Obviously they're not allowed to speed, but what if an engineer wants to go 5 to 10 mph slower than the recommended speed limit? Also, what about train handling in general... acceleration through curves, braking etc.. is it still mostly up to the engineer or are there hard and fast rules that must be followed?
Become familiar with the following rules
https://www.scribd.com/document/81871136/CSX-ABTH-Rules-7-1-2004
There have been further updates since these were published.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I believe the engineer's chief responsibility is running the locomotive safely and not causing any damage.
.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
SeeYou190I believe the engineer's chief responsibility is running the locomotive safely and not causing any damage.. -Kevin
https://www.ble-t.org/members/arbitration/docs/plb/PLB%206199%20Awd%2044.pdf
BaltACD Become familiar with the following rules https://www.scribd.com/document/81871136/CSX-ABTH-Rules-7-1-2004 There have been further updates since these were published.
Thanks BaltACD... my reading material for the Christmas break..
BaltACD SeeYou190 I believe the engineer's chief responsibility is running the locomotive safely and not causing any damage.. -Kevin https://www.ble-t.org/members/arbitration/docs/plb/PLB%206199%20Awd%2044.pdf
SeeYou190 I believe the engineer's chief responsibility is running the locomotive safely and not causing any damage.. -Kevin
I do miss running trains, and think that being an Engineer is one of the coolest jobs. However, I absolutely do not miss the incredible amounts of BS that current employees must deal with.
zardoz I do miss running trains, and think that being an Engineer is one of the coolest jobs. However, I absolutely do not miss the incredible amounts of BS that current employees must deal with.
Yeah, what you said.
Desktops and anything with a cowl/full width carbody are awful to run in reverse, and our C40-8M's have both. Nevertheless, I have gotten to run them backwards for some pretty long stretches, and it is NOT fun. Hopefully they will follow the SD50F's and SD60F's to the scrap heap, the sooner the better.
There are some locations where guys run certain trains at less than track speed to better the chance of coming through in one piece (prevent broken knuckles and drawbars that is). In some areas certain trains are restricted to a lower speed for the same reason.
In general intermodals are pretty easy to run. Less slack and less weight per car length, but their air brakes may not work as well as one would think, as 5-packs and 3-packs have 3 and 2 brake valves respectively. Weighs 5 cars but only has the brakes of 3.
Loaded or empty unit trains aren't too bad either, and anything longer than 110 cars or heavy enough to require more than 2 units will be in DP (out here anyway, CN loads everything down to 0.4 or 0.5 HPT). DP really helps, your air brakes react far more quickly and having mid-train or tail end power really helps manage slack.
The worst trains to run are long, conventional (all units on the head end) manifests. Lots of slack and mixed up loads and empties. The worst configuration is autoracks ahead of heavily loaded cars (think of a slinky with a dumbell on the end, and your hand is the locomotive).
Sometimes there is little you can do to keep a crappy train in one piece, even if you follow all the train handling rules. You'll be cruising along at less than the speed limit in moderate to heavy throttle and all of a sudden the air goes, with no discernable run in or run out (slack) at the head end. But the middle of the train was doing something very different.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70DudeThe worst trains to run are long, conventional (all units on the head end) manifests. Lots of slack and mixed up loads and empties. The worst configuration is autoracks ahead of heavily loaded cars (think of a slinky with a dumbell on the end, and your hand is the locomotive). Sometimes there is little you can do to keep a crappy train in one piece, even if you follow all the train handling rules. You'll be cruising along at less than the speed limit in moderate to heavy throttle and all of a sudden the air goes, with no discernable run in or run out (slack) at the head end. But the middle of the train was doing something very different.
Had the opportunity at one time to operate one of CSX's 'Train Simulator' computer set ups - A over the road highway trailer set up with 4 rooms that were outfitted with operating control stand with operating air gauges etc. + a video screen of the territory being operated over - off to the side was a video screen that displayed a video representation of the train and how the slack was moving through the train as the train moved over the terrain.
The simulation had the ability to operate 'any train' that had ever oprated on the CSX main frame computer over any territory on CSX.
The equipment was being used across the system by Road Foremen of Engines to assist their engineers in their operating practices over their territories.
I found it illuminating to watch how the operation of throttle, air brakes and dynamic brakes affected the slack of the train and how it all interacted with the terrain over which the train was operating. With the size trains being operated then it seemed very easy to induce free running slack within the train sufficient to break the train in two, without having that slack get transferred to the head end power. The trains operated today are even longer and heavier.
BaltACD SD70Dude The worst trains to run are long, conventional (all units on the head end) manifests. Lots of slack and mixed up loads and empties. The worst configuration is autoracks ahead of heavily loaded cars (think of a slinky with a dumbell on the end, and your hand is the locomotive). Sometimes there is little you can do to keep a crappy train in one piece, even if you follow all the train handling rules. You'll be cruising along at less than the speed limit in moderate to heavy throttle and all of a sudden the air goes, with no discernable run in or run out (slack) at the head end. But the middle of the train was doing something very different. Had the opportunity at one time to operate one of CSX's 'Train Simulator' computer set ups - A over the road highway trailer set up with 4 rooms that were outfitted with operating control stand with operating air gauges etc. + a video screen of the territory being operated over - off to the side was a video screen that displayed a video representation of the train and how the slack was moving through the train as the train moved over the terrain. The simulation had the ability to operate 'any train' that had ever oprated on the CSX main frame computer over any territory on CSX. The equipment was being used across the system by Road Foremen of Engines to assist their engineers in their operating practices over their territories. I found it illuminating to watch how the operation of throttle, air brakes and dynamic brakes affected the slack of the train and how it all interacted with the terrain over which the train was operating. With the size trains being operated then it seemed very easy to induce free running slack within the train sufficient to break the train in two, without having that slack get transferred to the head end power. The trains operated today are even longer and heavier.
SD70Dude The worst trains to run are long, conventional (all units on the head end) manifests. Lots of slack and mixed up loads and empties. The worst configuration is autoracks ahead of heavily loaded cars (think of a slinky with a dumbell on the end, and your hand is the locomotive). Sometimes there is little you can do to keep a crappy train in one piece, even if you follow all the train handling rules. You'll be cruising along at less than the speed limit in moderate to heavy throttle and all of a sudden the air goes, with no discernable run in or run out (slack) at the head end. But the middle of the train was doing something very different.
My boss is wanting to do the same thing for the local community college driver training program. He wants to build a full motion simulator of a cab that will respond how a real truck does when on various road conditions. I wonder how they will respond to being thrown against the roof on the Cross Bronx Expressway or some of the other wonderfully maintained roads in this nation.
BaltACD The trains operated today are even longer and heavier.
OK, so I don't operate 100 car trains, but the difference between our usual "local" 3-4 car trains and our 13 car holiday trains is very noticable. Plus, the "cargo" will definitely notice some bad train handling...
A friend has assembled a full AAR stand that will run MSTS. I'd love to put together a min-version of what Balt described to take to train shows, etc, mounted in a small trailer with two sets of processors so the changeover between "customers" would be relatively seamless. I'm sure the railfans at the shows would lay out some cash for the opportunity to run it...
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...
Shadow the Cats owner BaltACD SD70Dude The worst trains to run are long, conventional (all units on the head end) manifests. Lots of slack and mixed up loads and empties. The worst configuration is autoracks ahead of heavily loaded cars (think of a slinky with a dumbell on the end, and your hand is the locomotive). Sometimes there is little you can do to keep a crappy train in one piece, even if you follow all the train handling rules. You'll be cruising along at less than the speed limit in moderate to heavy throttle and all of a sudden the air goes, with no discernable run in or run out (slack) at the head end. But the middle of the train was doing something very different. Had the opportunity at one time to operate one of CSX's 'Train Simulator' computer set ups - A over the road highway trailer set up with 4 rooms that were outfitted with operating control stand with operating air gauges etc. + a video screen of the territory being operated over - off to the side was a video screen that displayed a video representation of the train and how the slack was moving through the train as the train moved over the terrain. The simulation had the ability to operate 'any train' that had ever oprated on the CSX main frame computer over any territory on CSX. The equipment was being used across the system by Road Foremen of Engines to assist their engineers in their operating practices over their territories. I found it illuminating to watch how the operation of throttle, air brakes and dynamic brakes affected the slack of the train and how it all interacted with the terrain over which the train was operating. With the size trains being operated then it seemed very easy to induce free running slack within the train sufficient to break the train in two, without having that slack get transferred to the head end power. The trains operated today are even longer and heavier. My boss is wanting to do the same thing for the local community college driver training program. He wants to build a full motion simulator of a cab that will respond how a real truck does when on various road conditions. I wonder how they will respond to being thrown against the roof on the Cross Bronx Expressway or some of the other wonderfully maintained roads in this nation.
I might add that these simulators dated from the early to mid 1990's; so I am sure that there are even better simulators on the market today as computer hardware and software have developed exponentially in the past 20-25 years.
I don't know what, if anything, is available for OTR Trucking but I would guess there is some product out there.
In a more specialized arena, ther is a competitive computer simulation game known as iRacing.com. iRacing has laser measured and defined most of the race tracks in North America if not the world - including bumps, frost heaves and other surface conditions on the tracks. Some iRacing 'experts' have actually transitioned from computer 'action' to actual wheel to whee racing in real vehicles.
SD70Dude zardoz I do miss running trains, and think that being an Engineer is one of the coolest jobs. However, I absolutely do not miss the incredible amounts of BS that current employees must deal with. Yeah, what you said. Desktops and anything with a cowl/full width carbody are awful to run in reverse, and our C40-8M's have both. Nevertheless, I have gotten to run them backwards for some pretty long stretches, and it is NOT fun. Hopefully they will follow the SD50F's and SD60F's to the scrap heap, the sooner the better. There are some locations where guys run certain trains at less than track speed to better the chance of coming through in one piece (prevent broken knuckles and drawbars that is). In some areas certain trains are restricted to a lower speed for the same reason. In general intermodals are pretty easy to run. Less slack and less weight per car length, but their air brakes may not work as well as one would think, as 5-packs and 3-packs have 3 and 2 brake valves respectively. Weighs 5 cars but only has the brakes of 3. Loaded or empty unit trains aren't too bad either, and anything longer than 110 cars or heavy enough to require more than 2 units will be in DP (out here anyway, CN loads everything down to 0.4 or 0.5 HPT). DP really helps, your air brakes react far more quickly and having mid-train or tail end power really helps manage slack. The worst trains to run are long, conventional (all units on the head end) manifests. Lots of slack and mixed up loads and empties. The worst configuration is autoracks ahead of heavily loaded cars (think of a slinky with a dumbell on the end, and your hand is the locomotive). Sometimes there is little you can do to keep a crappy train in one piece, even if you follow all the train handling rules. You'll be cruising along at less than the speed limit in moderate to heavy throttle and all of a sudden the air goes, with no discernable run in or run out (slack) at the head end. But the middle of the train was doing something very different.
I can agree. The worst trains are long, mixed manifests with long travel drawbars slopped together, but still meeting system standards. Autoracks, coil steel cars, reefers, some box cars, even with a DP there are spots that are challenging.
We have some spots identified as break in two zones. They issued instructions on how to run some trains through these areas. They came up with these by running trains on the simulator. The one B-I-T zone I regularly run I already was doing what the instructions say, except for one thing. They say to transition from dynamics to power at a location where the head end is starting a descending grade. Yeah, I'll do that because I want the head end to roll out.
Add the Energy Management Systems to the mix, and you sometimes have a train in two or if you're really lucky, three pieces. Although, some of the EMS have been doing a better job.
My "best" with EMS was following the LEADER system to the letter. Got a knuckle 80 cars deep on a 135 car loaded 2 x 1 coal train. The manager who came out to download the engine said he didn't think you could tear up a DP coal train. Since I was doing as instructed, the break in two was deemed, "mechanical failure."
Jeff
Ulrich Obviously they're not allowed to speed, but what if an engineer wants to go 5 to 10 mph slower than the recommended speed limit? Also, what about train handling in general... acceleration through curves, braking etc.. is it still mostly up to the engineer or are there hard and fast rules that must be followed?
Great commentary.. thanks..
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.