Trains.com

Gigantic Freight Car classification turntable?

5076 views
70 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, November 29, 2007 8:11 PM
 rrnut282 wrote:

 ndbprr wrote:
First comes the idea.  The rest is just engineering details.  The big problem is railroads that do not have foresight or try new things easily.  The response accross the board will be, "We've never done that before".

The wail of a dying organization.  Adapt or die.  Lima was slow to build diesels and went from a powerhouse to poorhouse in a few short years.  There are many examples of companies that failed to embrace new technology and ultimately failed.

Now I'm not saying every railroad should build one in every city, but I think it should be investigated and evaluated and tested.

Conversely, there are plenty of fools and idiots out there wanting to run major companies into the ground. Monster transfer tables or turntables in modern railroad service won't fly. If one is ever built, it will NEVER pay for itself. (and this surveyor has to put up with all the "magic" abilities that the public thinks GPS has, the same public that knows not the difference between accuracy and precision in the same manner that they know not the difference between GIS and GPS...)

ps - Carl not only fell on the floor in a fit of laughter, he darned near fell out of his hump tower!

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: MP CF161.6 NS's New Castle District in NE Indiana
  • 2,148 posts
Posted by rrnut282 on Thursday, November 29, 2007 7:53 PM

 ndbprr wrote:
First comes the idea.  The rest is just engineering details.  The big problem is railroads that do not have foresight or try new things easily.  The response accross the board will be, "We've never done that before".

The wail of a dying organization.  Adapt or die.  Lima was slow to build diesels and went from a powerhouse to poorhouse in a few short years.  There are many examples of companies that failed to embrace new technology and ultimately failed.

Now I'm not saying every railroad should build one in every city, but I think it should be investigated and evaluated and tested.

 

Mike (2-8-2)
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: MP CF161.6 NS's New Castle District in NE Indiana
  • 2,148 posts
Posted by rrnut282 on Thursday, November 29, 2007 7:39 PM
Where to stop and make a cut would already be calculated by the computer prior to the trains arrival, no doubt.  And if it takes another cut due to cars lengths it's not that big a deal.  I think the idea behind this is to eliminate the wait for the conductor to walk back and throw all the switches needed to get the cut to the right track.  And that's after getting permission to pull out on the lead, which is  probably the longest wait of all.
Mike (2-8-2)
  • Member since
    February 2001
  • From: Poconos, PA
  • 3,948 posts
Posted by TomDiehl on Thursday, November 29, 2007 7:31 PM
 ChuckCobleigh wrote:

From the classic movie The Graduate:

Mr. Robinson:   Ben, this idea seems pretty half-baked.

Ben:                    Oh no, sir.   It's completely baked.

I think that just about says it all. 

Or the guy that dreamed this thing up was pretty "baked!"

Or if the table is 750 ft diameter, imagine the centrifical forces on a car near the outer edge.

And with the multiple alignment points, considered with the varying car lengths, how could you make the required multiple splits in a train without multiple stops and uncouplings?

Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown
  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: Menasha, Wis.
  • 451 posts
Posted by Soo 6604 on Thursday, November 29, 2007 7:10 PM
Somebody is smoking something and they ain't sharing.
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • 7,486 posts
Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, November 29, 2007 5:52 PM
There are two uses that it might be of value that I can come up with.  One would be an intermodal terminal and the other would be something like an auto loading facilitybut I still don't think so.
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Thursday, November 29, 2007 5:06 PM

 jeaton wrote:
Haven't heard from CShaveRR on this one yet.  Assume Carl is still on the floor, laughing, gasping for breath...

Jay, I was laughing hysterically back on Page One.  Had to knock myself out last night before normal breathing would return.  Fortunately, I didn't lose any sleep over it (and neither should you, Ed!).

Keep in mind that all of those radial tracks approaching this thing take up valuable real estate, too.  As I said, you won't find many places in the real world where trackage could be configured that way.

We generate roughly fifty different classifications in our yard--not counting any intermodal operations.  How many stalls were there in a 360-degree roundhouse?

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 964 posts
Posted by TH&B on Thursday, November 29, 2007 3:10 PM

Seriousely though what is the advantage?

 

Parallel tracks take up less room when long trains are involved.

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Near Promentory UT
  • 1,590 posts
Posted by dldance on Thursday, November 29, 2007 1:52 PM
 Semper Vaporo wrote:

How about the trouble in maintaining alignment?  Would you be able to align one straight through track at each of the 6 interfaces of the three rotating sections AND at the same time get the similar interfaces to align on the other 2 intersecting lines?  That is 18 interfaces to put into alignment all at the same time, then rotate one, two or all three of the parts and do it again.  Even if you could build it initially "perfect", due to the size of this thing, thermal expansion differences from one portion to another would throw everything akilter.

 

With a combination of the proper sensers, computers, and something like a power switch machine, final alignment may be the easiest of the multitude of problems to solve.  The basic problems are are the physics - mass and inertia. (RR management inertia as well.)

dd

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • 7,486 posts
Posted by ndbprr on Thursday, November 29, 2007 1:15 PM
First comes the idea.  The rest is just engineering details.  The big problem is railroads that do not have foresight or try new things easily.  The response accross the board will be, "We've never done that before".
  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Iowa
  • 3,293 posts
Posted by Semper Vaporo on Thursday, November 29, 2007 12:26 PM

How about the trouble in maintaining alignment?  Would you be able to align one straight through track at each of the 6 interfaces of the three rotating sections AND at the same time get the similar interfaces to align on the other 2 intersecting lines?  That is 18 interfaces to put into alignment all at the same time, then rotate one, two or all three of the parts and do it again.  Even if you could build it initially "perfect", due to the size of this thing, thermal expansion differences from one portion to another would throw everything akilter.

 

Semper Vaporo

Pkgs.

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Thursday, November 29, 2007 11:22 AM

 Although I'm not advocating for this thing it does seem that they did some creative engineering to design it. Rather than scaling up locomotive turntable technology they propose to build the two rotating rings on a set of flanged wheels powered by traction motors and running on concentric circles of crane type rail. I agree with the sentiment that the the system seems like a maintenance nightmare. The total diameter for the one they want build in New Jersey is 1000 feet. I wonder if the cost of building it (estimated at approx. $220 million)would be cheaper than a conventional yard of similiar capacity (taking into account real estate costs)?

 How big would a model be in HO or N scale?

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,026 posts
Posted by tree68 on Thursday, November 29, 2007 9:27 AM

Just stopped back in to see how the discourse was going when one of those random thoughts struck me with regard to this idea.

 

 

 

Rubik's Cube....

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Rockton, IL
  • 4,821 posts
Posted by jeaton on Thursday, November 29, 2007 9:11 AM

Haven't heard from CShaveRR on this one yet.  Assume Carl is still on the floor, laughing, gasping for breath...

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Sunny (mostly) San Diego
  • 1,920 posts
Posted by ChuckCobleigh on Thursday, November 29, 2007 7:34 AM

From the classic movie The Graduate:

Mr. Robinson:   Ben, this idea seems pretty half-baked.

Ben:                    Oh no, sir.   It's completely baked.

I think that just about says it all. 

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • 9,265 posts
Posted by edblysard on Thursday, November 29, 2007 6:02 AM

Yeah Mark,

It's got me sweating bullets already....Wink [;)]

 

Rrnut282...Mike, that's pretty much how it happens now.

The road power pull into the receiving yard, cuts off his train, runs through the yard and begins to double up his outbounds.

If he has time left to work, he might get back out of the terminal...if he is short on time, his replacement crew is usually waiting for him.

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: South Dakota
  • 1,592 posts
Posted by Dakguy201 on Thursday, November 29, 2007 5:56 AM

The proposed site for the pilot facility is Tremley Point NJ.  I took a look at that area with Google Earth, and it is a massive petrochemical complex, rivaling Texas City in size.  It would seem almost certain that what they are going to sort is almost exclusively hazmat flammables.

The land itself appears to be coastal wetlands, although I wasn't sure from the web site.

Right, they only need $200 million to build the pilot.  It ought to be a slam-dunk!  NOT! 

 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 2,535 posts
Posted by KCSfan on Thursday, November 29, 2007 4:01 AM
 edblysard wrote:

HA ha ha ha haaaaaa....

No, wait,  uh...ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa....

 

Ok, I got it.....man, for a second I thought Futuremodal had found a buyer....

This is about as nonsensical a concept as I have seen in a long time.

As pointed out, if the table breaks, you're shut down till it gets fixed.

And all the cars entering the table, or yard for that matter would have to be pre-blocked in big groups for this to function efficiently...single car switching on this would take hours.

 

Oh well, at least someone is taking a idea and trying to make it work...but with railroading, as Larry already pointed out, KISS works best.  

Hi Ed,

The damn contraption will put you out of work - better start looking for another job. LOL

On the other hand it might be wise to keep your yard trackage as a back up when those Houston rains flood the turntable pit and short circuit the whole thing.

Mark

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 2,535 posts
Posted by KCSfan on Thursday, November 29, 2007 3:58 AM
 edblysard wrote:

HA ha ha ha haaaaaa....

No, wait,  uh...ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa....

 

Ok, I got it.....man, for a second I thought Futuremodal had found a buyer....

This is about as nonsensical a concept as I have seen in a long time.

As pointed out, if the table breaks, you're shut down till it gets fixed.

And all the cars entering the table, or yard for that matter would have to be pre-blocked in big groups for this to function efficiently...single car switching on this would take hours.

 

Oh well, at least someone is taking a idea and trying to make it work...but with railroading, as Larry already pointed out, KISS works best.  

Hi Ed,

The damn contraption will put you out of work - better start looking for another job. LOL

Mark

  • Member since
    April 2002
  • From: Nashville TN
  • 1,306 posts
Posted by Wdlgln005 on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:52 PM

Actually, this idea already works. Anyone here been to the B&O Museum? The TT is enclosed under ths big roof. I doubt if the TT moves very fast. At least the pit is covered so a visitor can't fall in.
What I don't know is how many of the cars/locos have been repaired since the roof collapse?

Now how's this for an idea: suppose a facility could be built like a stadium with a big dome roof? All the space with no posts/supports in the way? All the glass to supply some light/heat?  

 

 

 

Glenn Woodle
  • Member since
    April 2006
  • 356 posts
Posted by youngengineer on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:26 PM

This system misses the real issue, the issue in a yard is not switching cars, its capacity for in bound and outbound trains, there are only so many track coming in to and out of a yard. Even if you switch the cars faster, you still have to get the trains out. The other part hit upon in other posts is where do you put the trains while you air test them. Many a person has spent countless hours agonizing over how to run a yard more efficently and I'm sure there are more efficent ways to run a yard, but the money, resources and land to put such new wonders just is not available.

Yard operations are not a static system easy for computers to run, there are so many more variables than just moving cars from one track to another. A derailment in this system and you shut down the whole operation, in a yard today a derailment will limit your ability to classify as many trains but will not put the whole yard out of comission till it is cleaned up. Interesting but as said earlier, not practical.

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: MP CF161.6 NS's New Castle District in NE Indiana
  • 2,148 posts
Posted by rrnut282 on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:57 PM

I would deck it to keep out the snow and ice, so when there is a problem, I would walk across the table and open a hatch to start the repairs.  One computer would be able to handle generating the cut list and operating the table.

I see this working best at a location where several lines come together already that way it's not just one way in and out and is more efficient.  It would make short work of block swapping operations.  I think the inventor sees it as a time saver as the mainline power only has make a cut and pull away.  The trackmobiles and turntable do the rest of the work letting the mainline train go on its merry way much quicker than in a flat yard.

 

Mike (2-8-2)
  • Member since
    August 2002
  • From: Along the BNSF "East End"... :-)
  • 915 posts
Posted by TimChgo9 on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:12 PM

When I first saw this thing, I was impressed....for about 2 seconds. Then, all of the negatives began to pop into my head, the first one being the sheer size of something like this. I could not wrap my brain around this thing at all.  There are far, far too many things that can go wrong, and this is not a solution, at least not for a large complex, and probably not even a small one either.  Too many moving parts, and a reliance on only one way in and out. 

Complexity breeds failure, and as Larry put it earlier.  KISS..... that always works best.  I could only imagine the size of the power plant it would take to power this thing, not to mention the size of everything else.  How would maintenance and repair crews gain access to repair something that may go wrong inside underneath the inner table. Who would want to crawl the 500 or so feet through  maintenance tunnels to get to the problem..... 

No, this goes under the heading of "What happens when someone thinks too much", or "A Solution in Search of a Problem"

"Chairman of the Awkward Squad" "We live in an amazing, amazing world that is just wasted on the biggest generation of spoiled idiots." Flashing red lights are a warning.....heed it. " I don't give a hoot about what people have to say, I'm laughing as I'm analyzed" What if the "hokey pokey" is what it's all about?? View photos at: http://www.eyefetch.com/profile.aspx?user=timChgo9
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Lewiston Idaho
  • 317 posts
Posted by pmsteamman on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 7:42 PM

Does anybody remember what happens if the handbrakes were not set and the table was not lined up? Thats right folks the big hook came out and someone got a butt ripping. Good luck cleaning up a couple cars of hazmat in the pit. 

Highball....Train looks good device in place!!
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Aledo IL
  • 1,728 posts
Posted by spokyone on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 7:30 PM
Dave is doing great, but no longer participating in the forum. He has style. A few people complained to the moderator.
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 964 posts
Posted by TH&B on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 6:45 PM

No, won't work. At first I thought maybe on some smaller scale like one car turn table. But seriously, what is the advantage to this turn table to say, flat switching or hump sorting????

 

But I still love wacky ideas. And speaking of Futuremodel, where is he at, I haven't seen him promote his "ideas" lately?

 

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 6:45 PM

Think Dan Harmon has been tinkering with that invention of his in the basement again...

"Scotty, beam me up another cross hopper car full of di-lithium crystals"

"Aye, Captain!"Laugh [(-D]

As a railroad surveyor, I want to see a yard in this country that would have the operating footprint to accomodate that thing.....huge waste of land resources, especially in an urban area. (on top of the fact that there are too many failure scenarios to render the thing useless, including the inevitable blind shove into the pit with the train biting the turntable.)

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 6:38 PM

Just thought of an improvement, folks:

they could eliminate some of those locomotives/trackmobiles/whatevers by spinning the 750-foot turntable fast enough to utilize centrifugal force to propel these 140-ton cars into the proper (and properly-aligned) track.

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Near Promentory UT
  • 1,590 posts
Posted by dldance on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 4:55 PM

15 cars is about 4 million lbs that the turntable is going to be rotating.  Just think of stopping a 15 car train with 1/2 inch precision.  Yah!

dd

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 4:09 PM

Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]

All right--I counted as many as 15 cars on that turntable.  That's 750 feet minimum diameter, or about 35 tracks wide. 

Now, where are you going to find railroad trackage that you can steer from various compass points to a common center?  Right--you'd have to acquire the land!

Just how many locomotives are going to have to give up their prime movers to power this thing?

And then there's the matter of all of the other problems previously mentioned.

Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]Laugh [(-D]

Thumbs Down [tdn] (too bad they don't have a razzberry smiley to go with this!)

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy