edblysardWonder what I was remembering...kinda old so...
I sorta remember this, too, at the height of the 'Do You Live In The Blast Zone? fireball craze. It had something to do with key trains stopping anytime a passenger train was in their vicinity, I think. To keep a derailment/explosion from being a mass fatality. Don't know if it made it to an actual order or rule.
23 17 46 11
BaltACDA wink is not sufficiently sarcastic to the railroad community!
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...
BaltACD LithoniaOperator BaltACD LithoniaOperator I think a lot has been determined by the NTSB. But much of what they have found has not been passed along to the Trains forum. What's up with that? My comment was sarcasm. That's why I put in the winking-face emoticon. A wink is not sufficiently sarcastic to the railroad community!
LithoniaOperator BaltACD LithoniaOperator I think a lot has been determined by the NTSB. But much of what they have found has not been passed along to the Trains forum. What's up with that? My comment was sarcasm. That's why I put in the winking-face emoticon.
BaltACD LithoniaOperator I think a lot has been determined by the NTSB. But much of what they have found has not been passed along to the Trains forum. What's up with that?
A wink is not sufficiently sarcastic to the railroad community!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Quoting Euclid "Euclid
Well maybe you and others want to read it just a certain way so you can use it just a certain way."
Most of us try to read posts according the plain meaning of the words used, and do not try to interpret posts according to something the poster did not put into the post.
Johnny
BaltACDLithoniaOperator I think a lot has been determined by the NTSB. But much of what they have found has not been passed along to the Trains forum. What's up with that?
Still in training.
BaltACD edblysard I may be wrong, but doesn’t the rules require all movement on the adjacent tracks, including sidings, to be stopped when Amtrak or any passenger train passes? Again, I may be remembering wrong, but… In normal operations - if there is any Current of Traffic multiple track territory still in existance - trains of any variety may pass each other. In signalled territory trains of all varieties pass each other at normal speeds in multiple track territory. There is no requirement for trains on sidings or other track adjacent to the Main track to stop when passenger trains pass. The one requirement for freight trains when operating in passenger train territory is to not block or operate through passenger stations when passenger trains are due and will be picking up or discharging passengers at those station. Freight crews know the timetable operation of those passenger trains for their territory. In many cases the freight train will contact the passenger train on the road radio channel so the operation of the freight can be coordinated with the operation of the passenger train.
edblysard I may be wrong, but doesn’t the rules require all movement on the adjacent tracks, including sidings, to be stopped when Amtrak or any passenger train passes? Again, I may be remembering wrong, but…
In normal operations - if there is any Current of Traffic multiple track territory still in existance - trains of any variety may pass each other.
In signalled territory trains of all varieties pass each other at normal speeds in multiple track territory.
There is no requirement for trains on sidings or other track adjacent to the Main track to stop when passenger trains pass.
The one requirement for freight trains when operating in passenger train territory is to not block or operate through passenger stations when passenger trains are due and will be picking up or discharging passengers at those station. Freight crews know the timetable operation of those passenger trains for their territory. In many cases the freight train will contact the passenger train on the road radio channel so the operation of the freight can be coordinated with the operation of the passenger train.
EuclidWhy the need to hold the passenger train for the freight job when there is room to get by?
Because the freight hadn't cleared their paper yet. That's how it works in dark territory. Not rocket science.
If the signals were working per usual, Amtrak likely would have been waiting at the next signal north, which would have been showing stop. Once the switch was restored, they'd have gotten a less restrictive aspect and been able to proceed.
I suspect you're wondering why the freight was allowed to have the track if Amtrak was due - why they weren't in the clear well before the scheduled arrival.
I'm sure that was their plan. Sometimes things take longer than planned - maybe that last auto rack wasn't quite ready. Who knows?. Amtrak was down 20 minutes, too.
Railroad dispatching can be like a big chess game. When all the moves go as planned, things work great. One hiccup can throw a monkey wrench into the works that takes hours to work out.
edblysardI may be wrong, but doesn’t the rules require all movement on the adjacent tracks, including sidings, to be stopped when Amtrak or any passenger train passes? Again, I may be remembering wrong, but…
Overmod What I understood Euclid to be asking, a bit 'between the lines', was why the dispatcher, with 91 moved up and holding the barest distance away, did not ask the CSX job to pause as soon as they were clear of the fouling point, reline the switch right then, and take the additional steps to release track authority before continuing the shove. That would have gotten 91 by well before any need of the CSX crew to come anywhere near the main, or need authority to be there, again.
What I understood Euclid to be asking, a bit 'between the lines', was why the dispatcher, with 91 moved up and holding the barest distance away, did not ask the CSX job to pause as soon as they were clear of the fouling point, reline the switch right then, and take the additional steps to release track authority before continuing the shove. That would have gotten 91 by well before any need of the CSX crew to come anywhere near the main, or need authority to be there, again.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Overmod,
Yes, that is basically what I was asking, but you have provided a bit more detail. Why the need to hold the passenger train for the freight job when there is room to get by?
Euclid Well maybe you and others want to read it just a certain way so you can use it just a certain way.
Stop digging.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
BaltACD Euclid - were you to enact 'your rules of operation' on any Class 1's property - you would be fired so fast you head would not stop spinning.
Euclid - were you to enact 'your rules of operation' on any Class 1's property - you would be fired so fast you head would not stop spinning.
edblysard No, he does not have the authority to “take a block away” The crew may release it, but he has no authority to “take” it in any way. He can ask for it, or suggest they get out of the way, but he can never take it. Either the crew released it or they didn’t, nothing in between and in no way could the dispatcher take it from them without their permission.
Where do people come up with the idea that I was saying that the dispatcher could take the block away without permission? What if the crew gives the block to the dispatcher and the dispatcher "takes" it from them?
Euclid n012944 Euclid BaltACD Euclid Okay, but why hold a passenger train for that freight switching work? Why not have the freight job release their block authority and give authority to 91 before it arrives? Then after 91 passes without being delayed, give block authority back the the freight job so they can finish their work? In your perfect world that would happen. This is the real world of railroading - there are only 24 hours of track time to get everything done. Sometimes a move has to wait for track time to be able to continue their run. When the Dispatcher gave the CSX crew the block to perform what they had to do, he was probably told that the crew could do what they needed to do in 'XX' minutes, which would have had them clear for 91 without delay - the crew didn't get their move accomplished in 'XX' minutes and 91 was held until the Dispatcher got the block back. Okay, I see. If they took the block away from the freight, gave it to 91, and then had to give it back to the freight, it might have taken up more of the 24 hour track time than just holding 91 to let the freight finish. Then maybe somewhere in that urgent process, perhaps a mistake was made. Some things never change. Maybe, perhaps, ya but. A sign of a Euclid/Buckey thread. A dispatcher does not "take a block away" from a train crew. The train crew releases the block back to the dispatcher. There is a difference. Picky, picky. I did not mean to take the block away from the freight job without their consent. I assume that the dispatcher has the authority to require the freight job to release their block back in order to give it to 91. And if he asks them to give up the block, they will comply and restore the switches and be in the clear. Obviously that was my point.
n012944 Euclid BaltACD Euclid Okay, but why hold a passenger train for that freight switching work? Why not have the freight job release their block authority and give authority to 91 before it arrives? Then after 91 passes without being delayed, give block authority back the the freight job so they can finish their work? In your perfect world that would happen. This is the real world of railroading - there are only 24 hours of track time to get everything done. Sometimes a move has to wait for track time to be able to continue their run. When the Dispatcher gave the CSX crew the block to perform what they had to do, he was probably told that the crew could do what they needed to do in 'XX' minutes, which would have had them clear for 91 without delay - the crew didn't get their move accomplished in 'XX' minutes and 91 was held until the Dispatcher got the block back. Okay, I see. If they took the block away from the freight, gave it to 91, and then had to give it back to the freight, it might have taken up more of the 24 hour track time than just holding 91 to let the freight finish. Then maybe somewhere in that urgent process, perhaps a mistake was made. Some things never change. Maybe, perhaps, ya but. A sign of a Euclid/Buckey thread. A dispatcher does not "take a block away" from a train crew. The train crew releases the block back to the dispatcher. There is a difference.
Euclid BaltACD Euclid Okay, but why hold a passenger train for that freight switching work? Why not have the freight job release their block authority and give authority to 91 before it arrives? Then after 91 passes without being delayed, give block authority back the the freight job so they can finish their work? In your perfect world that would happen. This is the real world of railroading - there are only 24 hours of track time to get everything done. Sometimes a move has to wait for track time to be able to continue their run. When the Dispatcher gave the CSX crew the block to perform what they had to do, he was probably told that the crew could do what they needed to do in 'XX' minutes, which would have had them clear for 91 without delay - the crew didn't get their move accomplished in 'XX' minutes and 91 was held until the Dispatcher got the block back. Okay, I see. If they took the block away from the freight, gave it to 91, and then had to give it back to the freight, it might have taken up more of the 24 hour track time than just holding 91 to let the freight finish. Then maybe somewhere in that urgent process, perhaps a mistake was made.
BaltACD Euclid Okay, but why hold a passenger train for that freight switching work? Why not have the freight job release their block authority and give authority to 91 before it arrives? Then after 91 passes without being delayed, give block authority back the the freight job so they can finish their work? In your perfect world that would happen. This is the real world of railroading - there are only 24 hours of track time to get everything done. Sometimes a move has to wait for track time to be able to continue their run. When the Dispatcher gave the CSX crew the block to perform what they had to do, he was probably told that the crew could do what they needed to do in 'XX' minutes, which would have had them clear for 91 without delay - the crew didn't get their move accomplished in 'XX' minutes and 91 was held until the Dispatcher got the block back.
Euclid Okay, but why hold a passenger train for that freight switching work? Why not have the freight job release their block authority and give authority to 91 before it arrives? Then after 91 passes without being delayed, give block authority back the the freight job so they can finish their work?
In your perfect world that would happen. This is the real world of railroading - there are only 24 hours of track time to get everything done. Sometimes a move has to wait for track time to be able to continue their run.
When the Dispatcher gave the CSX crew the block to perform what they had to do, he was probably told that the crew could do what they needed to do in 'XX' minutes, which would have had them clear for 91 without delay - the crew didn't get their move accomplished in 'XX' minutes and 91 was held until the Dispatcher got the block back.
Okay, I see. If they took the block away from the freight, gave it to 91, and then had to give it back to the freight, it might have taken up more of the 24 hour track time than just holding 91 to let the freight finish. Then maybe somewhere in that urgent process, perhaps a mistake was made.
Some things never change. Maybe, perhaps, ya but. A sign of a Euclid/Buckey thread.
A dispatcher does not "take a block away" from a train crew. The train crew releases the block back to the dispatcher. There is a difference.
Picky, picky. I did not mean to take the block away from the freight job without their consent. I assume that the dispatcher has the authority to require the freight job to release their block back in order to give it to 91. And if he asks them to give up the block, they will comply and restore the switches and be in the clear. Obviously that was my point.
VOLKER LANDWEHR Euclid My point was to ask why you cannot interrupt the freight operation to let the Amtrak train through. Do you remember the moves involved? Forward out of the auto loading siding onto the main. Backing into the siding on the other side of the main. So until the work is completed the main is fouled. The only way to "interrupt it is to let it not even start. Euclid The freight is in the clear already, and all that needs to be done is re-line the switch for 91. Why did the freight work have to be completely finished before letting 91 through? The way I understand it the work is complete when the CSX train is in the siding, the switch realigned to normal and the authority given back to the dispatcher. Or did I misunderstand your question?Regards, Volker
Euclid My point was to ask why you cannot interrupt the freight operation to let the Amtrak train through.
Do you remember the moves involved? Forward out of the auto loading siding onto the main. Backing into the siding on the other side of the main. So until the work is completed the main is fouled. The only way to "interrupt it is to let it not even start.
Euclid The freight is in the clear already, and all that needs to be done is re-line the switch for 91. Why did the freight work have to be completely finished before letting 91 through?
The way I understand it the work is complete when the CSX train is in the siding, the switch realigned to normal and the authority given back to the dispatcher.
Or did I misunderstand your question?Regards, Volker
Volker,
I don't know if you misunderstood my question. I had to go back and look at how this recent exchange began. I asked a question and Balt answered it. Here is the question and answer.
Euclid said:
Okay, but why hold a passenger train for that freight switching work? Why not have the freight job release their block authority and give authority to 91 before it arrives? Then after 91 passes without being delayed, give block authority back the freight job so they can finish their work?
Balt said:
Euclid tree68 What had to be completely finished was the freight getting in the clear and restoring the switch(es), then giving up their authority. Until that was complete, 91 wasn't going anywhere. At this point, we don't know that the freight wasn't planning to come back out after 91 cleared so they could get track again. So why not complete that so 91 could continue without delay? And then if need be, the freight could go back to finish their work under new authority after 91 passes.
tree68 What had to be completely finished was the freight getting in the clear and restoring the switch(es), then giving up their authority. Until that was complete, 91 wasn't going anywhere. At this point, we don't know that the freight wasn't planning to come back out after 91 cleared so they could get track again.
So why not complete that so 91 could continue without delay? And then if need be, the freight could go back to finish their work under new authority after 91 passes.
That - to my mind - is what was actually being done. CSX crew was to shove in the siding and clear, lining the switches for MAIN TRACK MOVEMENTS for 91 and while waiting for 91 secure the cut of auto racks. After 91 would CLEAR THE BLOCK (not just pass the CSX Crew on the siding), the CSX crew 'most likely' would be given the block so that the engines could leave the siding and return to the yard and then release the blocks.
The 'WORK' crews perform is not done at the snap of a finger - it takes time - 60 seconds to the minute time, 60 minutes to the hour and the clock is always ticking; and at the expiration of 720 minutes the crew can no longer work.
EuclidMy point was to ask why you cannot interrupt the freight operation to let the Amtrak train through.
tree68What had to be completely finished was the freight getting in the clear and restoring the switch(es), then giving up their authority. Until that was complete, 91 wasn't going anywhere. At this point, we don't know that the freight wasn't planning to come back out after 91 cleared so they could get track again.
Murphy SidingTo be fair, what you're trying to say is not always obvious to folks that aren't you. Maybe you could reread your posts for clarity before hitting the submit button.
And maybe, every now and then, admitting "I didn't understand how that worked" would be useful, instead of claiming everyone else doesn't understand you.
It's said that if everyone around you seems to be the problem, maybe they aren't the problem at all...
BaltACDDispatchers ARE PICKY, PICKY, PICKY. Not being picky and following proper procedure get you run off in short order. Cavalier use of words get one in trouble from the word go!
Euclid tree68 Euclid Obviously that was my point. Not the way I read it. And it appears not the way several others read it. "Yes, but..." Well maybe you and others want to read it just a certain way so you can use it just a certain way.
tree68 Euclid Obviously that was my point. Not the way I read it. And it appears not the way several others read it. "Yes, but..."
Euclid Obviously that was my point.
Not the way I read it. And it appears not the way several others read it. "Yes, but..."
Well maybe you and others want to read it just a certain way so you can use it just a certain way.
BaltACDBS you meant what you said and what you said was WRONG!
Fully agree.
Very typical - say something, then when it's shown to be wrong, backpedal and say "what I really meant..."
Not the first time we've seen that. Probably won't be the last.
BuckyWhy did the freight work have to be completely finished before letting 91 through?
Who said the freight work had to be completely finished? What had to be completely finished was the freight getting in the clear and restoring the switch(es), then giving up their authority. Until that was complete, 91 wasn't going anywhere.
At this point, we don't know that the freight wasn't planning to come back out after 91 cleared so they could get track again.
If I might suggest something to keep the quotefest under control for us phone users, the point here is not to pile on over Euclid being wrong, but pointing out specifically and factually why he is wrong.
Please correct me if I myself am wrong, but I do not believe that a dispatcher can compel a crew to surrender authority once granted, either by taking it away (as Euclid said he didn't mean) or by forcing compliance (as he now says he assumes). While I'm sure there are all kinds of insubordination charges that would come out of not honoring a dispatcher's request to surrender authority 'as needed to run the railroad' that isn't the point: the crew with authority must relinquish it, and only after assuring it is fully safe to do so.
BaltACD BS you meant what you said and what you said was WRONG! Dispatchers ARE PICKY, PICKY, PICKY. Not being picky and following proper procedure get you run off in short order. Cavalier use of words get one in trouble from the word go!
My point was to ask why you cannot interrupt the freight operation to let the Amtrak train through. The freight is in the clear already, and all that needs to be done is re-line the switch for 91. Why did the freight work have to be completely finished before letting 91 through?
BS you meant what you said and what you said was WRONG!
Dispatchers ARE PICKY, PICKY, PICKY. Not being picky and following proper procedure get you run off in short order. Cavalier use of words get one in trouble from the word go!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.