Trains.com

A couple of operational questions

2378 views
19 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
A couple of operational questions
Posted by Murphy Siding on Sunday, March 17, 2019 9:05 PM

A couple questions:

     A train on a Class 1 railroad cuts out  20 or so cars from a switching yard and moves them to storage tracks about 1-1/4 mile away. The trip is literally over the river, through the woods, around a corner and up the steepest railroad grade in the state. There are no crossings in the 1-1/4 mile trip; the train goes over one busy street and under another. At the far end of the trip a utility man in a pickup is throwing the switch. In general, would a man be riding the front car?

      One of the tank cars had a stenciled note that said "Liquid petroleum gas. Not oderized". I thought the odor was put in for safety reasons. Doesn't the warning sort of translate to "In the event of a gas leak, if you are close enough to  read this you are probably already dead"?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Sunday, March 17, 2019 9:25 PM

My take on propane odorization is it's for gas going for distribution, as in fuel.  Propane going to a chemical plant for feedstock (where the odorant would be a contaminant) would be exempted.  Propane is an asphyxiant and collects in confined or low-lying places, but has low toxicity.  There are a lot more toxic chemicals, carried in tank cars, than propane.  Of course it is very flammable.  My guess is that if a propane tank car was leaking, you would hear it.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Monday, March 18, 2019 1:06 AM

There darned well had better be somebody on the point. The utility man/brakie can't protect against what he can't see. It isn't only crossings that come into play.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Canada
  • 1,820 posts
Posted by cv_acr on Monday, March 18, 2019 9:08 AM

Murphy Siding

In general, would a man be riding the front car?

 

If they're pushing, yes.

Literally every other detail in the scenario doesn't matter - if they're pushing, the brakeman/trainman is riding the point.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Winnipeg, Mb
  • 628 posts
Posted by traisessive1 on Monday, March 18, 2019 9:16 AM

Depends what the rules say. If I have exclusive use of a section of main track and there are no crossings or lights, I can back my train up to get the conductor on the head end. He does not have to be on the point. CROR. 

10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ... 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Monday, March 18, 2019 10:53 AM

Switches (rigid); Spring derails (a favorite); trespassers; M/W forces in yard limits protected by a flag, cars not in the clear....

As a roadmaster, I heard plenty of excuses on backing incidents. As a railroad surveyor I did three backing related fatality surveys (including one for a neighbor I knew for 20+ years and the work train crews knew there were people "back there" fixing signs from a hi-rail in "joint working limits" that a jordan spreader had knocked down under a situation similar to the OP....)

Even backing-up the length of your train where you just had been can be lethal.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Monday, March 18, 2019 1:33 PM

mudchicken
Even backing-up the length of your train where you just had been can be lethal.

But is permissible under some rulebooks. 

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

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Winnipeg, Mb
  • 628 posts
Posted by traisessive1 on Monday, March 18, 2019 1:50 PM

Such as the CROR in Canada when you have proper protection under 'Known to be Clear' in yards and exclusive track use in CTC/OCS (dark territory). 

10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ... 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, March 18, 2019 1:54 PM

mudchicken
Even backing-up the length of your train where you just had been can be lethal.

It is my understanding that CSX changed from making pickups and drops on the head end to the tail end.  This leaves the conductor a full trainlength away from the locomotive when all is said and done.

I watched a CSX train back up its entire length the past fall, in order to pick up the conductor.  We're talking hundreds of feet - 50 to 70 cars, maybe more.

That said, I've called backup moves from the ground, but I could see the entire movement, and it was our usual short train.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Monday, March 18, 2019 7:40 PM

Backing up is allowed under our rules for trains on a main or signalled track.  It can't go over crossings, either public or private.  It can't back up into the limits of a Form B, protection men/machines.

However, in Murphy's case I don't think one could say it was a back up move.  It sounds like a shoving move from the get-go.  Generally, unless there are other instructions or protocols in play, the leading edge would need to be protected.  A shove wouldn't necessarily need to be protected by a person riding it.  Someone on the ground ahead of the move, who can see it and the track from his/her vantage to the end of the move, could take charge of it.  In Murphy's description, someone would probably have to ride until the U-man can see it.  Once that point was reached, the person on the shove could get off and catch the engine while the U-man has the shove.   

We have also gone to mostly rear end setouts.  It makes sense in some cases, not so much in others.  Mostly, because some of the size of some of the setouts.  I've handled a mile and a half's worth of cars on a headend setout, where the conductor had to ride it.  A half mile from where he made the cut (at a crossing) to the switch and then a half mile back to the yard tracks.  We've had a few fatalities from people being bounced off long cuts on shoving moves.  For awhile, they made it almost impossible to ride a shove.  

Jeff

  

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 9:14 PM

jeffhergert

Backing up is allowed under our rules for trains on a main or signalled track.  It can't go over crossings, either public or private.  It can't back up into the limits of a Form B, protection men/machines.

However, in Murphy's case I don't think one could say it was a back up move.  It sounds like a shoving move from the get-go.  Generally, unless there are other instructions or protocols in play, the leading edge would need to be protected.  A shove wouldn't necessarily need to be protected by a person riding it.  Someone on the ground ahead of the move, who can see it and the track from his/her vantage to the end of the move, could take charge of it.  In Murphy's description, someone would probably have to ride until the U-man can see it.  Once that point was reached, the person on the shove could get off and catch the engine while the U-man has the shove.   

We have also gone to mostly rear end setouts.  It makes sense in some cases, not so much in others.  Mostly, because some of the size of some of the setouts.  I've handled a mile and a half's worth of cars on a headend setout, where the conductor had to ride it.  A half mile from where he made the cut (at a crossing) to the switch and then a half mile back to the yard tracks.  We've had a few fatalities from people being bounced off long cuts on shoving moves.  For awhile, they made it almost impossible to ride a shove.  

Jeff

  

 

 Yikes! 'Seems like you'd want to tie yourself to the car the way bull riders and bronc riders tie themselves to the saddle.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 10:16 PM

Murphy Siding
 
jeffhergert

  We've had a few fatalities from people being bounced off long cuts on shoving moves.  For awhile, they made it almost impossible to ride a shove.  

Jeff 

 Yikes! 'Seems like you'd want to tie yourself to the car the way bull riders and bronc riders tie themselves to the saddle.

The slack shift in a cut of cars being handled by a locomotive can easily exceed ones ability to hold on to the grab irons - especially if you are only holding on with one hand as the other hand is holding on to either a radio or a lantern.  For a while CSX was promoting having the individual protecting the 'point' walking on the ground - leading the movement at walking speed, I believe several individuals were injured trying to watch where they were going as well as watching where the lead part of the shove was.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 7:52 AM

And, that's why shoving platforms are used in some places.

Johnny

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 10:43 AM

BaltACD

 

 
Murphy Siding
 
jeffhergert

  We've had a few fatalities from people being bounced off long cuts on shoving moves.  For awhile, they made it almost impossible to ride a shove.  

Jeff 

 Yikes! 'Seems like you'd want to tie yourself to the car the way bull riders and bronc riders tie themselves to the saddle.

 

The slack shift in a cut of cars being handled by a locomotive can easily exceed ones ability to hold on to the grab irons - especially if you are only holding on with one hand as the other hand is holding on to either a radio or a lantern.  For a while CSX was promoting having the individual protecting the 'point' walking on the ground - leading the movement at walking speed, I believe several individuals were injured trying to watch where they were going as well as watching where the lead part of the shove was.

 

We've had guys written up for turning their head when walking a shove.  You also had to stop walking to talk on the radio.

Foe awhile after the fatalities, one could only ride a shove if the move was more than 1000ft.  Also only if there wasn't someway to have another employee at the far end protect the move or a ride available to reposition the conductor to the far end.  There have since been some changes to that, even before the PSR push.

Jeff

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,047 posts
Posted by cx500 on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 12:59 PM

Ah yes, changes to rules.  Safety is of the first importance, unless it slows down operations or is any other way inconvenient for the management.  Often promulgated by committees more familiar with Powerpoint than riding the point.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 1:45 PM

cx500

Ah yes, changes to rules.  Safety is of the first importance, unless it slows down operations or is any other way inconvenient for the management.  Often promulgated by committees more familiar with Powerpoint than riding the point.

 

Ah, yes! It helps when employees who have been on the ground rise to higher places and make use of their ground knowledge in their new capacities.

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 1:50 PM

Deggesty
 
cx500

Ah yes, changes to rules.  Safety is of the first importance, unless it slows down operations or is any other way inconvenient for the management.  Often promulgated by committees more familiar with Powerpoint than riding the point. 

Ah, yes! It helps when employees who have been on the ground rise to higher places and make use of their ground knowledge in their new capacities.

Safety does hit the bottom line - Injury Settlements cost money - lots of it.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 5:05 PM

cx500

Ah yes, changes to rules.  Safety is of the first importance, unless it slows down operations or is any other way inconvenient for the management.  Often promulgated by committees more familiar with Powerpoint than riding the point.

 


Tonnage first
Safety last
Run 'em slow
Instead of fast.

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,047 posts
Posted by cx500 on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 9:07 PM

BaltACD
Safety does hit the bottom line - Injury Settlements cost money - lots of it.

Of course, but that may be somebody else's budget!  Meanwhile managers have had a year or two of bonuses for meeting personal targets and moved upwards.

John

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 9:14 PM

cx500
 
BaltACD
Safety does hit the bottom line - Injury Settlements cost money - lots of it. 

Of course, but that may be somebody else's budget!  Meanwhile managers have had a year or two of bonuses for meeting personal targets and moved upwards.

John

The CEO's budget is the corporations bottom line.  If the CEO is fine with throwing away money in Injury Settlements safety takes a back seat.  If the CEO wants to maximize profits, improved safety reduces Injury Settlements and he gets to laugh all the way to the bank and shareholders.  

If the CEO only pays lip service to safety he signs off on promotions to individuals that have demonstrated by their safety records they don't care.  A corporation rots from the head - just like a fish.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

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