BaltACDToday - you go home and the electronic social media is right there with you - antagonizing you every minute of your waking day. As we all know from having passed through that age ourselves - kids are cruel.
Sadly, so true. No safe places.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
wanswheelUntil the first word in the title of this topic disappears from page one, I’ll be reminded of the kid. He sure didn’t need to kill himself to get his name in the paper. http://lagrangenews.com/features/community/8181/gardner-newman-middle-school-honor-roll-4 Excerpt from Reuters, Nov. 3 The suicide rate among U.S. middle school students doubled from 2007 to 2014, surpassing for the first time the incidence of youngsters aged 10 to 14 who died in car crashes, a federal report released on Thursday said. The steady seven-year rise in middle school suicides, from an annual rate of 0.9 to 2.1 per 100,000, came as traffic deaths among the same age group declined to 1.9 per 100,000, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. The motor vehicle mortality rate reported for 2014, the latest year for which such data was available, marked a 60 percent decline from 1999, when the government began tracking such figures. In aggregate numbers, 425 young people 10 to 14 years of age took their own lives in 2014, compared with 384 who perished in automobile accidents that year, according to the CDC. Those figures contrasted sharply with figures from 1999, when the rate of middle school students killed in car crashes, was four times higher than the rate among those who died from suicide that year. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/wr/mm6543a8.htm?s_cid=mm6543a8_w
http://lagrangenews.com/features/community/8181/gardner-newman-middle-school-honor-roll-4
Excerpt from Reuters, Nov. 3
The suicide rate among U.S. middle school students doubled from 2007 to 2014, surpassing for the first time the incidence of youngsters aged 10 to 14 who died in car crashes, a federal report released on Thursday said.
The steady seven-year rise in middle school suicides, from an annual rate of 0.9 to 2.1 per 100,000, came as traffic deaths among the same age group declined to 1.9 per 100,000, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.
The motor vehicle mortality rate reported for 2014, the latest year for which such data was available, marked a 60 percent decline from 1999, when the government began tracking such figures.
In aggregate numbers, 425 young people 10 to 14 years of age took their own lives in 2014, compared with 384 who perished in automobile accidents that year, according to the CDC.
Those figures contrasted sharply with figures from 1999, when the rate of middle school students killed in car crashes, was four times higher than the rate among those who died from suicide that year.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/wr/mm6543a8.htm?s_cid=mm6543a8_w
Today's Social Media make these children more vulnerable to a more pervasive form of bullying and ostrasizing than the childern of prior generations. In the days before electronic social media, one could go home from school and escape this negative social pressure within one's family and trusted friends. Today - you go home and the electronic social media is right there with you - antagonizing you every minute of your waking day.
As we all know from having passed through that age ourselves - kids are cruel.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Until the first word in the title of this topic disappears from page one, I’ll be reminded of the kid. He sure didn’t need to kill himself to get his name in the paper.
samfp1943 schlimm Norm48327 Guys, We may just as well concede that Bucky has all the answers. We're wasting bytes trying to convince him other points of view have merit and that ain't gonna happen. His mind is set in stone. Even if Euclid raises some good points, his obsessive internal dialogues and language problems negate any benefits. Just walk away. Multiple personalities allow those individuals to deal with a better class of people in their alternate realities....
schlimm Norm48327 Guys, We may just as well concede that Bucky has all the answers. We're wasting bytes trying to convince him other points of view have merit and that ain't gonna happen. His mind is set in stone. Even if Euclid raises some good points, his obsessive internal dialogues and language problems negate any benefits. Just walk away.
Norm48327 Guys, We may just as well concede that Bucky has all the answers. We're wasting bytes trying to convince him other points of view have merit and that ain't gonna happen. His mind is set in stone.
Guys, We may just as well concede that Bucky has all the answers. We're wasting bytes trying to convince him other points of view have merit and that ain't gonna happen. His mind is set in stone.
Even if Euclid raises some good points, his obsessive internal dialogues and language problems negate any benefits. Just walk away.
Multiple personalities allow those individuals to deal with a better class of people in their alternate realities....
Sam,
I don’t know who you are talking about when you refer to “those individuals with multiple personalities.” But I suggest that those who always get their pants in a bunch over what I write about might want to examine their own personalities and make sure everything is working properly.
Scrappers started a couple days ago with tools to cut up cars into truck sized pieces. access is limited so a crane has to take each car pieces in turn to get to next car.
jeffhergertThe engineer usually does get paid more, usually doesn't get as wet or as cold and has all of the prestige Laugh(We'll take a moment to allow Zug to regain his composure), but just look at all the controversy and second guessing on the forums. Imagine what it's like in the real world.
My elbow did get wet one day last week. But since I'm the youngest in my terminal holding an engineer assignment - there's a chance I may get knocked to the ground each week. If I do, it's no biggie. I'll go fill a utility job, work 8 hour days and get weekends off. It's a hard job, but somebody has to do it.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
jeffhergertThe engineer usually does get paid more, usually doesn't get as wet or as cold and has all of the prestige
Sounds like the joke where someone asks the guy cleaning up after the elephants in the circus parade why he doesn't get a better job and gets this answer: "What? And leave show business?"
BTW, I recall as a young lad that the circus parade had gone by my grandmother's house on the way back to the grounds where the circus was setting up. Apparently that fellow had quit by then.
Murphy Siding jeffhergert Some think after the last pre1985 guy is gone, the railroads may eliminate the position of conductor or at least force everyone to become dual qualified. Then which side of the cab you sit on during a tour of duty would be governed by seniority. Some short lines/regionals work like this. Jeff I gather that if two people called up for a train are both qualified to run as engineer, the one with the most seniority gets the engineers side? Or does he get to pick either side? Is the pay different?
jeffhergert Some think after the last pre1985 guy is gone, the railroads may eliminate the position of conductor or at least force everyone to become dual qualified. Then which side of the cab you sit on during a tour of duty would be governed by seniority. Some short lines/regionals work like this. Jeff
Jeff
I gather that if two people called up for a train are both qualified to run as engineer, the one with the most seniority gets the engineers side? Or does he get to pick either side? Is the pay different?
Since we don't do it, I can't say for sure how it would be done.
I know on one short line, where everyone sleeps in their own bed every night, they place their bids on the jobs for the next day. Dual qualified can work either engineer or conductor/foreman. Or brakeman/switchman if the job has one. (Some of our yard switchmen boards work this way. You bid the day before what you want. It's called a Daily Mark-Up Board.)
One possible way, one that most of my co-workers expect to happen, is to have one board. When they run a train, the senior person called decides on what position they want.
I think they may stay with separate engineer and conductor boards. Once dual qualified, you can bid (or bump) into either board your seniority permits. Possibly, assignments may be for 90 days (some yards do this, see above) and everyone has to re-bid for the assignments they want.
Most of the above is assuming the property has a union contract and seniority means something. On non-union properties, how many cabooses one has kissed may count more than how much time in their employ when getting job assignments.
While I never looked back (except on curves) after becoming an engineer. Some wished they hadn't. You might be surprised that sometimes the senior person may want to be the conductor. The engineer usually does get paid more, usually doesn't get as wet or as cold and has all of the prestige (We'll take a moment to allow Zug to regain his composure), but just look at all the controversy and second guessing on the forums. Imagine what it's like in the real world.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
I was told that now every engineer candidate has to have at least one year as a trainmen. I don't know if it's company or FRA. I think I was told FRA because it came about after some other railroad had an incident where the engineer had less than 1 year before going into engine service and the conductor had less than a year, too. (We have a few engineers who hired out before that edict. They finished training and were promoted to conductor on Friday. The following Monday they were firemen beginning their engine service training.)
All post-1985 trainmen can be forced to engine service. After 1985 it was a condition of employment. You can avoid it, and some have, as long as they have younger guys and gals (seniority wise) willing to go. You have to bid to go to engine service (I had to wait about 6 years for my turn and I went as soon as I could.) and can't be under any current discipline. If no one bids to go to engine service they can start forcing the youngest trainmen meeting eligibility requirements.
I can't say for other railroads but I had about 5 weeks total class room work. Two (It may have been only one, my memory has faded on this.) weeks initially at my home terminal and then 3 weeks later at the system facility in Salt Lake City. Total field time was about 6 months. I entered engine service in 9/04 and was promoted in 03/05.
The rest of what Balt said is pretty much it. Fail to pass and you're out the door.
That 1985 date gets talked about at times. Some think after the last pre1985 guy is gone, the railroads may eliminate the position of conductor or at least force everyone to become dual qualified. Then which side of the cab you sit on during a tour of duty would be governed by seniority. Some short lines/regionals work like this.
Thanks, Balt.
Johnny
DeggestyIt ceratainly interesting as to how things have changed in road operations. Formerly, firemen and brakemen began learning their territories under their conductors and engineers. Now, the conductors learn their territories under their engineers. I have no idea as to the relative pay of enginemen and trainmen in the old days; I do wonder if the pay scale is now the same for both crafts.
I have no idea as to the relative pay of enginemen and trainmen in the old days; I do wonder if the pay scale is now the same for both crafts.
Different crafts, different pay scales and work rules.
It ceratainly interesting as to how things have changed in road operations. Formerly, firemen and brakemen began learning their territories under their conductors and engineers. Now, the conductors learn their territories under their engineers.
MookieJohnny - After they eliminated the fireman on a train, the conductors were promoted to engineers. I don't know if they still have this practice.
Local media have distinct problems in understanding the differences between Conductors and Engineers in today's railroading.
The current reality is that the Conductors position is the 'entry level' for personnel entering Train & Engine service. After a period of time working as a Conductor (nominally 1 year, but it can be more or less) an individual will be forced into the Engineer Training cirriculum to learn the mechanics, operating proceedures and air brake systems that are involved in today's railroading. That training can take upto 6 months in classroom type settings. If the individual does not pass the periodic testing of this cirriculum they will be terminated from T&E railroad employment. If individuals refuse to go on to engineer training they will be terminated from T&E railroad employment. 'Promotion' to being an Engineer is not voluntary. After successful completion of the 'classroom' phase of engineer training, they will be assigned territory in Engineer Trainee status to learn the realities and tricks of the trade in operating trains over the assigned territory by being with the regular engineers that operate the territory. I am unaware of any specific 'time limit' for this phase of training, however, the regular engineers will report to the Road Foreman of Engines their observations of the proficiency of the trainees they have run with. When the trainee feels he is 'ready'; a 'Check Out' ride will be done with the Road Foreman of Engines aboard - if everything is satisfactory the individual will be marked up as a qualified Engineer.
With the traffic fluctions and increase and decrease of both Engineers and Conductors boards, a qualified engineer may work as a Conductor until increased business demands the Engineers board be increased in number.
Conductors with a seniority date prior to (I think) 1985 are not required to proceed to Engineer training - those with a later date are.
Zugmann and jeffhergert can respond with more of the particulars - having been through the process.
zugmannWe can only give a best guess what we might do in a situation, but most of us will refrain from even doing that on a public forum like this.
I definitely understand your point. That nature of the question is why I found it interesting. But, I don’t want to get anyone here in trouble for answering it. The question is really for someone like the FRA. They can address it without any risk, and also offer an authoritative answer.
tree68 Euclid ...how were you able to answer his question? I don't recall answering his question - and his examples weren't questions, they were examples.
Euclid ...how were you able to answer his question?
I don't recall answering his question - and his examples weren't questions, they were examples.
Shown in red, here are the two hypothetical situations described by Paul North followed by his question asking: “What do you think the engineer's reaction would - or should - be in each situation?”
Shown in blue, are your two answers to his question about those two hypothetical situations.
Since then, I have asked you how about question #1, and you now say that it cannot be answered without it including much more detail about many variables. Yet you have already answered that question as Paul North originally stated it. Why do you now say it cannot be answered unless it includes a lot more detail about variables?
Quote from Paul North (in red) on page 3, post #2:
Consider two extreme hypothetical situations with regard to emergency braking:
What do you think the engineer's reaction would - or should - be in each situation?
********************************************************
Posted by tree68 (in blue) on Saturday, September 10, 2016 11:01 PM, page 3, post #10:
Paul_D_North_Jr
1. Long heavy train of flammable and hazardous materials moving at track speed on a downhill grade in a densely populated town, in the middle of the night right after the bars close, and a car approaches a crossing with the driver swerving back-and-forth and hanging out of the window waving and yelling wildly.
Tangent or curve?
Either way, I'm probably not going to dump the brakes. I'll certainly make a fairly heavy application, but my primary goal is not to avoid hitting the drunk(s) in the car (who may be out of the way by the time the train gets there anyhow), but to to keep my train intact so the methyl ethyl awful I'm hauling doesn't kill dozens, or hundreds of people if the train derails.
This is also an engineer experience issue - if the engineer knows that there's the possibility of such an occurrence at this time of the morning, odds are he's actually already taken a little off his speed, and probably has a set on with air.
2. Short light train of empty bare-table intermodal cars moving at restricted speed on a level or upgrade in a farmland or desert area in the middle of the afternoon night right after the schools close, and a loaded school bus (or gasoline tank truck) is stalled on the crossing with the drvier outside and waving frantically for the train to stop.
So you're talking virtually unlimited sight distance, and I'm running my train at restricted speed. As noted before, restricted speed requires that I be able to stop my train in half the sight distance - and on our railroad, not to exceed 20 MPH (10 MPH in certain cases). That the vehicle in question has been on the crossing long enough for the driver to dismount and attempt to flag the train tells me that I should have been able to see it for some distance in the first place, and will be able to stop well short of the obstacle. Too easy.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Norm
Euclid...how were you able to answer his question?
Long and heavy are two variables. You can have long trains that aren't heavy (relatively speaking, of course), and heavy trains that aren't long. Those can be a bear to run.
It's easy to sit back after the fact (or looking at hypotheticals) and armchair quarterback. Even formal investigations forget that many of these decisions have to be made quickly; but not lightly. Are they always correct? Hell no. But are they the best the crew came up with at the time? Yeah. Is everyhting going to work out perfectly? Of course not.
But asking would you do this, or what would you do there is pointless. We are not there. We can only give a best guess what we might do in a situation, but most of us will refrain from even doing that on a public forum like this.
Mookie RME and the engineer has taxied to the Auberge. Tabarnac de tabarnacs! I took Latin, not French. Have kicked myself ever since. Fortunately Google works....
RME and the engineer has taxied to the Auberge. Tabarnac de tabarnacs!
I took Latin, not French. Have kicked myself ever since. Fortunately Google works....
tree68 Euclid Which way is it? Does the question need to list dozens or hundreds of variables that might have an effect—or—do just seven variables suffice? I think your earlier answer to Paul North's question proves that his seven variables were sufficient. Not even close, as numerous people have repeatedly pointed out. Time of year? Raining? Foggy? How's the sand in the locomotives? How many operative brakes? What's the brake pipe leakage? Was the train on air or on dynamics coming down that hill? You seem determined to know if there is some sort of matrix that will give a precise answer to the question. If this, then that. Not gonna happen. And, if you'll go back and read PDN's complete post, he used the example you cite, as well as another, to point out just how many variables exist when faced with having to make a decision.
Euclid Which way is it? Does the question need to list dozens or hundreds of variables that might have an effect—or—do just seven variables suffice? I think your earlier answer to Paul North's question proves that his seven variables were sufficient.
Not even close, as numerous people have repeatedly pointed out. Time of year? Raining? Foggy? How's the sand in the locomotives? How many operative brakes? What's the brake pipe leakage? Was the train on air or on dynamics coming down that hill?
You seem determined to know if there is some sort of matrix that will give a precise answer to the question. If this, then that. Not gonna happen.
And, if you'll go back and read PDN's complete post, he used the example you cite, as well as another, to point out just how many variables exist when faced with having to make a decision.
Well if Paul North’s seven variables are “not even close” to being enough to answer his scenario question, how were you able to answer his question?
You answered his question and now you say the question did not have enough information to give an answer.
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
EuclidWhich way is it? Does the question need to list dozens or hundreds of variables that might have an effect—or—do just seven variables suffice? I think your earlier answer to Paul North's question proves that his seven variables were sufficient.
EuclidEarlier in this thread Paul North asked people what their response would be for this hypothetical scenario: Long heavy train of flammable and hazardous materials moving at track speed on a downhill grade in a densely populated town, in the middle of the night right after the bars close, and a car approaches a crossing with the driver swerving back-and-forth and hanging out of the window waving and yelling wildly.
Long heavy train of flammable and hazardous materials moving at track speed on a downhill grade in a densely populated town, in the middle of the night right after the bars close, and a car approaches a crossing with the driver swerving back-and-forth and hanging out of the window waving and yelling wildly.
It won't matter, because the power is on the back end of the train, the brakepipe pressure has leaked down, and the engineer has taxied to the Auberge. Tabarnac de tabarnacs!
tree68 Euclid Long, heavy train. How long? How heavy? DPU's in use? Euclid Flammable and hazardous materials. Pretty cut and dried for this example. Clearly a problem if it derails. Euclid Moving at track speed. Which is? I've run on track where track speed is 10 MPH. On CSX, manifest trains can run at 50 on suitable track. In the line in my area, track speed is 40. On the shortline I run on, and much of our line, track speed is 30. Euclid Moving downhill grade. Is it .1% or 3%? Or something in between? Euclid Densely populated town. Also cut and dried for this example. Euclid Middle of night right after bars close. Also cut and dried. Euclid Car approaches with driver acting reckless and erratic. From what distance can this car be seen? This may be a built up area, but are we talking tangent with virtually unlimited sight distance, or a curve where a quarter mile visibility is more like it. And, at what point does this erratic driver approach the crossing? Are we a half mile away, or 200 yards?
Euclid Long, heavy train.
How long? How heavy? DPU's in use?
Euclid Flammable and hazardous materials.
Pretty cut and dried for this example. Clearly a problem if it derails.
Euclid Moving at track speed.
Which is? I've run on track where track speed is 10 MPH. On CSX, manifest trains can run at 50 on suitable track. In the line in my area, track speed is 40. On the shortline I run on, and much of our line, track speed is 30.
Euclid Moving downhill grade.
Is it .1% or 3%? Or something in between?
Euclid Densely populated town.
Also cut and dried for this example.
Euclid Middle of night right after bars close.
Also cut and dried.
Euclid Car approaches with driver acting reckless and erratic.
From what distance can this car be seen? This may be a built up area, but are we talking tangent with virtually unlimited sight distance, or a curve where a quarter mile visibility is more like it.
And, at what point does this erratic driver approach the crossing? Are we a half mile away, or 200 yards?
Don’t ask me. The point is that you were perfectly able to answer this scenario question asked by Paul North with just those seven variables that he gave.
All I have done is quote his scenario question. And now you want me to add in a bunch more variable stipulations as though I am asking the question.
You have already answered the question with just those seven variables that I quoted. So, why should I be required to add a bunch more variables in order to make the question capable of being answered?
Which way is it? Does the question need to list dozens or hundreds of variables that might have an effect—or—do just seven variables suffice? I think your earlier answer to Paul North's question proves that his seven variables were sufficient.
EuclidLong, heavy train.
EuclidFlammable and hazardous materials.
EuclidMoving at track speed.
EuclidMoving downhill grade.
EuclidDensely populated town.
EuclidMiddle of night right after bars close.
EuclidCar approaches with driver acting reckless and erratic.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.