Falcon48 That's why you may see (for example) UP power on an NS train on the east coast.
A frequent watcher of the Deshler cam will often see the question pop up in the chat "what railroad is this." Given the amount of run-through power (the other six Class 1's are often represented) it's actually a legitimate question, although the ownership of the rails is explained in the notes for the site.
That said - a number of the usuals there know many of the train symbols. With that knowledge, it's not unusual to see power from the same foreign railroads on a regular basis on the same trains.
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...
zugmann oltmannd All of this carries on even in the days of PTC. I wonder if the next generation of PTC (PTC - the sequel!) will make all the cab stuff obsolete? Or if RRs will start to petition to remove cab signal stuff since they have PTC. It's kind of ironic because I bet a lot of the stop signal violation crashes (not all) would have been prevented if cabs/lsl were present. But that's my opinion.
oltmannd All of this carries on even in the days of PTC.
I wonder if the next generation of PTC (PTC - the sequel!) will make all the cab stuff obsolete?
Or if RRs will start to petition to remove cab signal stuff since they have PTC.
It's kind of ironic because I bet a lot of the stop signal violation crashes (not all) would have been prevented if cabs/lsl were present. But that's my opinion.
This current generation of PTC will make cab signals (in the railroad's opinion) obsolete. I know of one that's chomping at the bit to get rid of theirs, especially a system inherited from a former acquisition. I don't believe any of the freight carriers have PTC fully implemented to the point that they have completely complied with the mandate's original deadline. All are still operating on waivers. Once the final deadline (If it really is final and not extended) is reached and PTC is fully operational in the eyes of the FRA, look for the railroads to petition to deactivate cab signal systems.
Cab signals may not have prevented, but may have lessened the incident at Stanwood IA when a switch was opened in front of a coal train diverting it into a spur. PTC didn't in this instance. It's funny, but no one (FRA, railroad, etc) wants to discuss that incident. The engineer involved has been interviewed multiple times by the FRA, asking the same questions that the engineer feels like they're almost trying to find some inconsistency, some reason to blame the crew.
Jeff
caldreamer There are hundreds of run through engines on foreign roads all the time. I have seen UP engines leading trains on NS tracks, BNSF engines leading on UP tracks, etc. NOT the same systems, but they do run, They do NOT need the same control systems.
There are hundreds of run through engines on foreign roads all the time. I have seen UP engines leading trains on NS tracks, BNSF engines leading on UP tracks, etc. NOT the same systems, but they do run, They do NOT need the same control systems.
On most of the UP, including lines from railroads that have been acquired, any engine, UP-foreign railroad-leasing company (LLPX, GMTX, etc.) can lead. On certain lines equipped with cab signals the lead engine has to be equipped. Even with PTC in operation and the cab signals not operating, the lead engine still has to have engines with operative cab signals in case the PTC fails.
UP has two different cab signal systems in use in different areas. All the modern engines purchased since the CNW merger have been delivered with both systems. Older engines may have both, some were retrofitted, some may only have one system. Many have neither. There are some exceptions, mainly short segments between yards and junction points for other UP lines, that allow nonequipped engines to lead. Outside of those only the properly equipped engines can lead.*
It's the same with other railroads. Many lines aren't cab signal territories and anything can lead. Other lines are cab signal territories and require an equipped lead engine. Of course, nonequipped engines can be used as trailing power or DP units, if DP equipped.
My last trip home was on a BNSF detour (coal train) move. They stuck a UP engine on the lead for the cab signals. Even though PTC was used instead of either UP cab signal system.
* During this year's flooding of the Missouri River and some tributaries when both UP and BNSF were disrupted in eastern Nebraska and western Iowa, some BNSF trains were operated without UP lead engines. They received a waiver for the cab signal requirement, although they started operating the trains before they actually received the waiver, and detouring BNSF trains were allowed to go without an equipped lead engine.
oltmanndThen there are the road-specific agreements that require facilities in the cab. Hot plates, coolers, seat specifics, and a whole bunch of other stuff.
To run on Amtrak (lead or trail), that engine must be approved in the Amtrak timetable (mostly for clearances sake).
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Haven't we all heard stories of steam locomotive crews using the back of the coal scoop over the fire box to fry eggs/cook their meals? MMM extra-crunchy.
BaltACD IAFarmer I cant imagine ANY crew being hungry enough to eat out of a locomotive microwave. You just don't know railroaders. Remember they will use the diesel's exhaust manifold or other hot surfaces on the locomotive as a stove.
IAFarmer I cant imagine ANY crew being hungry enough to eat out of a locomotive microwave.
You just don't know railroaders. Remember they will use the diesel's exhaust manifold or other hot surfaces on the locomotive as a stove.
The same coal scoop used for um... "other" purposes.
At 500 degrees nothing is going to be alive in terms of a bacteria that could have made them sick.
Shadow the Cats owner At 500 degrees nothing is going to be alive in terms of a bacteria that could have made them sick.
It's the principle of the thing.
zugmann oltmannd Then there are the road-specific agreements that require facilities in the cab. Hot plates, coolers, seat specifics, and a whole bunch of other stuff. To run on Amtrak (lead or trail), that engine must be approved in the Amtrak timetable (mostly for clearances sake).
oltmannd Then there are the road-specific agreements that require facilities in the cab. Hot plates, coolers, seat specifics, and a whole bunch of other stuff.
Amtrak has very tight clearances through the tunnel from Washington Union Station to points South. Very few Class 1 locomotives clear. Basically - anything newer than a GP or SD40 will not clear.
15 years ago - when CSX's Anacostia River bridge was out of service because 'steel eating bacteria' in the water had reduced the steel pilings to about 25% of their installed dimensions - CSX was able to negotiate with Amtrak to move one train in each direction through WUS (the UPS train) - among the requirements that Amtrak specified, only the former RF&P GP40's would clear the tunnel and had Train Control that was required to operate from Alexandria to Richmond. Other requirements were to have a Car Dept. 'block truck' and crew on hand when the trains moved as well as Division level supervision. Amtrak Pilots were required from Control Point 'F Tower' to Control Point 'Virginia'.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I know amtrak has leased some of our GP40s for work train service. Easy to tell which ones - they had the horn relocated.
But even on the other lines that can handle the larger engines - it still has to be in the book. But there have been the occasional engine that wasn't in the book that got by one way. Then had to be measured to go back out the other.
Then there's local places with further restrictions.
And I'm sure Balt has some experiecnce with Consol's limitations on certain engines.
zugmann The same coal scoop used for um... "other" purposes.
Those on oil burners were just "other purposes" out of luck.
zugmann Shadow the Cats owner At 500 degrees nothing is going to be alive in terms of a bacteria that could have made them sick. It's the principle of the thing.
Or some people have cultivated a taste for high-temperature reheated excrement?
jeffhergert zugmann The same coal scoop used for um... "other" purposes. Those on oil burners were just "other purposes" out of luck. Jeff
jeffhergertThis current generation of PTC will make cab signals (in the railroad's opinion) obsolete. I know of one that's chomping at the bit to get rid of theirs, especially a system inherited from a former acquisition. I don't believe any of the freight carriers have PTC fully implemented to the point that they have completely complied with the mandate's original deadline. All are still operating on waivers. Once the final deadline (If it really is final and not extended) is reached and PTC is fully operational in the eyes of the FRA, look for the railroads to petition to deactivate cab signal systems.
I'm pretty sure NS went the other way with cab signals and PTC. I think they are using the cab signal to tell the PTC system the current intermediate block signal indication. In fact, the PTC install had them rip out all the intermediates. If you have a failed cab signal system, then you can get a "clear to the next interlocking" indication at the current home signal. (a lunar white with the letter "C"...I beleive).
There's no way to do PTC without the cab signal on NS unless they go back and put radios at every cut section.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmannd jeffhergert This current generation of PTC will make cab signals (in the railroad's opinion) obsolete. I know of one that's chomping at the bit to get rid of theirs, especially a system inherited from a former acquisition. I don't believe any of the freight carriers have PTC fully implemented to the point that they have completely complied with the mandate's original deadline. All are still operating on waivers. Once the final deadline (If it really is final and not extended) is reached and PTC is fully operational in the eyes of the FRA, look for the railroads to petition to deactivate cab signal systems. I'm pretty sure NS went the other way with cab signals and PTC. I think they are using the cab signal to tell the PTC system the current intermediate block signal indication. In fact, the PTC install had them rip out all the intermediates. If you have a failed cab signal system, then you can get a "clear to the next interlocking" indication at the current home signal. (a lunar white with the letter "C"...I beleive). There's no way to do PTC without the cab signal on NS unless they go back and put radios at every cut section.
jeffhergert This current generation of PTC will make cab signals (in the railroad's opinion) obsolete. I know of one that's chomping at the bit to get rid of theirs, especially a system inherited from a former acquisition. I don't believe any of the freight carriers have PTC fully implemented to the point that they have completely complied with the mandate's original deadline. All are still operating on waivers. Once the final deadline (If it really is final and not extended) is reached and PTC is fully operational in the eyes of the FRA, look for the railroads to petition to deactivate cab signal systems.
Our signals all have radio towers. When first initializing PTC, you have to get within 1500 feet for PTC to "see" the first signal. Our signals are approach lit, and PTC lights them up six miles in advance of the train.
UP went the other way when they took over the CNW. They added wayside intermediates when they placed CTC in service on the east/west main about 10 years ago. Made it a lot better when the ATC/cab signals failed.
jeffhergert oltmannd jeffhergert This current generation of PTC will make cab signals (in the railroad's opinion) obsolete. I know of one that's chomping at the bit to get rid of theirs, especially a system inherited from a former acquisition. I don't believe any of the freight carriers have PTC fully implemented to the point that they have completely complied with the mandate's original deadline. All are still operating on waivers. Once the final deadline (If it really is final and not extended) is reached and PTC is fully operational in the eyes of the FRA, look for the railroads to petition to deactivate cab signal systems. I'm pretty sure NS went the other way with cab signals and PTC. I think they are using the cab signal to tell the PTC system the current intermediate block signal indication. In fact, the PTC install had them rip out all the intermediates. If you have a failed cab signal system, then you can get a "clear to the next interlocking" indication at the current home signal. (a lunar white with the letter "C"...I beleive). There's no way to do PTC without the cab signal on NS unless they go back and put radios at every cut section. Our signals all have radio towers. When first initializing PTC, you have to get within 1500 feet for PTC to "see" the first signal. Our signals are approach lit, and PTC lights them up six miles in advance of the train. UP went the other way when they took over the CNW. They added wayside intermediates when they placed CTC in service on the east/west main about 10 years ago. Made it a lot better when the ATC/cab signals failed. Jeff
When Control Points in signalled territory can be 10 - 15 or 20 miles apart. Removing Intermediate signals and the logic they operate on from the signal system, then has a train operating that entire distance at restricted speed as opposed to potentially finding a Intermediate that will allow 'track speed' and thereby pick up the pace of operations.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.