I didn't get to read the links yet, but some more stuff about this. First, as one poster asked, yes, NS has some ECP-equipped trains, such as the coal trains that have been coming into the plant for the past 3/4 year. Crews in the plant's yard have problems with the connections a number of times, and trains have been kept from leaving the plant in any decent amount of time on these occasions, thanks to such issues. It seems that the engineer can get all the car numbers at the locos, but if the equipment ain't working right, the cars aren't sequencing correctly, and he may have varying numbers of cars showing up in his consist. It's a huge pain when the crews have to start checking every single connection as a desperate last resort. I also hear of the hoppers having batteries on them, if I understand it correctly.
It had also been somewhat common for the crews to have to turn the engines around at the trio of switches outside of town a number of times during dumping coal from the ECP trains, but I don't know enough to have a clue why.
I also wonder, can ECP recharge the train line AND all air reservoirs while keeping the brakes applied? Would it be realistic to assume some day that with all the abilities of ECP already, that retainers could be automatically set/released from the same system, further improving braking abilities? Also, could some kind of modification be possible to make sure that, at the very least, the emergency air reservoir is never depleted below a certain point (still allowing effective emergency braking)?
And as I understand it, if the ECP fails, you still have air braking. If you have problems with your air, ECP can still handle all the car braking. So, it's also a backup system, right? And if you have a kink in the air hose that would stop normal application of the brakes, ECP could still force the brakes to apply on all the cars, right? Thanks.
kolechovski I didn't get to read the links yet, but some more stuff about this. First, as one poster asked, yes, NS has some ECP-equipped trains, such as the coal trains that have been coming into the plant for the past 3/4 year. Crews in the plant's yard have problems with the connections a number of times, and trains have been kept from leaving the plant in any decent amount of time on these occasions, thanks to such issues. It seems that the engineer can get all the car numbers at the locos, but if the equipment ain't working right, the cars aren't sequencing correctly, and he may have varying numbers of cars showing up in his consist. It's a huge pain when the crews have to start checking every single connection as a desperate last resort. I also hear of the hoppers having batteries on them, if I understand it correctly. It had also been somewhat common for the crews to have to turn the engines around at the trio of switches outside of town a number of times during dumping coal from the ECP trains, but I don't know enough to have a clue why. I also wonder, can ECP recharge the train line AND all air reservoirs while keeping the brakes applied? Would it be realistic to assume some day that with all the abilities of ECP already, that retainers could be automatically set/released from the same system, further improving braking abilities? Also, could some kind of modification be possible to make sure that, at the very least, the emergency air reservoir is never depleted below a certain point (still allowing effective emergency braking)? And as I understand it, if the ECP fails, you still have air braking. If you have problems with your air, ECP can still handle all the car braking. So, it's also a backup system, right? And if you have a kink in the air hose that would stop normal application of the brakes, ECP could still force the brakes to apply on all the cars, right? Thanks.
Re- your questions:
I also wonder, can ECP recharge the train line AND all air reservoirs while keeping the brakes applied?
Yes.
Would it be realistic to assume some day that with all the abilities of ECP already, that retainers could be automatically set/released from the same system, further improving braking abilities?
The graduated release attribute of ECP brakes can accomplish what retainers do, so you don’t need retainers.
Also, could some kind of modification be possible to make sure that, at the very least, the emergency air reservoir is never depleted below a certain point (still allowing effective emergency braking)?
I have wondered about that. It would stop the train if there were deemed insufficient reservoir pressure. But that would be a difficult determination. The system would know the reservoir pressure, but it would also have to know the speed and the location of the train in relation to track geometry. It is all doable, but may not be worth it if p-ing away the air is almost impossible as they imply.
And as I understand it, if the ECP fails, you still have air braking. If you have problems with your air, ECP can still handle all the car braking. So, it's also a backup system, right?
I believe you would still have air braking if the ECP failed, but not the other way around. That question and answer needs more exploration.
And if you have a kink in the air hose that would stop normal application of the brakes, ECP could still force the brakes to apply on all the cars, right?
So, after reading a bunch of documentation, the ECP brakes were mainly applied to coal trains, and it seems that unit trains will be the easy part of the conversion. But after that, wouldn't double-stacks (and perhaps all intermodal) make sense? I'd think that transforming all those cars and the locos that usually lead them would make it a decent choice to convert those next, especially with the changing from one railroad to another that often happens, it would seem that all railroads would try to jump on that part of the change at about the same time with that equipment. Double-stacks are also quite heavy, and I'd think that they would see significant boost in performance from ECP to make them a natural next choice for the conversion.
Would all railroads want to make the change to ECP, or would this mainly be to Class 1 and 2 railroads? Would small trains really see any benefit of ECP? Would shortlines that run them be better off not messing with the conversion until the end? In other words, would it be best for them to wait for all major railroads to have completed the conversions to ECP and have set the stage, then go about swiftly converting their entire train fleets at once? And with ECP, would it be best for railroads in hilly/mountainous regions to push for the conversion sooner than flat-road ones, both to maximize the benefit ASAP and since they often have equipment geared toward the hilly terrain (making it less of an obstacle of ECP and non-ECP trains bleeding together)?
Finally, I notice that sometimes the coal trains that come into the local plant have to go turn around the locos at the switches outside of town. What would be the reasons necessary for such a turn-around?
kolechovski So, after reading a bunch of documentation, the ECP brakes were mainly applied to coal trains, and it seems that unit trains will be the easy part of the conversion. But after that, wouldn't double-stacks (and perhaps all intermodal) make sense? I'd think that transforming all those cars and the locos that usually lead them would make it a decent choice to convert those next, especially with the changing from one railroad to another that often happens, it would seem that all railroads would try to jump on that part of the change at about the same time with that equipment. Double-stacks are also quite heavy, and I'd think that they would see significant boost in performance from ECP to make them a natural next choice for the conversion. Would all railroads want to make the change to ECP, or would this mainly be to Class 1 and 2 railroads? Would small trains really see any benefit of ECP? Would shortlines that run them be better off not messing with the conversion until the end? In other words, would it be best for them to wait for all major railroads to have completed the conversions to ECP and have set the stage, then go about swiftly converting their entire train fleets at once? And with ECP, would it be best for railroads in hilly/mountainous regions to push for the conversion sooner than flat-road ones, both to maximize the benefit ASAP and since they often have equipment geared toward the hilly terrain (making it less of an obstacle of ECP and non-ECP trains bleeding together)? Finally, I notice that sometimes the coal trains that come into the local plant have to go turn around the locos at the switches outside of town. What would be the reasons necessary for such a turn-around?
Most of what you state in your 1st 2 paragraphs makes sense to me, esp. when you look at how the industry has done similar conversions over its history - I'm thinking roller bearings as an example. No doubt there will be a phase-in period when the usually random collection of cars in a manifest or general freight train willl be a hodge-podge of cars both with and without ECP brakes. I don't see the railroads or the yard guys changing their blocking patterns too much so as to put all the ECP cars together - that'll just eventually and naturally happen as the percentage of ECP cars in the fleet approaches near to 100 %.
Short lines might not have to convert anything, other than their cars that go off-line. If they choose not to use the ECP feature - even when cars that have it are on their line - then they need not even equip a single loco with it. That would depend on how long their trains are, how steep and long the grades are, etc. I'm sure there are some that will benefit, and some that won't.
I think every Class I has at least 1 significant mountain grade - see Al Krug's list of "Major Railroad Grades" at: http://www.alkrug.vcn.com/rrfacts/grades.htm
But ECP might be more useful and of benefit by providing better train-handling characteristics in territory with an undulating profile of "hogbacks", or high-speed service when a fast brake application is sometimes necessary, etc. I'll defer to any of the experts for more insight on that.
Finally - likely reasons to turn-around the coal train locos at the switches outside of town:
1) Since ECP is still experimental, not all locos are equipped with the control gear - probably the lead unit only, and none of the trailers. So to keep the lead unit as the manned control unit on the front and headed in the right direction, they have to turn it;
2) DPU controls - if used on these trains ? maybe not at the plant, but elsewhere on the run ? Same rationale - only on the leading unit;
3) Signal equipment - only the lead unit has the right signal equipment for the old PRR and/ or B&O signals that these trains might encounter on their runs ?
4) Crew preferences for either controls - old stand style preferred vs. new "desktop" type, and/ or other misc. equipment - the type of toilet in the unit, other amenities such as AC, heater, microwave , railroad radios, FRED equipment, etc.
Maybe someone else can enlighten us on any other possible reasons ?
- Paul North.
ECP is no longer experimental. There are entire railways equipped with it such as SPOORNET in South Africa. It works fine.
The questions around ECP in North America, with a shared network instead of a closed network, are financial: Who will pay for it, and who will realize the cash benefits. That's a very difficult question to answer, because while the cost is known, the benefit is highly variable. Some days an ECP trainset might have a 3% fuel savings. Other days the same train will see no fuel benefit at all as the traffic on the railway varies and its meet-pass and speed events change.
A shipper doesn't want to pay for the ECP on his unit-train sets or cars unless he sees benefit in his rates. A railway isn't going to pay for ECP on a shipper-provided car unless it sees benefit in its costs.
There's no easy resolution to this problem.
RWM
Well, yes, I did intend to say that ECP is still "experimental" in the technical sense - even if it's now in the Beta" test or "roll-out" stage - based on the technical difficulties related earlier in this thread.
But even if ECP is no longer experimental in the technical sense, it would appear to still be experimental in its acceptance in both the institutional and economical senses, as RWM's comments illustrate. This appears to be another case of a dichotomy of internal dis-economies (costs) and external economies (benefits) - or vice-versa - for the railroads, the cars' owners, and the shippers, respectively. Again, kind of like the roller-bearing application debate. The key will be to get these parties better aligned in their economic interests - however that might occur.
How well undertood and applicable to U.S. practice is the cost and savings data (if any) from the SPOORNET usage of ECP ? Does it point to any resolution of the problem ? Will the ECP prototype testing by BNSF and NS (and others ?) be useful to provide North American data points for the costs and benefits, so that useful discussions can occur between the respective parties ?
Otherwise, the only easy resolution I can see is to appoint you or me as a "czar of ECP implementation" . . . unless we can convince the government that it's a worthy "stimulus" project with the added bonus of energy-saving benefits ????
RWM, quick, say something! You're one post away from 2000!
Can you see a railroad, once it has realized a cost savings from trains fully equipped with ECP brakes, putting a surcharge on trains of private companies (I'm thinking of power companies here) that don't convert their cars, based on those savings?
From my readings, I seem to remember that in the early days of air brakes (slightly before my time), that an effort was occasionally made to put the air-equipped cars next to the engine to get full advantage of them.
I think it's just going to have to be mandated, with a deadline date--much like the reflectorized visibility stripes.
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)
A question or three occurs to me as I read through this thread -
Can straight air and ECP be mixed?
Could a railroad, as an interim measure, run pass-through cables on cars not yet equipped with the system?
Would that even be desirable?
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...
CShaveRRRWM, quick, say something! You're one post away from 2000! Can you see a railroad, once it has realized a cost savings from trains fully equipped with ECP brakes, putting a surcharge on trains of private companies (I'm thinking of power companies here) that don't convert their cars, based on those savings? From my readings, I seem to remember that in the early days of air brakes (slightly before my time), that an effort was occasionally made to put the air-equipped cars next to the engine to get full advantage of them. I think it's just going to have to be mandated, with a deadline date--much like the reflectorized visibility stripes.
"Something". I'm done!
(Two thousand? I want a recount! The number is too high! I really have made that many posts?)
To answer your question, maybe.
On an open network the cost savings must account for highly variable cars, volumes, and operations, vs. a closed network with fixed and predictible cars, volumes, and operations. The cost savings are significant for a closed network but marginal for an open network -- assuming the cost estimate is even valid, which is a huge "if." Too many assumptions involved. Hard to assign probabilities of accuracy to the assumptions.
Somewhere there's an economic case for ECP, but perhaps it is not here yet. History may be a guide. It took 40 years after roller bearings and aluminum car bodies were introduced into the freight car fleet before they became standard or widespread. Things changed and made both technologies more attractive, such as labor costs going up and weight limits going up.
Time is on the side of ECP. Fuel and track capacity costs will probably rise much faster than the cost of ECP implementation. The economic case will eventually become a sure-enough thing that it happens in a hurry. I don't know when, but 10 years might be a reasonable watershed. Highly unlikely in the next 6-7 years.
From one of my posts yesterday (emphasis added):
Now it's been clarified that ECP is no longer experimental. Further, what I was really attempting to say anyway was that there isn't much of the ECP control equipment out there on North American railroads yet (nor on NS either). So, it's likely that only a few locomotives are equipped with it - such as the "leader" in these instances - and that's why the consist is being turned, to keep the same loco leading.
- PDN.
I was wondering about the costs of retro-fitting ECP to the current car fleet. Here's what I found in the FRA's May 2006 Final study by Booz-Allen-Hamilton that was referenced by Bucyrus in his post back on 02-13-2009, pages III-1 and III-2 (Pages 27 and 28 of 78) at:
http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/ecp_report_20060811.pdf
Estimated cost of converting a locomotive: $40,000
Estimated cost of converting a car: $4,000 to $5,000
Estimated added cost of building a new car with ECP only: $3,000
Notably, the long-run maintenance costs for the ECP system are not expected to be significantly different as compared to conventional air brakes (footnote 24 on page III-1, Page 27 of 78). "Booz Allen discussions with Quebec Cartier Mining, which has been running heavy-haul ECP trains of up to 180 cars in North America since 1998 – including in harsh winter conditions – confirm this conclusion." (Id.; emphasis added - PDN.)
It looks like both that FRA study and the other article referenced by Bucyrus are worth further review . . .
Well, the savings in fuel and time should still be significant enough to make it well worth it (like with powerbraking, not having to slow down much below the speed limit and reaccelerate, etc.). Plus, those cars shouldn't be getting banged around so much, so mainenance costs on those cars should be lower overall, even if the brakes don't get much savings.
About a few questions asked a few posts back, from what I hear, I don't think ECP and non-ECP cars can be mixed. But I have many takes and questions on this...
If it can't be mixed, but a train contains both, could all the ECP cars run on the front, with the non-ECP on the back, and just the ECP cars get the benefits?
In the above situation, if a train has wireless-signalled ECP, could the reverse be done, so cars on the rear get the ECP benefits (as they'd need it more), while the front cars get standard air brakes, and allow more even braking throughout the train?
If ECP and non-ECP can't go together at all, could the non-ECP cars, if small enough in number, just be placed on the end, with no air at all (and just have the last ECP car be called the "end"? If air could be run through the final cars, even to any extent, could an EOTD still effectively be placed and run on the rear?
As for the pass-through cables idea, I'd think that would be a good idea if it's cheap enough to do until the conversions can be made, especially with cars that would get swapped among the railroads a lot, so trains with ECP can still grab them easily and use the ECP where applicable. Too bad I'm not one of the guys who knows for sure if this would be good or not. Just my $.02.
maybe use of DPU control of ECP will enable the ECP placed where ever is best for the braking of any train?.
On most cars with ECP, it seems to be an overlay over the conventional air brake equipment. They can be operated in either mode. I think at first most existing cars will have an ECP overlay added. If all the cars can be ECP operated, and the locomotive is ECP equipped, the train will run in the ECP mode. If at least one car or the lead engine isn't ECP equipped, the train will be run in the conventional mode.
Eventually when most equipment is ECP capable a date will be set, like with air brakes and couplers, when only ECP equipped cars will be accepted in interchange. Cars that don't have ECB will either be upgraded or scrapped.
Our rule says you have to have all one or the other mode. Probably because you can only control one type or the other at one time, plus of air brake testing rules. The requirements aren't the same for ECP and conventional air brakes.
Jeff
There is one lingering question I have, a minor one though. ECP would allow a train line to recharge and remain fully charged without releasing the brakes. Would each of the service resevoirs also get this benefit?
Yes. The service reservoirs are constantly being supplied with air from the train line. There may be a temporary drop in reservoir pressure due to air going to the brake cylinder, but it will be replenished even with the brakes applied. How fast air is replenished would depend on how long the train is.
kolechovski There is one lingering question I have, a minor one though. ECP would allow a train line to recharge and remain fully charged without releasing the brakes. Would each of the service resevoirs also get this benefit?
With conventional air brakes, the trainline serves two functions, one is to supply air to the reservoirs on each car, and the other is to control the air between the reservoirs and brake cylinders on each car. With ECP, the trainline has only one function, which is to supply the air. The control function is handled electrically. By separating the supply function from the control function, the control function can be enhanced with more functionality such as graduated release.
In this whole discussion, what surprised me the most was to learn that batteries are carried on each car to provide power for the control valve.
But the air still has to go through the service reservoir to get to the brake cyclinder, right? Or is there now a direct connection from the train line to the brake cylinder available with ECP? And with graduated release given by ECP, will railcars made new even be equipped with retainers anymore? After all, they'd be useless now, right?
kolechovski But the air still has to go through the service reservoir to get to the brake cyclinder, right? Or is there now a direct connection from the train line to the brake cylinder available with ECP? And with graduated release given by ECP, will railcars made new even be equipped with retainers anymore? After all, they'd be useless now, right?
The service reservoirs and brake cylinders have the same relationship to each other with ECP that they have with conventional air brakes. But with conventional brakes, a pneumatically controlled valve allowed air to move from the reservoirs to the brake cylinder. Whereas, with ECP brakes, an electrically controlled valve replaces the pneumatically controlled valve of conventional brakes.
With ECP brakes, the graduated release function can perform the function of retainers. Retainers are a way to overcome the inability of conventional air brakes to allow graduated release. I may be wrong, but I thought retainers were still on all freight cars, and could be used if needed.
Someplace - either earlier in this thread, or in one of the referenced documents (more likely) - I read that (and its seems to follow, from my understanding of its operation):
Once ECP is universal (at least to a specific unit train or operation, if not to the interchange railroad world at large), then retainers will no longer be needed, as the ECP will perform that function.
However, in the meantime retainers will be needed for when ECP-equipped cars might be mixed into a non-ECP train and the use of the retainers is desired or necessary. But let's see if someone with more qualifications or knowledge of this can elaborate.
Freight cars still have retainers. I don't think they get used as much anymore. Dynamic braking has done a lot to eliminate their usage. There still are guidelines for how many retainers to set for the times when dynamic brakes won't be enough.
The only times I have dealt with retainers is to turn them back to the exhaust position after getting hit by a hot box detector.
I felt it important to revive this topic, due to a very interesting night last night. While occasional ECP problems have come and gone, and crews have responded to them for the most part, there are still some interesting issues about it.
First, yesterday, a crew ran a couple engines around the switches outside of town. I didn't get to listen to them, and I have been having major issues that simply popup for no reason with my scanner, forcing me to miss a lot of conversations. Anyhow, that evening, when I finally got some audio, I found out that the conductor was pretty *** about her train being held up so much due to a block truck doing something to the cars that was damaging to the connections. Although the train had been pretty much put together and was almost ready to leave, the problems detecting the train, caused by damage, along with other unusual conditions at the yard that nobody had communicated to them about (like cars being cut out with no explanation). The train didn't get to leave that day, and they had to clear up the runner for an incoming train. They continued to fight with the problems well into the night.
Around 3 AM, the incoming train made it into town. I really wanted to be at the crossing to catch it, but was too late getting there. I soon heard a radio transmission between the engineers on both ends of the train, wondering what had happened (the train went into emergency). Looking out the window, I saw the first 2 locomotives stuck on the crossing in town, blocking it completely. After quite a while of failed attempts at getting going again, the crew was able to back the train up enough to clear the crossing, call on the road foreman (who had already made the trip out here to deal with the problems of the first train), and have him stop at the crossing and help out.
I was able to use this to get a bunch of night shots until my memory was full (I only had room for a little over a dozen pics). While I was driving about to the different crossings, I had seen the conductor having walked back much of teh train. In fact, it wasn't until after 5 AM that the problem with the inbound train was fixed, and it went on into the plant. The conductor had been checking over each of the cars carefully the whole time. Due to more radio trouble, I didn't get to hear most of the conversation, but I did her the engineers trying numerous different operating modes, etc.
While the ECP thing has come a long ways, it clearly still has some issues to work out, and some workmen people also need trained on proper car handling to avoid damagaing the ECP equipment. Does anyone have any ideas/weigh in on the possible issues that happened with these 2 trains? BTW, after the inbound cleared up the runner, the first train finally made it out. Once again, I was a bit too late to meet it at the crossings for some dawn shots.
Info about these trains. Inbound was 560. The lead loco was NS 7659, with 7652 trailing it. I can't identify the 2 rear locos, but they may have been 7646 with 7650 on the end. Track Authority # 98, with Box 2 checked, from Saltsburg to Shelocta on main track, limits were cleared at 5:48 AM, 3/17/10 by conductor Yoho (spelling?).
The departing train was 561, lead loco NS 7647, TA# 99, south at Shelocta, Box 2 checked, from Shelocta to Saltsburg on main track, blocked, recorded, and correctly repeated at 6:08 AM, 3/17/10, conductor Schneider (spelling?), dispatcher JAP.
"Training"! Having spent 33-years in the U S Army, I truly hate that word, but it is necessary. Usually, "Training" is the tail-wagging-the dog. On the BNSF, we have been using Distributed Power for over ten years. We still have crews that can't make a proper link-up. Are they dumb, or just lack "school-housing"? Dunno, me, fur sure. Darn! I sure hate it when a UP unit is in the consist and has the cab signals activated. Our crews will spend eight hours on the phone with the Mechanical Desk and then "go dead" on the hog law. Sorry, Matt and Warren, but that's how it be!
BNSF also did some "downsizing" of the Dispatching personnel. They extended their areas and a lot of them have never "been on the ground" to conceptionalize (is that a word?) what they are dealing with. Nothing beats "been there, seen that", as far as a DS is concerned. "Penny wise, ..." The 'troops' need to know the territory!
I love the concept of ECB, but the 'troops' need to be trained. Do it locally, instead of Alliance or Fort Worth, and do it often!
Hays -- Shelby, MT. A BRK-B (né: BNI) shareholder, and general pain....
Are you sure those trains were ECP equipped?
From your descriptions it sounds like ordinary, every day air problems.
Present air brake systems, when they work as designed are almost forgotten about. When there are problems more complex than separated air hoses, air brake systems can be very vexing and hard to isolate the problems and correct them. Every once in a while there gets assembled at train from hell, that has nothing but trouble and can seemingly take forever to get across the road with multiple recrews involved and making the trip that is normally done by a single crew.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Yeah, both trains were certainly ECP (the crews had even said so), though this line still runs a mix of ECP and conventional. I had been surprised to learn that there still were conventional coal trains left on NS. I wonder if they're comparing results from the 2 types in doing so?
For the outbound train, the ''block truck'' is the Mechanical Dept. carmen and their support vehicle. [On my 'to-do' list is to get a photo of one and post it here, now that I know how to do that - they are a 'serious' truck, and conveniently there's one that 'lives' next to a public road at the nearby NS Allentown Yard. Maybe this week yet . . . ] They would have likely been there only if there was an issue of some kind with the cars - typically a minor derailment, and that some cars were ''cutout'' tends to support that - although it could mean that it was either the ECP or the conventional brake system on them that was 'cut out' instead. The block truck could have been there for other reasons, though, such as other brake problems, changing brake shoes, fixing broken grab irons, a defective coupler, routine inspections, etc. Wild speculation on my part is that in rerailing a car - or when it derailed - the ECP connector got mangled. Unless they have the training and special parts to repair/ replace it, they're out of luck, and the ECP system would have been disabled. Otherwise, BaltACD's explanantion makes as much sense as any to me - I don't believe we've been having any weird or abnormally cold or wet weather out that way that could have caused ice in the air lines, etc., although I suppose that if those cars have been sitting for a week or two after the recent heavy snow storms, then that explanation is more plausible.
Yes, I understand that both NS and BNSF are essentially continuing 'field trials' of the ECP system on selected trains and routes, and that its adoption/ deployment is not yet widespread or universal. That is precisely for to compare the 2 types, and to work out the 'bugs' in the ECP system - which it appears still needs some more work . . . Remember what Henry Ford famously said - ''Pioneering don't pay''. (I don't necessarily agree with that all the time, but I know what he meant - and this might be an example of that.)
As promised, a photo of a NS 'block truck' at the Allentown Yard from about 1:25 PM on Thurs., 18 March 2010:
If you study this photo carefully, you'll see about all that you really need to see to understand it - note the 2 coupler knuckles on the rear bumper, the wire mesh basket containing a collection of hardwood blocks for rerailing - hence its name, an air hose and reel, a lubricating hose, the top of a blue Miller electric welding unit, a supply of replacement brakeshoes, a towing cable and hook at the rear, several lockable tool and supply cabinets, and of course a heavy-duty Palflinger jib crane. Note that it does not have hi-rail wheels ! About the only other relevant thing that I saw in a front view is a pair of 'camel-hump' type rerailers mounted in slots on the front bumper, as the knuckles are on the rear bumper. It is also 'plugged in' to a manifold heater for sure starts on those cold mornings/ nights.
One of the primary functions of the conventional air brake is to control slack. Electronic control takes care of this. Transit trains have had electronic control since the 60'l and its been taken for granted for a long time. The electronic coupling problem is taken care of by the electric portion of the mechanical coupler. One actuator does it all. Putting an electric portion on a standard freight couple poses a problem but on dedicated ECP trains a transit type coupler would be quite feasible. It would need to be a little stronger but since ECP eliminates slack run in and run out, this could probably be handled.
Broad application of ECP freight brakes impacts draft gear requierments as well.
Those that would argue about the usefulness or lack therof in ECP break systems, I offer this link to a story from Railway Gazette referencing the "New' Fortescue Metals Group Railway in the Pilbara Region of NW Australia. They are obviously believers in it for their "heavyhaul' line (40tonnes per axle). The story is rather interesting.
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/10/fortescue-opens-the-worlds-heaviest-haul-railway/browse/10.html
Thanks a lot for the pic of the block truck. I am still surprised that it lacks rail gear.
While ECP is here to stay, and I believe will be adopted into almost everything eventually, it clearly has a few issues, though now, most seems to be in the handling. For a while, the trains have been pretty much running uneventful, with the occasional turnaround at the switches outside of town. I'm still nto sure why they have to do that on occasion, but not all the time. Then again, the trains also come at night, and there's been much locomotive variety, so their types might be having something to do with the occasional power spin.
While I'm thinking about it, I've heard ECP trains go into emergency a couple times. It is easy to notice how much more uniform it is applying on the ECPs, as compared with it clearly running through conventional trains.
Also while I'm thinking about it, at what point does a penalty kick in?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.