Though the railroad was once a central feature of American life, it's plain that awareness of railroading is slipping away from the general public.
One telling example: many newspaper reporters, who obviously never played with toy trains as children, seem to be unaware that, in the U.S, the guy who drives the train is called the "engineer." It's quite common to read news articles like this one from the May 7 Seattle Times:
"A man talking on a cellphone was killed by a train today near Emerald Downs racetrack, according to Auburn police. The man was struck while walking north on tracks in the 1400 block of C Street Northwest, said Police Sgt. Scott Near said. Near said the conductor sounded the horn and applied the emergency brakes but "there was nothing he could do."
Now, we all know it's possible that an alert conductor riding in the left-hand seat might indeed have reached for the brake valve and grabbed for the horn, but that in all probability, it was the engineer who took these actions. Almost certainly, this is a case where the reporter has acquired the misimpression that the operator of a locomotive is called the "conductor."
Lest one think this is an isolated case, a Google News search will show similar journalistic errors repeated two or three times per week, as far back as one cares to look. If the reports are to be believed, conductors are running trains all across the nation.
When I called attention to this issue elsewhere, an anonymous commenter wrote in to say:
"My brother is a conductor on the railroad. For many short runs, or when he's assembling a train, he often drives the train..."
I have to say, I'm skeptical of this claim. I've always understood that the union rules commonly in force are quite strict about who-does-what on a train. Hostlers (and other yard personnel) assemble trains, engineers operate locomotives (even on "short runs") and conductors have their own, extensive set of duties overseeing the whole operation of the train.
Am I wrong? Are there railroads in the U.S. (non-unionized short lines, perhaps?) where trains zip along the rails with no engineer, but a "conductor" at the throttle instead?
And just to underscore the point, this morning it's a "sheriff's spokeswoman," quoted in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel telling us about another train with a conductor doing the engineer's job:
A Coral Springs man whose car apparently didn't clear the railroad tracks because of a traffic backup was killed Tuesday when an Amtrak train slammed into his vehicle at a CSX railroad crossing on West Atlantic Boulevard, the Broward Sheriff's Office said. The train was traveling about 79 mph when it hit Crowell's vehicle, authorities said. "The crossing gates had come down, the train conductor had blown his horn and he had administered his emergency brake when the collision occurred," (spokeswoman) Russell said.
So now Amtrak engineers are letting the conductors do the driving?
Meanwhile, yesterday's Mahoning Valley Tribune-Chronicle brought us a reporter who not only thinks the conductor drives the train, but apparently never heard the term "railroad:"
A week after a Newton Township police cruiser was crushed by an oncoming locomotive, a dispatcher in Newton Falls has been suspended for two weeks. Police Chief Robert Carlson released a memo Monday to part-time dispatcher Dawn A. McAvoy stating that she did not do her duty when she failed to call the CSX train company to tell them a township officer was chasing theft suspects along the tracks intersecting Miller Graber Road... Officer Tom Colosimo stopped on the tracks about 10:50 p.m. when he spotted three scrap metal theft suspects walking along the railway. When they ran, he jumped out of the car and chased them, radioing that he was on the tracks and told the dispatcher to call the train company... Almost 13 minutes later, after the shift change, Colosimo radioed back and asked if anyone called the train company... According to reports, the conductor noticed the cruiser’s overhead lights from a half mile away and tried to brake.
A week after a Newton Township police cruiser was crushed by an oncoming locomotive, a dispatcher in Newton Falls has been suspended for two weeks. Police Chief Robert Carlson released a memo Monday to part-time dispatcher Dawn A. McAvoy stating that she did not do her duty when she failed to call the CSX train company to tell them a township officer was chasing theft suspects along the tracks intersecting Miller Graber Road...
Officer Tom Colosimo stopped on the tracks about 10:50 p.m. when he spotted three scrap metal theft suspects walking along the railway. When they ran, he jumped out of the car and chased them, radioing that he was on the tracks and told the dispatcher to call the train company... Almost 13 minutes later, after the shift change, Colosimo radioed back and asked if anyone called the train company...
According to reports, the conductor noticed the cruiser’s overhead lights from a half mile away and tried to brake.
When I read things like this, all I can think of is Utah Phillips' song, "Daddy, What's a Train?"
BillyFloyd wrote: Though the railroad was once a central feature of American life, it's plain that awareness of railroading is slipping away from the general public.One telling example: many newspaper reporters, who obviously never played with toy trains as children, seem to be unaware that, in the U.S, the guy who drives the train is called the "engineer." It's quite common to read news articles like this one from the May 7 Seattle Times:"A man talking on a cellphone was killed by a train today near Emerald Downs racetrack, according to Auburn police. The man was struck while walking north on tracks in the 1400 block of C Street Northwest, said Police Sgt. Scott Near said. Near said the conductor sounded the horn and applied the emergency brakes but "there was nothing he could do."Now, we all know it's possible that an alert conductor riding in the left-hand seat might indeed have reached for the brake valve and grabbed for the horn, but that in all probability, it was the engineer who took these actions. Almost certainly, this is a case where the reporter has acquired the misimpression that the operator of a locomotive is called the "conductor."Lest one think this is an isolated case, a Google News search will show similar journalistic errors repeated two or three times per week, as far back as one cares to look. If the reports are to be believed, conductors are running trains all across the nation. When I called attention to this issue elsewhere, an anonymous commenter wrote in to say:"My brother is a conductor on the railroad. For many short runs, or when he's assembling a train, he often drives the train..."I have to say, I'm skeptical of this claim. I've always understood that the union rules commonly in force are quite strict about who-does-what on a train. Hostlers (and other yard personnel) assemble trains, engineers operate locomotives (even on "short runs") and conductors have their own, extensive set of duties overseeing the whole operation of the train.Am I wrong? Are there railroads in the U.S. (non-unionized short lines, perhaps?) where trains zip along the rails with no engineer, but a "conductor" at the throttle instead?
I can relate ! In a recent story featured on our local stations(Waco,Tx.) the reporters stated that neither of the conductors were injured in a crossing accident involving a semi...
It's been my experience that despite their best efforts (occasionally), many reporters have no clue.
We see it in the fire service on a regular basis. Some fire departments have been known to run a "mini fire academy" just for the media, so they can be told the hows and whys of fire operations and maybe write about them intelligently next time they report on a fire incident.
Especially with a train incident, the reporter is often getting information not from the railroad, but from law enforcement, who also has no clue. In fact, the "spokesman" may not have even been involved in the investigation, but is simply reporting what he (or she) has been told up through the chain of command.
Ever play that game where a "secret" is repeated around the room?
Of course, the demise of the caboose hasn't helped, either. Used to be that the engineer was in the engine and the conductor was in the caboose...
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...
J. Edgar wrote:ohhhhh i see......we are critiqueing the press's responsibilty on fair un-bias accurate reporting.....well when ya find some lemme know....ill critique it
Well, it's partly that-- if you can't trust the media to get little things like this right, can you trust their reports on global warming, the crisis in the Middle East, or the state of the economy?
For me, though, as a historian interested in transportation, it's fascinating (and sad) to see just how peripheral the railroading industry has become in popular culture. A couple of generations ago, everyone knew about engineers and conductors because trains were important in their lives. These days, it seems a lot of the public knows as much about trains as they do about Conestoga wagons.
One example of the practical consequences: some years ago, in Harpers Ferry, WV, I talked to a young woman whose car had just been smashed by a six-axle EMD. Seeking to avoid paying for parking, she'd squeezed the car into a "parking space" at the downtown railroad station... with her back wheels on the ballast and rear bumper sticking right out over the eastbound CSX main. It wasn't long before the inevitable took place.
When I asked if she'd given any thought to the risk, she wailed, "I didn't think they used those tracks anymore!"
BillyFloyd wrote: .....Are there railroads in the U.S. (non-unionized short lines, perhaps?) where trains zip along the rails with no engineer, but a "conductor" at the throttle instead?
Billy,
We experience the same kind of press and puplic ignoranace here in heavily transit rich and commuter RR rich New York City. There were many times I have seen in the papers where incidents involving accidents and suicide jumpers that refer to the subway train motorman as the "conductor". "....The conductor could not stop his train in time....."
I am a NYPD detective and once I took a prisoner to Bellevue Hosp. Emergency Room there was a female motorman, or Train Operator as they are now called, that was taken to the ER for evaluation, because a jumper commited suicide by jumping from the platform in front or her train as she was braking for a stop. Well would you know it that the EMT's and nurses kept referring to her as the train conductor.
So you see even in a place where trains, in this case subway trains, are just a part of the everyday lives of average New Yorkers today as their were 60 years ago and also here in NYC in working class neighborhoods everyone knows somebody be it a family member, friend or nieghbor work works for the transit authority because transit jobs are one of the few jobs that still offers good wages with benefits and pensions. There is a still creeping ignorance of what duties of the "conductor" and "motorman" are.
I think that part of this is due to the trend of corporatizing, "PCing" and desexing job titles by the transit authority, such as Motormen are now called Train Operators and Motor Instructor, the subway equivilant of a Road Foreman of Engines are now called Train Operator Supervisors. This blandness separates the present empolyees from their "electric traction heritage" and make thwm seem less distinct from any other job in transportation.
Having worked in television broadcasting for 30+ years, I hate to say it -- but most reporters "don't have a clue". I have had an on-going battle with the news department at the station I used to work for; they persist in referring to the rifle volley at military funerals as a "twenty-one gun salute". They are also determined to work in non-standard English at every opportunity. I just have to grit my teeth and say nothing when I hear that "the burglar BUSTED out a window", or "the teen SNUCK out of the house".
And to think people used to complain about Dizzy Dean (remember him?) telling TV audiences how somebody just "SLUD" into third base!
/Lone
Remember: In South Carolina, North is southeast of Due West... HIOAg /Bill
lonewoof wrote: Having worked in television broadcasting for 30+ years, I hate to say it -- but most reporters "don't have a clue". I have had an on-going battle with the news department at the station I used to work for; they persist in referring to the rifle volley at military funerals as a "twenty-one gun salute". They are also determined to work in non-standard English at every opportunity. I just have to grit my teeth and say nothing when I hear that "the burglar BUSTED out a window", or "the teen SNUCK out of the house".And to think people used to complain about Dizzy Dean (remember him?) telling TV audiences how somebody just "SLUD" into third base!/Lone
Whats wrong with that?
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
[quote user="TH&B"]Why don't they just call them all, railroad employees. Covers it all. The media is NEVER EVER accurate about anything, and never have been anywhere.[/quot
I blame Google for some of the misinformation. Planning a trip to the beautiful "Mountain Empire" of Southwestern Virginia? Perhaps you'd like to stay in lovely "Abington." Thousands of entries.
One problem, though, "Abington" did not and does not exist! The county seat of Washington County, Virginia, is "Abingdon" with a "d." There were about three times more entries for the correct Abingdon spelling as for Abington. Nowhere under "Abington" did I see a link to the correct spelling, or mention of it.
Apparently sprucing up the Wikipedia is the least of our problems. Now the internet is convening whole cities where none existed.
al
BillyFloyd wrote: J. Edgar wrote:ohhhhh i see......we are critiqueing the press's responsibilty on fair un-bias accurate reporting.....well when ya find some lemme know....ill critique it "So now Amtrak engineers are letting the conductors do the driving?"Well, it's partly that-- if you can't trust the media to get little things like this right, can you trust their reports on global warming, the crisis in the Middle East, or the state of the economy?
"So now Amtrak engineers are letting the conductors do the driving?"
Then why do you even bother reading so many newspaper stories online?
And BillyFloyd -- since you're obviously such a stickler for perfect details and getting little things right, engineers don't "drive" trains as you write several many times above -- they "run" them. I thought everyone knew that.
Hello everyone,
Actually, I had to laugh about the one where they call it a "train company"! I've never thought of a railroad in those terms. We could use it here on the forums for subjects such as "What's your favorite train company?!", "Classic Train Companies", or "Train Company Locomotives".
Later,
Gregory
coborn35 wrote: lonewoof wrote: Having worked in television broadcasting for 30+ years, I hate to say it -- but most reporters "don't have a clue". I have had an on-going battle with the news department at the station I used to work for; they persist in referring to the rifle volley at military funerals as a "twenty-one gun salute". They are also determined to work in non-standard English at every opportunity. I just have to grit my teeth and say nothing when I hear that "the burglar BUSTED out a window", or "the teen SNUCK out of the house".And to think people used to complain about Dizzy Dean (remember him?) telling TV audiences how somebody just "SLUD" into third base!/Lone Whats wrong with that?
Aside from the fact that they are BOTH examples of, at best, informal usage, or, at worst, just plain incorrect usage -- NOTHING! The crook "broke" out a window; the teen "sneaked" out...
Out in the real world, the conductor, qualified or not, is often the one running the train when the engineer is busy doing other things on trainling units, using the facilities or taking a rest to eat his/her meals.
10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ...
I'm a conductor for the Monticello RR Museum in Illinois. Last weekend, someone asked me if they still made RR ties!!!!! He also asked me if our GP11 was a real steam engine. And another asked me if our train really did move. I told her we hired high school kids with signed painted with scenery to run by the windows.
We determined that parents in their early 20's most likely never saw a train with a caboose on the back end. Cabooses were removed in the early 1980's & if you were born after that, seeing a caboose on the back end of a train is not part of your for a better word "culture". The majority of people in this country no longer have a relative, friend or neighbor working for the RR & their only contact with one is when they get stopped at a crossing. There questions may seem stupid to us, but not any worse than me asking questions about quantum physics to a group astronomers.
Rob
lonewoof wrote:Aside from the fact that they are BOTH examples of, at best, informal usage, or, at worst, just plain incorrect usage -- NOTHING! The crook "broke" out a window; the teen "sneaked" out... /Lone
But the runner shoulda slud inta third, right?
Dave Nelson
BillyFloyd wrote: Though the railroad was once a central feature of American life, it's plain that awareness of railroading is slipping away from the general public.One telling example: many newspaper reporters, who obviously never played with toy trains as children, seem to be unaware that, in the U.S, the guy who drives the train is called the "engineer." It's quite common to read news articles like this one from the May 7 Seattle Times:
H'mmm, just as I guess that many railfans are totally clueless that it is the newspaper EDITOR's responsibilitity to catch and correct such erroneous content in the paper, not the REPORTER..LMAO!!
Convicted One wrote: BillyFloyd wrote: Though the railroad was once a central feature of American life, it's plain that awareness of railroading is slipping away from the general public.One telling example: many newspaper reporters, who obviously never played with toy trains as children, seem to be unaware that, in the U.S, the guy who drives the train is called the "engineer." It's quite common to read news articles like this one from the May 7 Seattle Times: H'mmm, just as I guess that many railfans are totally clueless that it is the newspaper EDITOR's responsibilitity to catch and correct such erroneous content in the paper, not the REPORTER..LMAO!!
Well, since I've published articles in both newspapers and magazines, I'm reasonably familiar with the workflow. In this case it's reporter makes mistake, editor fails to catch same. Kind of reinforces my suspicion that general knowledge of railroading basics is fading from public consciousness.
Do LYAO if it keeps you amused, though.
G Mack wrote: Hello everyone,Actually, I had to laugh about the one where they call it a "train company"! I've never thought of a railroad in those terms. We could use it here on the forums for subjects such as "What's your favorite train company?!", "Classic Train Companies", or "Train Company Locomotives".Later,Gregory
Actually, I used to have a neighbor who frequently asked me what it was like to work at that "train place".
G Mack wrote:Actually, I had to laugh about the one where they call it a "train company"! I've never thought of a railroad in those terms. We could use it here on the forums for subjects such as "What's your favorite train company?!", "Classic Train Companies", or "Train Company Locomotives".
One does wonder; how about...
BillyFloyd wrote:Well, since I've published articles in both newspapers and magazines, I'm reasonably familiar with the workflow. In this case it's reporter makes mistake, editor fails to catch same. Kind of reinforces my suspicion that general knowledge of railroading basics is fading from public consciousness. Do LYAO if it keeps you amused, though.
It's the Reporter who pretty much does all the grunt work acquiring the story from the field, is it not? The editor has final responsibility for the content, hacking the story to pieces, etc.
side note, just look at all the resident 'experts' on accoustics we have here whenever a story comes along about a community having issues on horn loudness at RR crossings (chuckles)
robscaboose wrote:...We determined that parents in their early 20's most likely never saw a train with a caboose on the back end. Cabooses were removed in the early 1980's & if you were born after that, seeing a caboose on the back end of a train is not part of your for a better word "culture". The majority of people in this country no longer have a relative, friend or neighbor working for the RR & their only contact with one is when they get stopped at a crossing. ..
I think this is the crux of the matter. I agree most reporters probably don't have a clue about railroads or train operations. But, even if they did, they have to report stories in a manner their audiences will understand. To most people, an engineer is a person who builds bridges and things and a conductor runs a train. And, to avoid offending engineers (railroad or otherwise), most don't realize that neither is the case.
They are doing it again Billy!!!!!
This is a quote from TV station WBZTV Boston regarding the fatal trollely accident on Thursday 5/28/08 "......MBTA officials have not released the name of the female conductor. ......."
To be fair it the father of the deceased female trolley operator who referred to his daughter as the "conductor" . Maybe he did not know that her job entail actually running the trolley(light rail vehicle) not just opening and closing the doors. He did say that she was on the job for only six months.
I talked about this to a friend of mine who is management at Metro North Commuter RR here in NYC. He said that he noticed since the big fight of few years ago between the UTU and the BLE. That the media tends to just use the word conductor for all freight RR accidents and that it is only with accidents involving Amtrak that they take care and use the word engineer.
He and I attributes this to the fact in freight RR's the conductor now rides in the cab, it is sort of technically correct since for nearly two decades on freight RR's all engineers are first qualified conductors, for the press it easier to key stroke conductor since he/she is technically the "captain"/overall supervisor of the train and the generally dumbing down of society as a whole.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.