Railroad

[Nasby]

Looks like a combo PTC and remotely controlled fixed antennas for dispatch to train voice communications.

 

[raski]

New Tower erected this past summer on Branson Road in Olmsted Twp. Ohio

Do you mean Bronson Road by the ice company?

 

[radioman2001]

That tower looks to have VHF 160 mhz DB products on the nearest to top, next down could be UHF and the bottom might be 900. Without radials on the 2 fiberglass antenna's it's hard to tell.

The main problem with 220 mhz is there is no continuity of frequencies throughout the entire US. Our agency had to BUY our freqs from private individuals and they are not even the same for our entire system. They should have stayed on 900 mhz as we were nationally licensed.

 

[RadioDitch]

No. Each railroad is using whatever band and channels as they see fit in each area. Most common is
220, but CHF, UHF and 900 are being used.

False. PTC is being implemented within the continental United States entirely within a channelized band plan, consisting of 11 channels in the 220.12750Mhz-221.78750MHz range as per the standard agreed to by the AAR, FRA, and FCC to permit seamless interchange/run-through. Most of the channels were formerly held under a block lease by UPS. You're confusing PTC on 220MHz with other integrated wireless and codeline systems elsewhere in the spectrum. Citation? I do this for a living, including with my former employer JEMCOM, which currently is the vendor for the pretty much industry standard cab-top antenna farm units. Wish they had paid better, they were great people...

As to the original question, yes. Class I's are utilizing NXDN across the nation, including in Ohio, for various operations. Norfolk Southern Police are now NXDN encrypted systemwide, and both CSX and NS are utilizing NXDN for certain yard operations. No, at this time, no Class I or Class II common carrier is using NXDN for road or dispatch operations, but pretty much all have modified their licenses to permit it.

 

[PJH]

I bet you my other employeer would tell you otherwise. 220 is the main “interoperable” spectrum block but not the only spectrum used.

My cohorts over at BNSF are using 220 and VHF locally.

 

[N9JIG]

Will PTC affect ATCS/ARES operations or are they going to remain totally separate?

I know some railroads use VHF and others 900 MHz. for ATCS, do any use anything else, like 220 for ATCS?

 

[RadioDitch]

I bet you my other employeer would tell you otherwise. 220 is the main “interoperable” spectrum block but not the only spectrum used.

My cohorts over at BNSF are using 220 and VHF locally.

And the agreed (not lawfully enacted) standard originally authored by the AAR in cooperation with the railroads, FRA, and FCC would prove them wrong.

As to BNSF, I've done installs in the Los Angeles, Chicago, and Powder River Divisions. BNSF is setting up all their PTC for 220 with Sinclair vertical dipoles. Other than voice, their standard plan upon completion will only leave VHF active for HLCP, and ARES (Burlington Northern's early version of ATCS). Hell, Dave Freeman, BNSF VP of Engineering, had a hand in the creation of the 220 PTC standard.

The standard is what the standard is. No Class I or Class II has deviated from it yet, and they would stand to take regulatory major penalties from the STB and/or FRA if they did for hindering interchange. Which is why the AAR 220 Standard was created in the first place.

I gotta say, honestly, It's frustrating that there's so much misinformation on this site when it comes to rail communications. Including route name errors and various operating details in many of the railroad frequency databases.

 

[PJH]

Will PTC affect ATCS/ARES operations or are they going to remain totally separate?

I know some railroads use VHF and others 900 MHz. for ATCS, do any use anything else, like 220 for ATCS?

No. Two different systems.

 

[PJH]

Which standard(s) or recommended practice(s) are you referring to in your statements?