cv_acr steemtrayn Does it even matter which way the trailing units face if the destination has turning facilities? Not really.
steemtrayn Does it even matter which way the trailing units face if the destination has turning facilities?
Does it even matter which way the trailing units face if the destination has turning facilities?
Not really.
Railroaders say that it doesn't matter but it is a good idea to have at least one other loco point the direction of the lead unit in case it has to be cut out of the train because of mechanical failure.
There is another transition era when the Safety Cab (wide cab) came into existence. Railroads started putting them on the point and having the older helpers in the middle with another safety cab pointing the other direction at the far end so the latch doesn’t have to be turned. This was very common with western railroads like Santa Fe and Union Pacific.
dehusman If the trailing units are run cab-first, you can flat-switch them if you get a failure in the lead unit on the road, and replace it with a trailing unit. Having the trailing unit facing the rear helps if something crazy happens en route, and you wind up running back the way you came (Like the wye suddenly being out of service, or something like that). Actually having the trailing DP unit on a coal train facing backwards is very helpful. If a unit in the ledad consist on a loaded coal train dies, you can cut the trailing unit of an empty train and use it as a leader on the load. The empty doesn't need the DPU for horsepower and since its a remote unit you know it can be used as a DPU controlling unit on the loaded train.
If the trailing units are run cab-first, you can flat-switch them if you get a failure in the lead unit on the road, and replace it with a trailing unit. Having the trailing unit facing the rear helps if something crazy happens en route, and you wind up running back the way you came (Like the wye suddenly being out of service, or something like that).
Actually having the trailing DP unit on a coal train facing backwards is very helpful. If a unit in the ledad consist on a loaded coal train dies, you can cut the trailing unit of an empty train and use it as a leader on the load. The empty doesn't need the DPU for horsepower and since its a remote unit you know it can be used as a DPU controlling unit on the loaded train.
Then all you need is an EOT for the empty or it's not going anywhere. Probably something you might find in a terminal. Out on the road not so much. Intermediate terminals, including those that are crew changes don't always have any extras laying around.
Jeff
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
For crhostler61. Did the mucky-mucks in the Blue Room tell you to be sure there was a jumper cable on the lead unit so the inevitable "rescue squad" could mu with the power when they came out to get the stalled train?
Did you check all available power in the computer for on road failures in the last 30 days so you could assemble the most reliable units for the hot trains?
Did your machinist or laborer ever use up 3 tanks of gas burning the pinion gear out of the traction motor so you could at least send the crippled unit to the shop?
Oh the junk that was Conrail. (via PC of course)
Charlie
http://mprailway.blogspot.com
"The first transition era - wood to steel!"
It depends. Not all turning facilities are created equal. I worked at a location where we tried to run double ended sets into the location, even though it had a wye and a turntable.
Why? Turning engines on a turntable is a laborious process. Only one engine at a time would fit on the turntable. That means you have to break the consist apart, take the engine to the turntable, secure it, turn it, take the engine back to the consist, reconnect all the hoses and cables, brake test it, power test it. Turning power on the wye wasn't the easiest either, since the wye was a main line junction. Hostlers had to take the power to the wye, get permission to use the wye between through trains (trains in and out from 4 different directions and another railroad had trackage rights through the junction).
It was much quicker just to have double ended sets that could be easily "turned" by just flipping some switches and the engineer getting on the other end of the consist.
W
Chris van der Heide
My Algoma Central Railway Modeling Blog
jecorbett The most unrealistic thing I remember from the movie was when the train went around the sharp curve at speed and the inside wheels lifted off the track but the outside wheels stayed on. My guess is that if there was that much outward force one of two things would have happened, the outside wheels would have jumped the track or the track itself would have been ripped from the ties. There was a lot about that movie I liked but I just rolled my eyes at that scene.
At least it illustrates why railroad wheels have inside flanges.
Dave
Just be glad you don't have to press "2" for English.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ_ALEdDUB8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hqFS1GZL4s
http://s73.photobucket.com/user/steemtrayn/media/MovingcoalontheDCM.mp4.html?sort=3&o=27
Unless there is a compelling reason to turn an engine, such as the end terminal of a train not having an easily accessible turning facility, no one is going to turn an engine scheduled to be a trailing unit. If the engine facility foreman is told he needs three engines for a westbound train and he has three engines pointed west, that westbound will have three engines elephant style. All facing west.
If the only engines he has available are all facing east, at least one will get turned. If they are already mu-ed together and the turning facility, like a balloon (loop) track or wye with a long enough tail track, can handle all three he just might turn the entire consist. (If the engines are equipped to be leaders even if running backwards, they might not even turn anything. Some railroads equip both ends with ditch lights. Some of the modern NS engines I've been on also have speedometer on the rear wall for times it's leading running backwards.)
During my time with Conrail when I was 'pushing power' (setting up locomotives for trains), the Blue Room in Philadelphia wanted an east-west leader in most cases. For two locomotives, it simply means they are back to back. For more than two units, an east-west leader and those in between...any which way, what ever was quickest for us to get together.
As for running forward or reverse...the locomotive really doesn't know the difference. Running in reverse just makes visiblity difficult by having to look beyond 40-45 ft of hood.
Unstoppable...flawed from start to finish. It's an action-comedy...as far as I am concerned.
Mark H
Modeling in HO...Reading and Conrail together in an alternate history.
jecorbettAlso the few pictures I've seen of NS units seem to show they have abandoned the NW's practice of running long hood forward
If you study photos of N&W locomotives you will soon discover just as many running short hood forward as you do running long hood foward.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
JE,
I'm not sure that what I recorded at my time and place would necessarily match what you were looking at. Your railroad might have far different ideas about things than mine. I just thought it was neat that I could exactly quantify an answer at all. But if ya wanna know what BNSF was doing along the Columbia River a couple of weeks ago, you do now. And it likely very much represents what's typical elsewhere on BNSF. More or less........
Consider my comments about UP across the river, and how they had some pretty large loco consists--something I didn't see on my side. All railroads don't necessarily follow exactly the same practices.
Ed
wjstix I'm not aware of any particular preference for the middle unit in a 3-engine lash-up to be pointing one way or the other. If the middle engine is facing forward on the way there, it will be facing rearwards on the way back. Yes, Norfolk Southern runs engines short-hood forward. "Unstoppable" has several (numerous?) things that are unrealistic. The engine can go forwards and backwards at the same speed, but the engineer's vision would be restricted when running in reverse.
I'm not aware of any particular preference for the middle unit in a 3-engine lash-up to be pointing one way or the other. If the middle engine is facing forward on the way there, it will be facing rearwards on the way back.
Yes, Norfolk Southern runs engines short-hood forward.
"Unstoppable" has several (numerous?) things that are unrealistic. The engine can go forwards and backwards at the same speed, but the engineer's vision would be restricted when running in reverse.
The most unrealistic thing I remember from the movie was when the train went around the sharp curve at speed and the inside wheels lifted off the track but the outside wheels stayed on. My guess is that if there was that much outward force one of two things would have happened, the outside wheels would have jumped the track or the track itself would have been ripped from the ties. There was a lot about that movie I liked but I just rolled my eyes at that scene.
7j43k From the 17th of this month to the 20th of this month, I photographed 41 freights on the BNSF through Lyle, WA. Of those, 6 occurrances were of the local way freight, which I will discount here. Thus, the following totals 35 trains. With one exception, the head end was either 2 or 3 units. There were 13 "triples". The center unit faced forward 5 times and rearward 8 times. Of the 2 units sets, the second unit ran elephant style about 20-25% of the time. Where there was DP on the rear (pusher, to old timers), it faced the front of the train 7 times, and towards the rear 8 times. It was two units once, otherwise a single. There was only one time that there was more than 3 units on the front: 5. Across the river, I noted that there were times when UP put a LOT of locos on the front. Power transfer? Maybe. Ed
From the 17th of this month to the 20th of this month, I photographed 41 freights on the BNSF through Lyle, WA.
Of those, 6 occurrances were of the local way freight, which I will discount here. Thus, the following totals 35 trains.
With one exception, the head end was either 2 or 3 units. There were 13 "triples". The center unit faced forward 5 times and rearward 8 times. Of the 2 units sets, the second unit ran elephant style about 20-25% of the time.
Where there was DP on the rear (pusher, to old timers), it faced the front of the train 7 times, and towards the rear 8 times. It was two units once, otherwise a single.
There was only one time that there was more than 3 units on the front: 5.
Across the river, I noted that there were times when UP put a LOT of locos on the front. Power transfer? Maybe.
It appears I may have gotten a false impression from the small sample of photos modern lashups I have seen recently. I saw one 6 unit lashup with all but the rear unit facing forward. Another had a 3 unit lashup with all three forward. Those aren't the only two I was thinking of, just the most recent. I've seen a number in person as well and it seems to me that most of the units are facing forward but again, probably a false impression.
One thing I have noticed about photos of modern lashups is that most if not all of the units have the cabs forward elephant style.
In many cases they will put the second unit forward in case the first unit develops mechanical issues, the 2nd unit can be used as a leader. But there is no reall requirement to have them elephant style.
Also the few pictures I've seen of NS units seem to show they have abandoned the NW's practice of running long hood forward.
They quit doing that about a decade or more ago and started using conventionally configured units.
Is this an example of a screenwriter not being knowledgeable about the subject or would that locomotive not run as fast in reverse?
The issue would be visibility. The engineer would need the brakeman's assistance on keeping watch for signals and the other locomotives.
Almost all my research into prototype railroading has been about the transition era and earlier. What little I know about modern practices I have picked up here and there. One thing I have noticed about photos of modern lashups is that most if not all of the units have the cabs forward elephant style. Some of them might have the trailing unit with the cab facing rearward. Of course with the pooling of motive power those lashups might be from multiple roads as well. Is this the way of modern practices. First generation diesels typically would have the front and rear units facing opposite directions but the middle units seemed to be facing randomly assuming they were "A" units, but there seems to be an effort nowadays to keep most if not all of them facing forward.
One last question. In the movie Unstoppable the engineer played by Denzel Washington commented that they would be trying to catch the runaway train while running their engine in reverse. My understanding is that diesel-electrics, both first generation and modern, ran equally efficiently in either direction. Is this an example of a screenwriter not being knowledgeable about the subject or would that locomotive not run as fast in reverse?