zugmann Euclid Maybe this inability to know whether an employee’s attitude toward point and call is constructive is a good reason to use inward facing cameras. They would probably reveal whether an employee is conscientious and sincere in using point and call, just as they would reveal whether an engineer is sleeping on the alerter. How do you determine (through a camera) sincerity wtih "... an employee could defeat point and call by performing it without any conscious attention to it. "? Seems you want it both ways. I'm not a huge fan of "let's just take this practice someone else does, shoehorn it into our operations, and all will be good!". I know it's hard to believe, but we aren't all the same out here. EAch of us has our own way of safely doing the job. Maybe point and call works for some. Awesome. But for others - it's a stupid waste of time, and they are fully capable of running a train safely without it. But when you have managers that never sat in the engine cab before they put on their crisp white shirt, and never laid a hand on a switch handle or throttle, what do you expect? Just turns into a giant game of Simon Says.
Euclid Maybe this inability to know whether an employee’s attitude toward point and call is constructive is a good reason to use inward facing cameras. They would probably reveal whether an employee is conscientious and sincere in using point and call, just as they would reveal whether an engineer is sleeping on the alerter.
How do you determine (through a camera) sincerity wtih "... an employee could defeat point and call by performing it without any conscious attention to it. "?
Seems you want it both ways.
I'm not a huge fan of "let's just take this practice someone else does, shoehorn it into our operations, and all will be good!". I know it's hard to believe, but we aren't all the same out here. EAch of us has our own way of safely doing the job. Maybe point and call works for some. Awesome. But for others - it's a stupid waste of time, and they are fully capable of running a train safely without it. But when you have managers that never sat in the engine cab before they put on their crisp white shirt, and never laid a hand on a switch handle or throttle, what do you expect?
Just turns into a giant game of Simon Says.
Well maybe point and call would provide benefit as a kind of safety net to catch those who are not fully capable of running a train safely without it. I certainly agree that not every person is the same. Some people can focus their attention to the task at hand with great precision and reliability.
I do not know what kind of relationship operators and managers have on Japanese railroads. But on railroads where the relationship is highly adversarial, I can’t see point and call working. Either employees will not put the proper effort into it, or management will believe they are not doing so. So, the system is dead on arrival where the adversarial relationship exists.
Going back to 1982 and my ride alongs on CP's Thompson, BC sub , I remember engineer and brakemen calling out signals as they approached. Given the amount of responsibility and the potential for catastrophic loss due to any misunderstanding, this practice seems like a good idea to me.
UlrichGiven the amount of responsibility and the potential for catastrophic loss due to any misunderstanding, this practice seems like a good idea to me.
Which practice; calling signals or point and call as applied in Japan?
Ulrich Going back to 1982 and my ride alongs on CP's Thompson, BC sub , I remember engineer and brakemen calling out signals as they approached. Given the amount of responsibility and the potential for catastrophic loss due to any misunderstanding, this practice seems like a good idea to me.
Calling signals between crewmembers in the cab has been a rule requirement at least since the 1920s. (The oldest rule book I have with the requirement is a 1923 Ann Arbor rule book. The few rule books I have that are older don't have it. Later ones do, most under Rule 34.)
Some railroads require calling some or all signals over the radio. This cab be good and bad. Good because it gives you an idea of what's happening ahead of you. Bad because in some areas where there's already heavy radio traffic someone calling a signal might "walk" over a more important radio transmission.
Jeff
Ulrich Going back to 1982 and my ride alongs on CP's Thompson, BC sub , I remember engineer and brakemen calling out signals as they approached.
Going back to 1982 and my ride alongs on CP's Thompson, BC sub , I remember engineer and brakemen calling out signals as they approached.
zugmann You can keep that hotel and road crap. I'm happy with my little GPs, industries, and yard. Oh yeah, and my own bed at night/day.
You can keep that hotel and road crap. I'm happy with my little GPs, industries, and yard. Oh yeah, and my own bed at night/day.
jeffhergertCalling signals between crewmembers in the cab has been a rule requirement at least since the 1920s. (The oldest rule book I have with the requirement is a 1923 Ann Arbor rule book. The few rule books I have that are older don't have it. Later ones do, most under Rule 34.)
I just checked, and the Uniform Code of Operating Rules dated August 25, 1951, which would be the rule book the CPR operated under, has calling signals as Rule 34.
Thanks for that info Jeff, I did not know that rule was in place back in steam days.
Bruce
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
zardoz wrote the following post an hour ago:
zugmann zardoz You can keep that hotel and road crap. I'm happy with my little GPs, industries, and yard. Oh yeah, and my own bed at night/day.
zardoz You can keep that hotel and road crap. I'm happy with my little GPs, industries, and yard. Oh yeah, and my own bed at night/day.
The CROR in Canada has you calling MANY things in the cab. CRO Rule 34.
CN's radio rules in Western Canada. These fall under CRO Rule 578 for the most part. Special Instructions add and take away in certain cases/locations.
On the radio:
- the signal indication and location on approach to a CONTROLLED LOCATION. Usually announced by using the train # for ID.
Example: CN 315 Clear to Stop to Deer.
- your location (mile you're at), direction of travel, leading engine ID at every mile post ending in a 5 (whole #). If you have any slow orders, foreman, crossing messages etc. in the next 10 miles you announce those as well.
Example: CN 2305 East, Mile 75, No Restrictions
Example: CN 2305 East, Mile 65, Rule 43 (Slow order) at mile 58.
10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.