Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Short train = no FRED?
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by Overmod</i> <br /><br />[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by drfizzix</i> <br /><br />...according to US federal law, CFR Title 49 Section 232, all trains operating outside yard limits must have an accurate air gauge on the rear end of the train. While this does not necessarily require an EOT unit as such... <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />You better go back and read 49 CFR 232 subpart E again, paying attention this time. (Since you appear to have castigated a couple of other posters for having either missed or mis-stated small details, it seems in the spirit of fairness to bring this up.) <br /> <br />The presence of an "accurate air gauge" on the rear of the train is NOT a necessity (although an air-pressure sensor with +/- 3psi accuracy and -1psi differential IS)... see 232.403 (4). You might claim that "a means of visually displaying the rear unit’s brake pipe pressure measurement" is what you meant by "air gauge" -- but one then would have to wonder why 232.403(4) specifically uses the words "air gauge" and then ADDS a separate, additional functional-device description... <br /> <br />On the other hand, I can find no indication whatsoever in subpart E that an EOT is "not necessarily required" as you claim. What is not necessarily required (under the circumstances delineated in 232.407) is the use of a *2-way* EOT. A radio-telemetric EOT (as defined specifically in 232.5) is mandatory for all operations "operating on track which is part of the general railroad system of transportation." See 232.3 -- if you don't need an EOT, you're not bound by the air-gauge requirements either, as it's the whole of part 232 that would be excepted. In fact, subpart E in its totality will continue to apply in at least some cases where other parts of 232 would not apply. <br /> <br />You might also mention that all new EOT devices, by law, have to be 2-way (or better), and this goes as far back as 1998. Again, you might note that while earlier 2-way devices are grandfathered into 232-405, the rulemaking is perhaps pointedly silent on the subject of older 1-way devices. <br /> <br /> <br />Finally, everyone might note that the FRA says nothing about markers, flashing or otherwise, colored or not, as part of the EOT device with respect to brakes. That's -- I think rightly -- an operating-rules issue. (As is the definition of a "train" as opposed to a yard move, etc., I think) From an engineering standpoint, it makes reasonable sense to incorporate a 'highly visible' function into an EOT that already requires sensors, a radio, and a relatively long-life battery. But just because you don't see a blinking light or whatever is no indication that a 'legal' EOT or equivalent (e.g. functionality built into a trailing DPU locomotive) is not present and active... <br /> <br />I'd love to be corrected if I'm not interpreting the present rulemaking correctly (note that the 2003 Title 49 CFR 232 reflects a number of changes in these regards from the 1998 version). <br /> <br /> <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />Not to get to legalistic here but i really do not see any other interpreation of "a means of visually displaying the rear unit’s brake pipe pressure measurement" besides that of an accurate air gauge (which in the context I was using also includes, but is not limited too, all EOT devices). If you know of any other instrument fitting that criteria, I would be more than welcome to learn what that might be. <br /> <br />Yes it is true that all new EOT devices must have 2-way capability, although existing 1-way EOT's are permissible under certain circumstances. I expect that eventually 2-way EOT devices will be the only devices permissible. <br /> <br />Why are all trains required to have EOT's? Have you never seen a caboose operating on a train before? As indicated in Subpart E of 232 .... for those of us that were reading it with our eyes open anyway.... there is no statement indicating that 1-way EOT's ARE required in any circumstance, only designating the performcance and design standards for these devices. The only devices that are required are 2-way EOT's with the exceptions provided in that subpart, which include, among other things, staffed cabooses. I see no statement indicating that if a two-way EOT is not used (when it is not required) that a 1-way EOT is required. It makes no sense why, if you are not required to use a 2-way EOT, that you would use a 1-way EOT when you have a staffed caboose on your train. The most important thing, which is what I was originally trying to point out to the original posters, is that common-carrier railroad lines cannot get away with having no air gauge capabilities of some sort because that would be a Part 232 air brake testing violation.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy