Rail Symposium Closing Comments from Richard Wagoner

 

The exchange over the past two days has been interesting, informative and stimulating in the sense that new information gleaned from the symposium provides us with additional guidance in trying to determine the best way for the R&D community to interact with the private sector vendors of weather information, the railroads and government agencies like the FRA.  The path ahead is still not clear; however, this exchange has provided an initial baseline for further discussions in the future. I have put together some preliminary thoughts regarding follow up and where we go from here. Consider these as potential action items for many of us attending the symposium.

 

  1. A new American Meteorological Society (AMS) standing committee is being formed to address the ITS and Surface Transportation community. I will chair this committee for the next three years. I need a representative from the railroad community to serve on this committee. This representative would serve as a liaison between the rail and meteorological communities.  Someone who is an AMS member would be ideal. Please forward nominations to me.

 

  1. The Cooperative Program for Meteorological Education and Training (COMET) has a solid track record for producing either very high quality computer-based training (CBT) or residency courses for stakeholders in several communities (NWS, DOD, emergency management, etc.).  The FRA in collaboration with the railroad industry might consider using COMET to produce training courses or materials to teach railroad operational personnel how to use advanced weather information more effectively.

 

  1. Some consideration needs to be given to creating an advocacy group that might be called Friends of Rail Weather.  It would consist of railroad industry, private vendors, government agencies and national laboratories (much like the makeup of the attendees at this symposium) who would meet on an annual basis to mark and measure the progress being made in the implementation of and efficient us of advanced weather technologies in the railroad community. A similar group called the Friends of Aviation Weather has been very effective in that community for the past five years. Much of the progress made has been attributed to their activism.  The annual meeting of the American Railway Engineers and Maintenance of Way Association (AREMWA) might be an appropriate forum for this meeting.

 

  1. Gary Nelson has advocated an “observational infostructure,” a national environmental observing system, multimodal in scope, and incorporating fixed and mobile sensors.  This idea plays very well with other technological initiatives, particularly the development of specific decision support systems. Gary has agreed to follow up on this concept and be a protagonist to get it started.

 

 

  1. Given the recent terrorist threats and the ever-present threat of a major toxic spill along the railways, it may be time to consider some type of National Response Center to address these threats.

 

  1. There were several references to getting “the best bang for the buck” in terms of the provision of weather information to the industry.  Although the meetings in April at the AAR,  the work done by the OFCM, and discussions here have more clearly defined many of the operational requirements for improved weather information, the cost and benefits of such capabilities are still not clear. FRA and the railroad industry might consider having the Volpe Center conduct a cost/benefit analysis to more accurately identify where future research and operational dollars should be spent to get the best bang for the buck.

 

 

  1. There was quite a bit of discussion of new sensor technologies ranging from track sensors, on-board sensors, and remote sensors to better sample the tracks, track bed and the surrounding environment.  This is an area that needs more study. The AMS and ITS committees on surface transportation weather can be encouraged to address this area in terms of better identifying the benefits of the sensors, assessing the technical maturity of the sensors and recommending R&D and technology transfer mechanisms to accelerated the migration of these technologies into the operational railroad community.

 

  1. Decision support systems (DSSs) were discussed. Although the general idea of DSSs with similar architectures to those used in highway applications is pretty well understood, the details of how such systems should be structured and who the decision makers are is not clear. More work is needed in this area to determine the operational areas that would benefit the most from such technologies.

 

 

  1. More collaboration between some of the government agencies (DOT/FRA and DOC/NOAA/ERL for example) is needed to ensure a smooth implementation of the DGPS network and to ensure that the system can be exploited as a weather sensing system in a cost effective manner.

 

  1. More emphasis is needed to focus on how advanced weather capabilities can be designed and implemented within an ITS context.  Future funding will be more and more contingent on building new technologies into the overall ITS  infostructure.  This topic can be passed along to the AMS and ITS committees on surface transportation weather with a special focus on the ITS 10-year Research Program.

 

Finally, I would like to thank all of you for taking the time out of your busy schedules to attend this symposium. The exchange was considered by all to be very positive and stimulating. Let us commit ourselves to keeping this general forum alive and well over the next year or so. Doing so will ultimately bring a much improved level of weather information to the railroad community.

 

A special thanks goes to the people who organized and ran the meeting: Don Plotkin (FRA), Jim Lamond (Volpe), Rose Lundeen (NCAR) and Susan Shaw Keegan (CSX).