I walk the line

[Murphy Siding]

    Today, at t the edge of a secondary yard, a train was stopped accross the intersection.  I sat watching the train crew.  There was a row of ethanol cars.  Two switchmen were walking, one on each side of the cars, at the same pace, kind of looking under the cars.  At the end of each car, they seemed to hollar accross the couplers, as if comparing notes.  Then off they kept walking, to the next coupler, to do the same thing.  What were they looking for?

[Anonymous]

Sounds like a pair of "car knockers" to me...

[CShaveRR]

Blocking a crossing for an inspection? Car knockers wouldn't routinely do that, I don't think. Norris, do you have any idea about whether the train was entering or leaving the yard? I suspect that whoever was inspecting the train was doing so on the strength of a defect report obtained during a rollby, possibly while a newly-minted ethanol train was departing.

[tree68]

The process sounds very much like a normal "Class 1" or "Initial Terminal Test," although as Carl says, it would be highly unusual to block a street/highway to do so (unless it was actually railroad property, in which case it wouldn't matter).

The back-and-forth over the couplers also suggests to me that they were looking for something specific, either due to a roll-by or perhaps an unexpected emergency application.

One other possibility that occurs to me is that they had picked some cars up and were inspecting them, the rest of the train having been inspected previously.  It's also possible that they may have been avoiding fouling another, busier crossing at the other end of the train, with the train being too long to fit in between.

[bubbajustin]

Maybe the EOTD wasn’t picking up an air reading, and they were looking for an air line leak?

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Any 'detectors' nearby - like 'hotbox' or 'dragging equipment', etc. - that the train might have set off, and so they would have been looking for that ? 

Otherwise - since it was stopped in an unusual/ undesirable place, I too would suspect an undesired brake application = loss of train line air pressure.  So maybe they were looking for loose [?]or improperly mated [?] or disconnected 'glad hand' couplings, defects in the train line piping, some brakes that were applied but not others, etc.

- Paul North.

[jeffhergert]

I would guess they have added a block of cars and are doing their safety inspection while the air is being pumped up for the air test.  

If they are looking around the couplers, I'd bet they are checking the position of the anglecocks.  Either air isn't coming up on the rear yet, or possibly during the air test someone turned one on them.  It isn't unheard of for someone blocked by a train to turn one. 

Jeff

[mudchicken]

jeffhergert

I would guess they have added a block of cars and are doing their safety inspection while the air is being pumped up for the air test.  

If they are looking around the couplers, I'd bet they are checking the position of the anglecocks.  Either air isn't coming up on the rear yet, or possibly during the air test someone turned one on them.  It isn't unheard of for someone blocked by a train to turn one. 

Jeff

or they have a "kicker" caused by a partially closed anglecock. Being that you do NOT want to reach over or under a drawbar/coupler to get at the anglecock, I can see why they are walking opposite each other looking at the trainline air.

[edblysard]

Been there, done that...like Muddy says, looking for a closed anglecock or almost closed anglecock...and one on each side keeps the men from going into the Red Zone (three step protection)at the end of each car to check the opposite anglecock, it would require a request to enter, then a clear on the radio, makes lots of chatter, and two men make it go faster than one...they can do a quick visual check and then request Red Zone protection if they find one closed.

[wabash1]

edblysard

Been there, done that...like Muddy says, looking for a closed anglecock or almost closed anglecock...and one on each side keeps the men from going into the Red Zone (three step protection)at the end of each car to check the opposite anglecock, it would require a request to enter, then a clear on the radio, makes lots of chatter, and two men make it go faster than one...they can do a quick visual check and then request Red Zone protection if they find one closed.

Ed once I give three step they have it til released, meaning they can walk the whole train going in and out of the trains red zone with out talking to me. there is no rule that states that they must give it up right after they look at that car.  This could be a class 2 inspection at industry before leaving . the road wont be blocked very long and so they walk the set.

[edblysard]

Sure, it could be a walk set, but we dont block roads down here doing that...local law guys get itchy ticket writing hands when we do...then again, it may be one of those things that cant be helped in this instance.

No rule states you have to ask for 3 step or red zone more than once...but I like to keep reminding my engineer if I am taking a long time doing something in the zone.

[Boyd]

 Maybe they were looking for Waldo.

[wabash1]

edblysard

Sure, it could be a walk set, but we dont block roads down here doing that...local law guys get itchy ticket writing hands when we do...then again, it may be one of those things that cant be helped in this instance.

No rule states you have to ask for 3 step or red zone more than once...but I like to keep reminding my engineer if I am taking a long time doing something in the zone.

yea my conductors have had to wake me after they have taken several hours to walk a few cars.

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

mudchicken

jeffhergert

I would guess they have added a block of cars and are doing their safety inspection while the air is being pumped up for the air test.  

If they are looking around the couplers, I'd bet they are checking the position of the anglecocks.  Either air isn't coming up on the rear yet, or possibly during the air test someone turned one on them.  It isn't unheard of for someone blocked by a train to turn one. 

Jeff 

or they have a "kicker" caused by a partially closed anglecock. Being that you do NOT want to reach over or under a drawbar/coupler to get at the anglecock, I can see why they are walking opposite each other looking at the trainline air. 

To better help visualize the situation described, here's a link to a neat 'top-down' view B&W photo of couplers, the brake hoses, and the angle cocks of a pair of coupled cars at speed.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=252015 

- Paul North.

[Modelcar]

Paul_D_North_Jr

To better help visualize the situation described, here's a link to a neat 'top-down' view B&W photo of couplers

 

Just a comment on this photo....It has sure made more clear {to me}, how forces are transmitted thru the couplers {in connected position}, in connection of our coupler discussion back some weeks ago.

But why doesn't the bottom coupler {in photo}, have a coupler pin....? 

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Good catch there, Quentin ! 

Yes, it appears that the 'lift pin' has been removed, and its opening covered with a little plate that's been 'tack-welded' in 3 spots onto the surrounding top of the coupler.  That would result in this coupler's knuckle being permanently closed - there is now no way to lift the 'lock pin' to allow the knuckle's tang to rotate so that it can open, etc. as was discussed.

Since the caption indicates this photo was taken at the Monticello Railroad Museum, I'll speculate that maybe it's on a piece of equipment for which they don't want the coupler to be opened for some reason - only open the coupler of the other car, which is the top coupler in this photo, as that would be enough to separate the cars or equipment.  But that's really the same question - why would they want or need to do that ?  Only thought that comes to mind is maybe they don't have the special parts for it ?  But Type E couplers as these are stated to be are pretty much standard and interchangeable parts, so that doesn't seem to be a valid explanation.   I just don't know . . .  . . . yet.

- Paul North.

[oltmannd]

Modelcar

But why doesn't the bottom coupler {in photo}, have a coupler pin....?

It does. It's on the bottom and is pushed up by the cut lever to uncouple. You can see the cut lever on the right side of the coupler.

[tree68]

oltmannd

Modelcar

But why doesn't the bottom coupler {in photo}, have a coupler pin....?

It does. It's on the bottom and is pushed up by the cut lever to uncouple. You can see the cut lever on the right side of the coupler.

All of our passenger cars "lift" from the bottom....

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Ahhh - and that's to avoid being blocked by the diaphragm's deck plate/ walkway (or whatever else it's called) between 2 passenger cars, which would be only a couple inches above the top surface of the coupler ?

[Murphy Siding]

    Sorry.  Some people asked about more info, and I haven't made time to reply.  Did you ever try to move a huge, 100+ year old lumberyard 8 miles? Without shutting down the business?   The upside is,  I can see the BNSF line form my window, along the back property line.  The engineers have been kind enough to blow their horns, so I know when they're coming.

     The train in question works like this:  Ethanol cars are brought into town from the northwest.  The train is broken up, and stacked in 3 yard sidings south of the main yard.  When it's time for the train to ship out, it's reassembled, and ship out on tracks going northeast.

     I was looking at the south end.  It had no EOT device attatched.  I'll guess, that the crew was re-assembling the train sections to head out of town.  Since the train had been sitting there a couple days, it may have seen some attention from the local population.

[wabash1]

In the photo the pin is a engine and the other with out a pin on top is a car as all cars pins are pulled from the bottom, and also the slack is in on the cars so you can pull the pin at anytime. its not to have room for clearance its just the way it is on all cars.

[Anonymous]

These days all pins are lifted from the bottom, but in the past, they were lifted from the top.  I recall back in the 1960s, there was a mixture, but most lifted from the bottom even back then.  I do not know why they changed from top-lift pins to bottom-lift pins. 

Engine couplers lift from the top (do all of them?  I'm not sure), but I don’t think that coupler at the top of the photo is an engine.  It looks like a car from what shows of it.  If it is in a museum, it could very easily be a top-lift pin on an older antique car.  I believe all couplers that lift from the bottom have that little plate tac-welded to cover the opening for a top pin.  Apparently they make all couplers with that hole for top-lifting pins, and then cover the hole if they don't use it.  I cannot explain why engines often, if not always, use a top-lift pin.  I never thought about it before. 

I don’t know of any cases where they would permanently lock a coupler closed.  If they want that kind of connection, they replace the couplers with a solid drawbar pinned to each car.  

[tree68]

Bucyrus

I don’t know of any cases where they would permanently lock a coupler closed.  If they want that kind of connection, they replace the couplers with a solid drawbar pinned to each car.  

I've dealt with a few couplers that acted like they were permanently locked....

[Modelcar]

oltmannd

Modelcar

But why doesn't the bottom coupler {in photo}, have a coupler pin....?

It does. It's on the bottom and is pushed up by the cut lever to uncouple. You can see the cut lever on the right side of the coupler.

Yes, I do see the "cut lever" now.....I've never seen any comment or talk of the "pin" being operated from the bottom before.  I'm assuming then, that bore has to be deep enough to allow the pin to move up {without hitting the welded plate}, and disconnect the  knuckle to rotate.

[edblysard]

I'm with Wabash...the top coupler is either an engine or a caboose, ( I am betting locomotive)  the bottom one is a caboose...the plate is used to cover the cut pin hole to keep debris out, the coupler has been modofied to use the bottom opening, maybe they dont want anyone on the caboose having the ability to cut it off on the fly anymore, so they fixed it so you have to be on the ground to uncouple the car.

Makes sense if this is a tourist line...be a real pain if some kid pulled the pin while your running at track speed.

I have only seen top lift couplers on locomotives and caboose, not on freight cars.

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Amazing what has come out from just posting the link to that one photo, simply to better illustrate the anglecock position dilemma . . . Thanks to all of you for your informative and 'gentle' answers    without 'talking down' to some of us who maybe should have known better already . . .   But that what comes from you fellas looking at them most of each day, whereas I'd probably look at joint bars and turnout geometry that way instead . . .

- Paul North.

[Anonymous]

I never thought about it much, but this thread raises the question of why they converted from top-lift coupler pins to bottom-lift pins.  I don’t know the exact history, but the bottom-lift pins came into use maybe in the 1930-1940s or thereabout.  Before that, the top-lift pins were apparently the standard coupler design, going all the way back to the original Janney patent. 

 

I recall that in the late 1960s, there were still top-lift pin couplers on cars in interchange, but they were relatively rare by then.  I would say less than 10% were top-lift pin couplers.  There were some tank cars running around that were built in the 1910-1920 decade that had the top-lift pin couplers.  Also, the Milwaukee’s outside braced wooden boxcars from the 1920s were still in service, and they had top-lift pins.  Top-lift pins were notorious for not staying up when they were pulled.  Maybe that was not the case when they were new, however. 

 

Here are some photos of older cars with top-lift pins. 

 

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1671039

 

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1311735

 

http://www.midcontinent.org/collectn/woodfrt/dssa18052a.jpg

 

http://www.midcontinent.org/collectn/woodfrt/soo29667b.jpg

 

Note the FOX trucks on this car:

http://www.midcontinent.org/collectn/woodfrt/mstl4570c.jpg

 

http://www.midcontinent.org/collectn/woodfrt/dir8022b.jpg

 

http://www.midcontinent.org/collectn/woodfrt/cnw123576d.jpg

 

http://www.midcontinent.org/collectn/woodfrt/cnw96791a.jpg

 

http://www.midcontinent.org/collectn/woodfrt/dssa996a.jpg

 

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1642698

  

Ore cars may have retained the top-lift pins after the changeover due to the limited clearance to the outer wheels.  Here are some ore cars:

   

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1168727

 

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=537464

 

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1268536

 

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1718248

  

 

[edblysard]

Bottom lift creates a lot more leverage than top lift, makes it a lot easier to operate the lever, plus you can put all the cut levers on all the cars at the exact same height, about waist high.

And you answered part of it yourself, the "pin" in top lift set ups falls back a lot more easily, hence the the terms "drop the pin" or "the pin fell" came into use.

The older top lift also didn't have the thrower hook, so every knuckle had to be opened by hand...and with the top lift, when kicking or humping cars, some one had to walk along side the car holding the lever up to make sure the seperation worked...with the bottom lift, you know the instant you lift it up if the pin locked in the release position.

Last, but not in the least I am sure...the weight and leverage of the bottom mount lever helps pull the pin back down once the thrower hook bumps the pin off it's locked position when the knuckles close.

[Deggesty]

Paul_D_North_Jr

Amazing what has come out from just posting the link to that one photo, simply to better illustrate the anglecock position dilemma . . . Thanks to all of you for your informative and 'gentle' answers    without 'talking down' to some of us who maybe should have known better already . . .   But that what comes from you fellas looking at them most of each day, whereas I'd probably look at joint bars and turnout geometry that way instead . . .

- Paul North.

And, I have lifted a few pins myself (more than 35 years ago)--and never noticed that the action was from below and not from above.

Johnny

[edblysard]

Funny, I look at joint bars also...but for different reason that you would...I have a piece of stick rail, rolled in 1919, and another rolled in 1923, both 90lbs, with compromise joint bars joining them to 113lb rail rolled in 1953, and we go over this section of track several time a day on weekends with tank cars full of awful stuff.

Man, that 90lb rail looks really reall small compared to the rest of the track.