Trains.com Sites
Resources
Shop
E-mail Newsletters
SEARCH THIS SITE
Help
Contact Us »
|
Customer Service
Get our free e-mail newsletters
Model Railroader
(weekly)
Model Railroader VideoPlus
(weekly)
Trains
(weekly)
Classic Toy Trains
(bi-weekly)
Garden Railways
(bi-weekly)
Classic Trains
(bi-weekly)
By signing up I may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers from Trains.com. We do not sell, rent or trade our e-mail lists.
Details about our newsletters »
Read our privacy policy »
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Search Community
Searching
Please insert search terms into the box above to run a search on the community.
Users Online
There are no community members online
Thread Details
Rate This
12
Replies — 12286 Views
0
Subscribers
Posted
over 21 years ago
Thread Options
Subscribe via RSS
Share this
Tag Cloud
1950s
advice
Amtrak
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Baltimore and Ohio
Boxcars
Bridges
Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Caboose
Canada
Canadian National Railway
Canadian Pacific Railway
cargo
Chicago
Chicago, Burlington and Quincy
Colorado and Southern
Coupler
Coupling
CSX
dcc sound
Depots
Diesel Engines
education
Emporia
fec
Home
»
Discussion Forums
»
General Discussion (Trains.com)
»
Worst Aspect of Remote Control
Worst Aspect of Remote Control
|
Want to post a reply to this topic?
Login
or
register
for an acount to join our online community today!
1
2
Worst Aspect of Remote Control
Posted by
ironhorseman
on
Sat, Aug 2 2003 8:55 PM
In light of the article that just came out in Trains Sept. 2003 I want to know what IS or what you THINK would be the biggest problem regarding the freight yard remote control units.
Most of all the other forums on this topics had negative opinons on the subject, but me, a dumb railfan, didn't even know the mechanics of how the darn thing works.
The article brings up several points: learning to operate, injuries, deaths, all tasks not completed in the same day pushes assignments to next day, and engineer operators being laid off.
Now as you get your magazine in the mail or go a bookstore or library to read the article we can all hopefully be on the same page.
What's the worst part of it all? Besides hurting employees is this gonna hurt the railroad?
Conversly, what are the best aspects, if any, of remote control?
yad sdrawkcab s'ti
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Replies to this thread are ordered from "oldest to newest". To reverse this order, click
here
.
To learn about more about sorting options, visit our
FAQ page
.
Posted by
ironhorseman
on
Sat, Aug 2 2003 8:55 PM
In light of the article that just came out in Trains Sept. 2003 I want to know what IS or what you THINK would be the biggest problem regarding the freight yard remote control units.
Most of all the other forums on this topics had negative opinons on the subject, but me, a dumb railfan, didn't even know the mechanics of how the darn thing works.
The article brings up several points: learning to operate, injuries, deaths, all tasks not completed in the same day pushes assignments to next day, and engineer operators being laid off.
Now as you get your magazine in the mail or go a bookstore or library to read the article we can all hopefully be on the same page.
What's the worst part of it all? Besides hurting employees is this gonna hurt the railroad?
Conversly, what are the best aspects, if any, of remote control?
yad sdrawkcab s'ti
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Willy2
on
Thu, Aug 7 2003 10:43 AM
Remote controls can not run our railroads. The amount of crossing accidents and derailments would go up very fast, not to mention all of the lost jobs. I am totally against remote control operated trains. I do not think we should worry though because are a long way from unmanned trains.
Willy
Willy
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Willy2
on
Thu, Aug 7 2003 10:43 AM
Remote controls can not run our railroads. The amount of crossing accidents and derailments would go up very fast, not to mention all of the lost jobs. I am totally against remote control operated trains. I do not think we should worry though because are a long way from unmanned trains.
Willy
Willy
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
Sat, Aug 16 2003 5:31 PM
I just got the Sept. 2003 mag. I don't think it will work. There is a picture in some trains mag. that shows a lot of WARNING sighns! It looks like it about to spell railroad
DOOME .
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
Sat, Aug 16 2003 5:31 PM
I just got the Sept. 2003 mag. I don't think it will work. There is a picture in some trains mag. that shows a lot of WARNING sighns! It looks like it about to spell railroad
DOOME .
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
johngraser
on
Mon, Aug 18 2003 1:27 AM
I would think one of the disadvantages of Remote control would be not be able to "feel" how the locomotive is responding to the controls.
John
HO 19' x 12.5' with DCC Control Base on Southern Pacific's (Tillamook branch) Oregon
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
johngraser
on
Mon, Aug 18 2003 1:27 AM
I would think one of the disadvantages of Remote control would be not be able to "feel" how the locomotive is responding to the controls.
John
HO 19' x 12.5' with DCC Control Base on Southern Pacific's (Tillamook branch) Oregon
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
Mon, Aug 18 2003 2:50 PM
As a railroader who works in both yard and road service I have seen first hand the effects of rco operations. It is in my opinion the wrong step for the railroads to be taking. But the bottom line is that they are reducing the yard crew by one third. The biggest problem is number crunching harvard grads who have never switched a car a day in there life. it will not end there. Talk is now the UP is testing software that would permit trains to be ran by satillite. A comment was made we can put a man on the moon we can sure as hell run a train by satillite but the unions are in the way. thank God for unions!!!!!
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
Mon, Aug 18 2003 2:50 PM
As a railroader who works in both yard and road service I have seen first hand the effects of rco operations. It is in my opinion the wrong step for the railroads to be taking. But the bottom line is that they are reducing the yard crew by one third. The biggest problem is number crunching harvard grads who have never switched a car a day in there life. it will not end there. Talk is now the UP is testing software that would permit trains to be ran by satillite. A comment was made we can put a man on the moon we can sure as hell run a train by satillite but the unions are in the way. thank God for unions!!!!!
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Trainnut484
on
Mon, Aug 18 2003 4:44 PM
I say increased property / load damage from RCL operators trying to get the hang of the box. LOL
All the Way!
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Trainnut484
on
Mon, Aug 18 2003 4:44 PM
I say increased property / load damage from RCL operators trying to get the hang of the box. LOL
All the Way!
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
bluepuma
on
Fri, Nov 7 2003 11:20 AM
No engineers in the cabs to wave to!
Some aspects of safety were said to be better, but could be worse for safety of the operator from PEOPLE - 2 man crews in some areas may be better.
I think it's a good thing if one man can do pickups/switching on low volume lines that otherwise couldn't be served with profit by 2 man crews.
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
bluepuma
on
Fri, Nov 7 2003 11:20 AM
No engineers in the cabs to wave to!
Some aspects of safety were said to be better, but could be worse for safety of the operator from PEOPLE - 2 man crews in some areas may be better.
I think it's a good thing if one man can do pickups/switching on low volume lines that otherwise couldn't be served with profit by 2 man crews.
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
Fri, Nov 21 2003 11:00 PM
Safety is a huge issue because a man in the cab can see more than a man on the ground.
The engineer has a feel for the controls and the weight of a train.
lost jobs is another negative.
God forbid on the idea of trains controlled by satelitte......they can't see people walking along the tracks or activity at grade crossings.That would be a recipe for multiple disasters, not to mention class action suits from the families of the dead and injured.
You have posted to a forum that requires a moderator to approve posts before they are publicly available.
1
2
Home
»
Discussion Forums
»
General Discussion (Trains.com)
»
Worst Aspect of Remote Control