desparately seeking r c l..

[cabforward]

where can i read details about rcl controllers? also: pictures of product on display and in use; operating specs, prices; various models; how users regard this change and their experiences with its operation: good, bad, ugly; the displaced crewman--what happens to them?

[Anonymous]

read about them at ble.org. RCOs suck! They are dangerous and cost jobs and are less productive than a full switch crew.
Ken

[Anonymous]

I totally agree. Too often, even a two man crew is not enough to safely and efficiently switch.

[edblysard]

Try Canac, Canadian automated controls. They make remote controled cranes, and ventured into the remote controled locomotive marked place.
As to how users regard them? Manaegment loves them, it allows them to reduce crew consists to one man, who has to read a switch list, throw switches, run the locomotive, pull the pin on cars and hold a lantren, all with only two hands. It also allows the railroad to furlough employees, (lay off). As for how crews feel? In public, those who want to keep their jobs say they love them, (read the above description of the ballet they have to perform) in private, they wi***he darn things were never invented. Do not belive the FRA reports about safety, they get their numbers from the railroads FRA reportable injury/incident reports, and we all know how reliable the railroads are at reporting accidents and injuries, right? Think about this, do you want a unmanned locomotive using the crossing where you or you wife and kids are crossing the tracks, with only a video camera as eyes on the locomotive? What happens to the displaced crewmen? Well, engineers get forced back to the ground switching, after all those years working to get up on the seatbox, they in turn force the switchmen further down their seniority roster, and in the end, the youngest guys get laid off, as now there are even less jobs they can hold. Real productive, huh?
Remember, the FRA says nothing is safer that a switching locomotive without a person on board.
Only from your federal goverment would such a statement make sense..
Ed

[Anonymous]

Ed, you are right on the money again. How can this truly be safer or more efficient? It can't!! Don't tell it to the bean counters though, especially the new breed who have no idea of what it's like out there.

[cabforward]

how can a man on the ground be as effective as a man 8-10 ft. above the ground? how can one less man in a crew make a dangerous job safer?

has a tape been made to compare identical operations with / without rcl? it seems unions should get the media, especially tv, to a press conference to ha***his out and offer tapes as noted above..

how can a controller on the ground achieve the vision an engineer has? how can mgmt. justify this?

this idea seems ludicrous from git-go. i have to wonder why unions and those who empathize, did not raise cain when this idea was first mentioned..

how long before this lousy idea shows up on road ops?

[Anonymous]

SAFETY FIRST! But when safety collides with the pocket book, the pocket book will always win. I fully expect single man assignments as "radio flyers" before it's over.

[douginut]

http://www.canac.com/action.html

[Anonymous]

Amen, bro, amen!

[Anonymous]

Ed, very clearly put! You are very well versed. Have you ever thought of running for union office?
Ken

[Anonymous]

What do you mean? The unions did get involved. Don't get me wrong, I am very strong union, but, the UTU sold my *** and all of the other new hires down the river for the remote instead of fighting it. I personally am headed for the BLE!

[Anonymous]

Dude, bite your tongue!

[edblysard]

Never, not now, not then, not ever...
Ed

[edblysard]

Thats right, they sold us, to give the protected men a added $1500.00 bonus for breathing air, and the old heads get first shot at remote control jobs, the UTU refuses to fight it, even though I and all the members of our local wanted to, and almost every other UTU member I spoke to didnt want it implemented. Its unsafe, period. But money rules over common sense. Again, greed wins and we pay the price.
Ed