decides how something is to be done, everyone will fall in line. To start, the AAR owns the UMLER system and operates the USDOT and FRA's specialized testing facilities. It's no coincidence that the headquarters of the AAR is in Washington DC in the capitol view building situated among other government offices like NASA, the USPS... Oh... and right across the street from the offices of many congress critters.

The AAR has enough power that railroads invested hundreds of millions into NXDN gear for such a requirement that was eventually removed.

Please show me where NXDN was a pushed requirement, I'd love to see where it was ever required.

Narrowbanding had nothing to do with any requirements to go digital by the railroads. Narrowbanding was for adding additional radio channels to commercial/public safety without giving up additional spectrum. It was a blanket mandate by the FCC for ALL VHF and UHF communications (amateur radio was not required to) the railroads simply took the additional step to push digital-capable radios as the gold standard, especially since NXDN96 uses 12.5khz channels.. so with digital you could get more from the same space. Technically you can get two radio paths in 12.5khz with NXDN48, so with the addition of splinters and ability to do digital, the railroads ended up with around 4x more channels to utilize.

 

[kg6nlw]

Please show me where NXDN was a pushed requirement, I'd love to see where it was ever required.

Narrowbanding had nothing to do with any requirements to go digital by the railroads. Narrowbanding was for adding additional radio channels to commercial/public safety without giving up additional spectrum. It was a blanket mandate by the FCC for ALL VHF and UHF communications (amateur radio was not required to) the railroads simply took the additional step to push digital-capable radios as the gold standard, especially since NXDN96 uses 12.5khz channels.. so with digital you could get more from the same space. Technically you can get two radio paths in 12.5khz with NXDN48, so with the addition of splinters and ability to do digital, the railroads ended up with around 4x more channels to utilize.

Yet we still use all the same channels we always have, just in narrowband...

Regards,

-Frank C.

 

[burner50]

Please show me where NXDN was a pushed requirement, I'd love to see where it was ever required.

Narrowbanding had nothing to do with any requirements to go digital by the railroads. Narrowbanding was for adding additional radio channels to commercial/public safety without giving up additional spectrum. It was a blanket mandate by the FCC for ALL VHF and UHF communications (amateur radio was not required to) the railroads simply took the additional step to push digital-capable radios as the gold standard, especially since NXDN96 uses 12.5khz channels.. so with digital you could get more from the same space. Technically you can get two radio paths in 12.5khz with NXDN48, so with the addition of splinters and ability to do digital, the railroads ended up with around 4x more channels to utilize.

Show you a 25 year old requirement that was dropped years ago from an industry group known for secrecy?

There certainly aren't going to be any credible sources for that... But there is evidence.

Around 2005-2006 all of the class I railroads began deploying exclusively NXDN capable gear. This comes with a cost premium for companies that are obsessed with pinching pennies wherever possible.

 

[wa8pyr]

Show you a 25 year old requirement that was dropped years ago from an industry group known for secrecy?

There certainly aren't going to be any credible sources for that... But there is evidence.

Around 2005-2006 all of the class I railroads began deploying exclusively NXDN capable gear. This comes with a cost premium for companies that are obsessed with pinching pennies wherever possible.

That doesn't strike me as evidence so much as (relatively rare) forward thinking; the FCC has said they want to shrink VHF/UHF even further (6.25 kHz vs 12.5 kHz), and switching to NXDN48 (the AAR standard) would accomplish that without having to purchase new equipment.

True, the railroads (except for FEC and a few shortlines) haven't made major steps toward shifting to digital, but most of the Class Is are using NXDN here and there, so it's certainly on their radar.

As I understand it from a couple of guys I know in the industry, all of the equipment is NXDN-ready, including the lineside base stations; in many cases all the dispatchers have to do is select the channel they want. By and large the only thing the C&S guys would have to do is visit each defect detector and change the channel on the radio.

No telling why they haven't switched yet, but I'm not going to complain that they're still analog. The longer they wait means the longer I have before needing to scrounge up NXDN-ready radios for a museum I volunteer at.

 

[iceman977th]

That doesn't strike me as evidence so much as (relatively rare) forward thinking; the FCC has said they want to shrink VHF/UHF even further (6.25 kHz vs 12.5 kHz), and switching to NXDN48 (the AAR standard) would accomplish that without having to purchase new equipment.

True, the railroads (except for FEC and a few shortlines) haven't made major steps toward shifting to digital, but most of the Class Is are using NXDN here and there, so it's certainly on their radar.

As I understand it from a couple of guys I know in the industry, all of the equipment is NXDN-ready, including the lineside base stations; in many cases all the dispatchers have to do is select the channel they want. By and large the only thing the C&S guys would have to do is visit each defect detector and change the channel on the radio.

No telling why they haven't switched yet, but I'm not going to complain that they're still analog. The longer they wait means the longer I have before needing to scrounge up NXDN-ready radios for a museum I volunteer at.

I hope not either.. because SDRTrunk, which is what I'm planning to switch my feeds to next year as time permits, still doesn't support NXDN sadly.

 

[KF5EGM]

"Now that ATCS is going away and if not most states have moved away from this system, which was used to monitor train traffic in the area."

To be clear, ATCS isn't actually going away, its implementation physical network layer is changing to use undecipherable packets in a different radio spectrum, or going to fiber optic transmission medium which not detectable without breaching its security.

So ATCS is still there but is slowly shedding unencrypted radio in the 900 Mhz range which ATCS Monitor, the SW package, depends upon.

The system is there, but impossible to use to monitor train traffic where the radio transmissions aren't any longer being radiated.

"What is used now to help track train movement?"

If you mean "what is used by people who foremerly relied on the ATCS Monitor SW package and 900 Mhz radios to track trains?"

It's like the other poster said, we're back to rubbing sticks together by listiening to other radio emissions.

EOT, HOT, DPU, voice, etc are reliable but less exact for determining when the train might arrive. [ Edit: also PTC Mobile channels ]

I also have theorized the design of a system of directional microphones pointing in both north and south directions toward the UP main that goes just east of my residence.

Then I would try analyzing the sound to detect a distance train horn among the other noise then email me or text me.

But right now, I'm not highly motivated because the ATCS Monitor works great with the radios and unencrypted right here.

Speaking from a security standpoint, there is no such thing as uncrackable ciphers, only what's not yet been cracked, but especially for that. Maybe not in real time, but it's a matter of amount of data captured and amount of computing resources available. Unless you're talking about post quantum cryptography, like crystals-kaiber or crystals-dilithium (yes i know the names are great, but 100 percent serious cryptography) which i seriously doubt anything like a railroad runs on it's packets. And yes there are classic algorithms that are totally uncracked yet, but in security it's the cardinal sin to assume something is uncrackable. Everything we ever thought was uncrackable has been cracked.

 

[burner50]

That doesn't strike me as evidence so much as (relatively rare) forward thinking; the FCC has said they want to shrink VHF/UHF even further (6.25 kHz vs 12.5 kHz), and switching to NXDN48 (the AAR standard) would accomplish that without having to purchase new equipment.

True, the railroads (except for FEC and a few shortlines) haven't made major steps toward shifting to digital, but most of the Class Is are using NXDN here and there, so it's certainly on their radar.

As I understand it from a couple of guys I know in the industry, all of the equipment is NXDN-ready, including the lineside base stations; in many cases all the dispatchers have to do is select the channel they want. By and large the only thing the C&S guys would have to do is visit each defect detector and change the channel on the radio.

No telling why they haven't switched yet, but I'm not going to complain that they're still analog. The longer they wait means the longer I have before needing to scrounge up NXDN-ready radios for a museum I volunteer at.

All of the hardware is in place, they just need to "flip the switch"... That's almost all of the steps that they need to take. The last step is just paperwork in the form of general orders to change radio channels on affected subdivisions.

I was issued an NX-210 in 2006 almost immediately after they were released... The Class 1 railroads don't spend money on "forward thinking". This is the same industry that once decided that it wasn't worth changing the oil in locomotives because it was too expensive, and they determined that the amount of money saved by not changing the oil would pay for a rebuild of the 16 cylinder diesel engine. The same industry that decided that slowing down all of the freight nationwide and clogging the system was a good idea because someone in an office somewhere decided that it would save fuel. In the first example they didn't thing about the incredible amount of downtime required to overhaul the prime mover, and in the second situation they didn't think about the negative effect these decisions would have on train handling and freight performance, a practice for which Union Pacific was sued by its own customers as well as the federal government.

Speaking from a security standpoint, there is no such thing as uncrackable ciphers, only what's not yet been cracked, but especially for that. Maybe not in real time, but it's a matter of amount of data captured and amount of computing resources available. Unless you're talking about post quantum cryptography, like crystals-kaiber or crystals-dilithium (yes i know the names are great, but 100 percent serious cryptography) which i seriously doubt anything like a railroad runs on it's packets. And yes there are classic algorithms that are totally uncracked yet, but in security it's the cardinal sin to assume something is uncrackable. Everything we ever thought was uncrackable has been cracked.

No, there is no uncrackable cipher... But existing encryption techniques (that can be performed on the fly) cannot be broken in realitme or even within a couple billion years utilizing 2024 technology.