It works in model trains so why not in real life? Lionel had a system that pushed the pins apart and detached the cars. What I am proposing here is that there would be a magnectic device that would uncouple cars and a control panel at the head end were the engineer would type in the car number and detatch the car. I know that the FRA has plans in the works on their website for this.. https://railroads.dot.gov/rolling-stock/current-projects/advanced-tri-coupler
There is one minor issue that you failed to address. How would you make or break the air line connections remotely?
Transit trains have airlines built into the coupling knuckles.I believe that the FRA website deals with this
CSSHEGEWISCH There is one minor issue that you failed to address. How would you make or break the air line connections remotely?
A lot of schemes have been proposed over the years. Sometimes it isn't whether something can be done, but is it worth it?
Obviously, so far, it hasn't. I doubt with current equipment and operations that it will ever be "worth it." It's something that might be more viable when equipment and operations are almost entirely semi-permanently coupled train sets that rarely uncouple.
Jeff
jeffhergertSometimes it isn't whether something can be done, but is it worth it? Obviously, so far, it hasn't. I doubt with current equipment and operations that it will ever be "worth it."
Obviously, so far, it hasn't. I doubt with current equipment and operations that it will ever be "worth it."
I agree. A lot of cars to retrofit ...
Still in training.
jeffhergertI doubt with current equipment and operations that it will ever be "worth it." It's something that might be more viable when equipment and operations are almost entirely semi-permanently coupled train sets that rarely uncouple. Jeff
Yes I agree that something like these hands-free couplings, ECP brakes, or automatic parking brakes will never be adopted for loose-car railroading. This is because every such improvement will need to be applied to every car in a short time, and those cars will vary in how much benefit comes from the improvement.
Once loose car railroading starts to give way to dedicated trainsets, that opens the door to vast improvements such as ECP brakes, powered train securement, derailment detectors, and trains without slack.
We're a long way from getting rid of loose car railroading. Unless you want to get rid of a lot of the business railroads currently do. The Class 1's have largely moved loose car handling into the realm of shortlines, but those cars still have to go from point A to point B, via the Class 1's. Virtually all railroading, with the exception of true unit trains, like coal, coke, or certain liquids, is still loose car - even intermodal.
As for automatic uncoupling - one VERY important safety feature of the current arrangement is that if a brake hose parts, it dumps the emergency brake application. You have to find a way to maintain that functionality while at the same time alowing for Lionel-like automatic uncoupling.
The current arrangement is a vast improvement over link-and-pin, or even European buffers (which is really just link and pin). It's reasonably simple, and it works. As we've seen with discussions of ECP, adding a level of complexity in the form of remote control of anything, is a stumbling block few want to tackle.
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...
Various quite constructable designs capable of this have existed for over a century -- consider how easy it would be to make a Scharfenberg coupler remotely operable.
If you have the 220V trainline for ECP, a two-motor system would be reasonably hackproof: one motor swings the 'coupler servo' into position and locks it; then the coupler servo manipulates the cut lever as brake foundations are actuated independently of the manual 'securement'
I believe the Europeans have some cockamamie overdesigned automatic coupler that could be designed to separate blocks of cars, including autonomous railcars if anyone wants to throw money at, or down a hole regarding, that 'potential market segment'.
Back in the late Sixties, NJ Transit (or whatever it was called then) put on an exhibition of their new Jersey Arrow MU cars. As a teen model railroader/railfan, that settled what I was doing that Saturday. I was impressed - modern, clean, comfortable, air conditioned - a far cry from the communter coaches I knew. But the thing that impressed me the most was that it had true automatic couplers. A rectangular box was beneath the knuckles, containing the brake pipe, signal pipe and MU couplings. The next Friday, when I was at the model railroad club, I told people what my impressions of the new cars were and I must have been very enthusiastic about the couplers. One of the old heads - I mean he was on a first name basis with Bill Walthers and Al Kalmbach - who had grown up riding interurbans in Ohio in the Thirties informed us that the technology was nothing new and he used to ride on cars equipped with such devices. So the technical problems have long since been solved. However, even at my tender age, I realized that equipping well over a million cars continent wide would be hugely expensive. My older friend pointed out that adoption of such a system as standard would be the biggest change to railroad cars since the Safety Appliance Act, and it would probably take a similar mandate to achieve.
From a Union standpoint who pushes the button to opeearate automatic uncoulpler? Engineer or Conductor? Can't have cross crafting with seperate unions BLE vs TCU
tree68 We're a long way from getting rid of loose car railroading. Unless you want to get rid of a lot of the business railroads currently do. The Class 1's have largely moved loose car handling into the realm of shortlines, but those cars still have to go from point A to point B, via the Class 1's. Virtually all railroading, with the exception of true unit trains, like coal, coke, or certain liquids, is still loose car - even intermodal.
I'll go even deeper.. While the C1's hate to switch cars. Loose car (carload freight in general) is still the traffic that provides the highest margins. Intermodal is expensive due to all the moving parts involved with it; Dray cost, lift cost, switching cost, chassis availability, and other high operational cost.. Last but not least, because intermodal is modal competitive means it produces less revenue.
One tenet of PSR was suppose to be the simplification of the loose car network. Hence driving margins higher on manifest traffic..Which modal competitive traffic can't provide.
SD60MAC9500One tenet of PSR was suppose to be the simplification of the loose car network. Hence driving margins higher on manifest traffic..Which modal competitive traffic can't provide.
PSR is actively working for the ultimate simplification of the loose car network - its elimination on Class 1's. If their service can drive customers to other forms of transportation PSR will have achieved its real goal.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
We're heading towards autonomous intelligent driverless trucks. Probably similar systems in railroading too. If cars and trucks, and even short strings of trucks, can be made to avoid one another on roads and highways, the same can be done with short consists of motorized railbourne containers or cars that carry shipments too heavy for asphalt. At that point you achieve a fully automated system and the need for motive power diminishes. Of course, all this works best on an overhead power configuration running with the pants up.
Same me, different spelling!
1) Remote control angle cock.
2) Remote control pin lifter.
3) Automatic coupler for the brake pipe air connection.
4) Automatic coupler for the electrical connection.
Lasers and archimedes screws. That's about the only way I can think of to make couplers smart. They have automated docking systems on unmanned supply vehicles arriving at the ISS. Why not automatically adjusting couplers?
It's not that it can't be done. It's that it can't be done economically. You'd have to retrofit hundreds of thousands of cars.
Euclid There is one issue about this hands-free “Tri-Coupler” being proposed by the FRA that I don’t see addressed. That is the alignment of the car couplers. Car couplers can become misaligned to the point where they will fail to make coupling when shoved together. Then some manual labor is necessary to adjust one or both coupler positions, and try the coupling again. For the Tri-Coupler concept description, the following features are needed: 1) Remote control angle cock. 2) Remote control pin lifter. 3) Automatic coupler for the brake pipe air connection. 4) Automatic coupler for the electrical connection. Overall, the point is to keep workers away from the dangerous proximity to the coupler operation. But, what about misaligned car couplers? How do you automate the manual labor needed to adjust a car coupler position before coupling, if necessary?
The real issue is.. How do you plan on getting the 1.64 Milllion railcars that are privately owned equipped with this tri-coupler?
Remote uncoupling between cars could be many years away, if ever. But remote uncoupling of helper locomotives from trains has already been a thing for more than a decade. It's called Helper Link.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/devights/3697085292
http://burningjournal.activeboard.com/mobile.spark?p=topic&topic=40697885
EuclidI only cite the need for getting away from loose car railroading because it is a fundamental necessity to unblock many technological improvements.
There are many who agree with you, however there is still a lot of loose care railroading. I think the rule of thumb is one railroad car translates to three trucks. The trucking industry is having problems with current capacity - putting three hundred more trucks on the road per 100 car manifest freight is probsbly a logistical impossibility.
And, when you get down to it, even contrainer traffic is a form of loose car reailroading.
tree68 Euclid I only cite the need for getting away from loose car railroading because it is a fundamental necessity to unblock many technological improvements. There are many who agree with you, however there is still a lot of loose care railroading. I think the rule of thumb is one railroad car translates to three trucks. The trucking industry is having problems with current capacity - putting three hundred more trucks on the road per 100 car manifest freight is probsbly a logistical impossibility. And, when you get down to it, even contrainer traffic is a form of loose car reailroading.
Euclid I only cite the need for getting away from loose car railroading because it is a fundamental necessity to unblock many technological improvements.
For the railroads - Intermodal with both trailers and containers has become the loose car railroad network of the 40's and 50's - replacing the 36 foot and 40 foot box cars of that era. Many of the commodities that were loose cars in those long gone era's no longer exist in the 21st Century - coal for home heating, autos in boxcars, grain in box cars and a whole host of others.
Some of what were loose car commodities in the era gone are now 'bulk' commodity unit train type commodities in the 21st Century - grain in trainload lots of 100 ton capacity covered hoppers, vehicles in multi-level auto racks are two that spring to mind.
The only thing that is wanted is the autonomus money machine. All it does is create money without the need for capital expenditure or maintenance expenditures.
BaltACD The only thing that is wanted is the autonomus money machine. All it does is create money without the need for capital expenditure or maintenance expenditures.
Euclid BaltACD The only thing that is wanted is the autonomus money machine. All it does is create money without the need for capital expenditure or maintenance expenditures. An autonomous money making machine would be very popular except it would create massive inflation. But in any case, autonomous trains, while they may lower operating costs, they are hardly something that can done without capital expenditure or maintenance.
Not when the ultra elite are the ones that possess the autonomous moneymaking machine - they don't buy the products that create inflation among the masses - they only buy politicians which have been out of the price range for us mere wage earners for centuries.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.