As I'm studying here, this literally just came to me. How does one use a unit like an E or an F to do switching, even a few passenger cars? Does the engr just rely on his/her ground crew to guide him/her safely, or...?
Nance-CCABW/LEI
“Even if you are on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there.” --Will Rogers
Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right! --unknown
WMNB4THRTL As I'm studying here, this literally just came to me. How does one use a unit like an E or an F to do switching, even a few passenger cars? Does the engr just rely on his/her ground crew to guide him/her safely, or...?
Yep.
I remember a story in Trains some time back about a Santa Fe crew doing some switching on a local with something like an A-B-B-A set - and possibly even more units than that.
Of course, this was more of a challenge in the days before radio...
This past summer we were stuck with a single F for our local trips. I tell people it's like backing a package delivery truck.... One direction was always a "push" move, with a crew member on the leading end advising the engineer back in the locomotive that the track was clear.
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...
Sometimes it was done with mirrors. At other times, one or the other of the head-end crew would be working with his head well outside the window to catch signals. Otherwise, it's pretty much as Larry says, when the crew is radio-equipped.
I worked as a fireman on an E8 once (or was it an E9, Jim? One of the cab units we got from the UP and numbered into the 500s). As such, I was watching my side of the unit as we backed up from 40th Street to Cal Avenue, and was on the ground to make the joint when we tied onto our coaches (I'm glad I didn't have to make all of the hoses and cables, because I didn't know how). Form there it was easy--the unit was still backing up, but we were in the cab car.
Never had to work an F unit in all of my time in the yard or on various transfer runs.
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)
CShaveRRSometimes it was done with mirrors.
Add a little smoke and it sounds like railroading is magic!
Good one, Larry. It's funny but it is a bit shy of hi-LARRY-ous!
Except when maybe coupling up a single engine (and even then sometimes with the long hood end) you're relying on your condr/brakeman/switchman to be your eyes. So no matter what kind of engine, cab unit, hood, or switcher, how hard you hit when making the joint a few cars back kind of depends on the experience of the guy at the joint. Also, how mad he is at you, if you know what I mean.
Sometimes, if the coupling is made on a slight curve to the engr's side you might be able to watch the cars come together. If the lighting conditions are right, you might be able to watch the shadows as you get close. Still, if it's a ways back it's hard to tell exactly how close you are. You still need that person back there.
Jeff
jeffhergertSo no matter what kind of engine, cab unit, hood, or switcher, how hard you hit when making the joint a few cars back kind of depends on the experience of the guy at the joint.
Not to mention how the engineer runs. With some we give five feet at ten, others you have to coax in - "...need another two feet..."
Sir Tree:Have you guys received your RS-18u yet?
Dan
CNW 6000 Sir Tree:Have you guys received your RS-18u yet?
They'll looks something like this when painted:
I found it:http://www.canadianrailwayobservations.com/2011/mar11/mar11cn.htm(Tiny plug for me as the first picture in this issue! WOO HOO!)
ADIX 1835 last reported placed in interchange at Buffalo, NY via CN at 2:40 AM on 2/24, per a friend.
Larry, I guess that meets the qualifications for being the antithesis of the Warbonnet! I love that paint scheme, complete with the nod to the NYC with the number on the long hood.
CShaveRR [snipped] 3. I finally got a good look at the mainline shift toward the east end of Proviso. A new bridge was built over Mud Creek, and the trackage shifted slightly northward onto it. There is now enough room under the IHB bridge for the third track. There is some major pile-driving taking place in this area, and I'm wondering whether this will be a flyover linking the yard directly to the IHB without involving the main line.
I get this location for it from ACME Mapper 2.0: N 41.89163 W 87.86957
About midway between the Bellwood and Melrose Park commuter stops; bounded on the west by US 12/ US 20/ US 45, on the east by 25th St., on the south by St. Charles Rd., and on the north by Lake St. (FWIW, the USGS Topo map calls the stream "Addison Creek", but i'm not going to argue over that with a local . . . )
Where exactly were the piles being driven ?
Where do you suspect the 'flyover' would tie into the yard ?
Other than the hump and the intermodal area, I'm not familiar with which portions are used for which functions - Arrival, Departure, Holding, etc. - so I don't really have an idea where such a connection would be wanted to go.
Also, there are several connections now from the IHB main to the yard. The IHB line spreads out into 4 tracks just south of its bridge over the UP, and the westernmost 2 of those then curve around to the northwest and tie into the northernmost yard. Is that not a useful connection ? What new functionality would a flyover add which those tracks don't already have - they already don't touch the UP main, either. Or am I missing something ? (Not being argumentative here - just seeking more info from someone who knows the place well, because I know I don't know or understand it well at all . . . )
And completely unrelated: In a nod to a former Trains staffer and author - librarian George H. Drury - I stumbled across a "Drury Lane" about 2 miles south of here in the Westchester area, abutting the south side of another major rail line, just south of W. Roosevelt Rd., about a block east of Westchester Blvd., and on the west side of Gardner Rd. Wonder if he's got 'dibs' on any of the good trainwatching sites there ?
- Paul North.
We just use the mirrors and hand signals.
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
tree68 We're getting two, of course, plus some spare parts. One locomotive (1845) is in our shop and is nearly ready for paint (that's a lot of needlescaling!). The other (1835) is reported enroute
We're getting two, of course, plus some spare parts. One locomotive (1845) is in our shop and is nearly ready for paint (that's a lot of needlescaling!). The other (1835) is reported enroute
Larry, I'm not sure if you have seen these pictures of your "new" units back in the day. The 1845 was built as CPR 8747 in 1957, and the 1835 was built as CPR 8780 in 1958. The site cprdieselroster.com has photos of these engines going back to 1962. I will post the links for their RS-18u configuration and you can follow the links from there to the vintage photos.
1845
http://www.cprdieselroster.com/Roster%20Archive/CP%201800B/CP%201845.htm
1835
http://www.cprdieselroster.com/Roster%20Archive/CP%201800B/CP%201835.htm
I like your new avatar.. The button has a motto I've lived by for over 56 years!
Bruce
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
I guess now is a good time for me to ask:
Once a loco is given a certain number, say 1835, does it generally keep that number for it's life, or is a new road apt to renumber it? What would happen if you already had that same number in your roster; how would you pick it's new number? Thanks.
PS Congrats, Larry! That paint scheme is pretty snazzy!! Do you have other units painted like that?
Nance - The paint scheme is based on an ALCO C424 we leased for several years. It's headed to CT with its owner.
That scheme was actually something of a "cob job," which used existing paint on the loco along with some new colors. The stripes on the nose were added later - it was a "work in progress" for several years.
I'm actually not sure where the number will go on the finished project, but that might be it. That was one of several mockups I did when we were discussing possible schemes.
I found a picture of the 1845 in its old number, and with a high short hood. Our folks have been researching it pretty well.
As for numbers - they are changed pretty regularly for a variety of reasons. Very often the owning railroad will renumber units in order to make room for a new series of locomotives. That's why UP 844 became 8444 for a while.
The RS-3 we run was built as NYC 8223 and was renumbered at some point to NYC 5223 (or maybe it was PC). It's back as NYC 8223 now.
Usually when two railroads merge the two haven't numbered their motive power (and possibly other rolling stock) by the same scheme, so somebody's locomotives get renumbered. Again, UP is a recent player in that - witness the numerous SP and Cotton Belt locomotive that are/were "patched."
Locomotives that trickle down to shortlines often keep their numbers for sheer economy - why bother to change the number?
Or not. MWHA 642, the "Atomic Train" locomotive (C420, IIRC) carried that number over from BC Rail. It was recently repainted and renumbered as 6042. On the other hand, a number of EL ALCOs acquired by BC Rail kept their numbers, and still keep their EL numbers (in BC Rail green and green) for GVT.
I went in for a complete physical today. I'm still in pretty good condition for somebody of my advanced years, but did receive one surprise diagnosis: Tennis Elbow! It's my left elbow...but I'm right-handed and have never played tennis in my life. (Maybe it's really railfan-librarian's elbow--I notice it the most when I'm trying to retrieve or shelve some of my old log-books...which are to the left of, and slightly behind, me as I sit here.)
__________________
Numbering of locomotives and rolling stock is a subject that has been fascinating to me for many years, Nance. I'm pretty sure that railroads don't really want to renumber their locomotives too often, because there is a lot of record-keeping and record-changing involved, not to mention the actual expense of the renumbering materials, new number-boards, new AEI tags, and so on. But every so often, railroads decide that new numbers are a better idea in the long run. The Santa Fe, I think, renumbered absolutely everything in the late 1960s, giving the units new numbers based on builders and types of service. Southern Pacific did the same thing, a little earlier, at the same time incorporating the Cotton Belt's engines into the same renumbering plan.
Mergers can account for either a complete or partial renumbering of units. The C&O's numbering system was pretty much a hodgepodge, especially after the mid-1950s when diesel purchases outpaced the old series fairly quickly. B&O did an interesting flip-flop in the 1950s, renumbering its remaining steam into lower numbers while giving all of its diesels four-digit numbers that were organized by builder, locomotive type, and so on (quite an accomplishment, since B&O had power from everybody who was building locomotives at the time!). So, in 1963, when these two railroads got together, there was a bit of renumbering, but only when necessary to eliminate duplications. Most of the time the B&O system was used for renumbered C&O units.
Norfolk & Western took a different approach, for the most part: when it absorbed the Nickel Plate and Wabash, the three-digit road numbers of NKP units got a "2" in front of them, and those of the Wabash had a "3" in front of them. This wasn't always the case (NKP's only GP35 was numbered above the Wabash units in the 3000s, for example), but for the most part it was easy to figure the origins of N&W units for many, many years.
Pennsy and New York Central began to get ready for Penn Central years before the actual merger took place, renumbering some units as early as 1965 (I remember being surprised that PRR seemingly had ordered enough U25Bs to have them in the 2600 series, but the ones I was seeing were just renumbered out of the 2500s--this was in 1965, two or three years before the merger). Believe it or not, C&O/B&O and Norfolk & Western did the same thing in preparation for their merger...which never took place.
UP has had to renumber units just to keep them in recognizable groupings, and it hasn't always been successful. I'm sure that there are some ex-CNW units that have carried two or more UP numbers already, and I'm not even thinking of the ones that were relettered UPY.
I think BNSF just cobbled the two rosters together as best they could--some number series contained a mixture of ex-BN and ex-ATSF units. Probably a moot point now, as new units have come around there faster than anywhere else, I think.
CSX had a very nice system for locomotive numbers when the railroad was created. If the unit started out with an odd digit, GE built it. Units that started out with even numbers were EMD (the switchers were in the 9000 series originally; the only exception). Low-horsepower units were numbered in different series depending on the number of axles they had; high-horsepower units were numbered in the higher-numbered series the same way. This system came into use a couple of years after the creation of Seaboard System Railroad; by 1986, when Chessie was merged, the "holes" in the SBD numbering system were neatly filled by Chessie units of the proper type! It didn't take long for the system to go out of whack, though--when they decided to number their AC units beginning at 1. And the acquisition of hundreds of ex-Con(rail)s didn't help matters.
Paul_D_North_Jr And completely unrelated: In a nod to a former Trains staffer and author - librarian George H. Drury - I stumbled across a "Drury Lane" about 2 miles south of here in the Westchester area, abutting the south side of another major rail line, just south of W. Roosevelt Rd., about a block east of Westchester Blvd., and on the west side of Gardner Rd. Wonder if he's got 'dibs' on any of the good trainwatching sites there ? - Paul North.
Johnny
Paul, this is part of two interconnected CREATE projects:
http://www.createprogram.org/PDF/B2%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
http://www.createprogram.org/PDF/PDF%2012-16-10/B3%20CREATE%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet_12_14_10.pdf
A line from this portion of the yard would permit trains leaving east out of the departure mains (or out of Global 2) to have direct access to the IHB. The trains from the mains can get to Provo Junction, but currently block both of the main tracks while doing it. The pilings are a short distance north of the suburban tracks, and on both sides of the creek. They are not driven vertically into the ground, but rather at angles and meeting at the tops of the pilings. A flyover is mentioned in B2--it sounds like it will both connect to our main line (?) and go to the IHB. This sounds like a new bridge over the tracks, evidence of which I haven't seen. This will bear watching. C.S. Harrier may yet ride again (that's because taking Metra is the best way I can think of to see this!)!
In the bottom right of the picture on the B3 sheet, the bridge has two spans. You're looking through the bridge along the tracks connecting the east end of the yard to the main line. The main line itself (two tracks, soon to be three) goes under the span to the right.
Mud Creek is how it's shown on all of the Proviso maps, but I've seen it as Addison Creek everywhere else. I like Mud Creek myself--it's appropriate, and this stream doesn't go anywhere near the village of Addison (further west) or Addison Township, and Addison Street in Chicago doesn't intersect it, either.
There's a bigger Drury Lane theater considerably west of the one you saw, in Oak Brook (or Oakbrook Terrace). In fact, I hadn't heard of one in Westchester before. The "major rail line" you mentioned isn't so major any more--it's CN's former Illinois Central line into Iowa, and probably sees little more than local traffic and a daily manifest.
Forgot to mention yesterday's action. Besides shaking my head and muttering "Tennis elbow?" all morning, we went to Elmhurst, where we were able to catch the "Another Train Warning System" in action. The voice of the system (sounds a lot like the voice that announces the arrival of Metra trains in the station--that could get confusing!) can be heard for about half a block away. Pat got a kick out of the signal maintainers that were nearby, and their fist-pumping and "Glory Be!" gestures when the devices actually worked.
We had five freights go through in the hour or so that we were near the tracks (Fontano's was closed for vacation, so we ate where I couldn't see the trains), and they were almost all manifests, so I have enough sightings to keep me occupied for a few hours. We have a patronage (and grandpatronage) visit to make today; perhaps I can parlay that into some BNSF action.
Carl - and anyone else who's interested -
Go to this webpage - http://www.createprogram.org/b2geometrics.html - and see "Geometric Images 3 - 5" inclusive of the 14 that are there, and all will become clear regarding the flyover !
After only a brief review of those, since I doubt your UP retiree privileges include a pass for free rides on METRA, I anticipate you better figure on a monthly pass for off-peak hours - and consider scheduling weekly round-trip train rides for the grandkids !
I got lucky since this B-2 project was part of the TIGER I grant application that was approved for $133 Million - see:
http://www.createprogram.org/PDF/NEW%20PAGE%20PDFS/FR1%20CREATE%20TIGER%20Application1%20_FINAL_electronic.pdf (28 pages, 2.2 MB in size), which has lots of 'hot links' to other documents, plans, reports, and details, etc.
http://www.createprogram.org/PDF/NEW%20PAGE%20PDFS/Stimulus%20Project%20Descriptions%20FINAL.pdf
http://www.createprogram.org/newpageLINKED.html
The information on the CREATE website otherwise is mostly text and tables, with very few plans or drawings that are even conceptual in nature. Why that is, I don't know or understand - the folks who put all that together must have had a least a sketch plan to perform the screening and preliminary cost estimates, etc. a couple years ago, so why not post them too ? I sent them an e-mail about that early last summer, but I never received a response, and can't see that anything along those lines has been implemented . . .
For the "Way Too Much Information" level on this, see the "B2 Project Report" in the TIGER application at this link:
WARNING: It's 1,013 pages+of various sizes - including 24" x 36" plan-size sheets, approx. 69 MB in size !
http://www.createprogram.org/PDF/NEW%20PAGE%20PDFS/CREATE%20Program%20Project%20B2%20Phase%20I%20Project%20Report%20&%20Design%20Approval%20June%202008%20final.pdf
The "B3 Melrose Connection" at - http://www.createprogram.org/PDF/B3%20benefits%20Melrose%20Connection.pdf - has a 3rd photo of the new bridge, from its other/ southern end, but otherwise is similar to the link that Carl posted above. One very interesting detail is that the "inner"/ eastern girders of both the long and short spans - it's a 2-span Through Plate Girder ("TPG") bridge - is somewhat taller than the "outer"/ western girders ! (even though it does not appear to be connected to the existing parallel adjacent bridge to the east). I've not seen that before - and so can only speculate that someone anticipates and made provisions for replacement of that adjoining bridge sometime in the future, by allowing for connecting the replacement bridge's floor system to those taller girders as well. We'll just have to see what happens . . .
My "curiosity itch" has been satisfied for now - maybe more sometime later.
Paul, my retirement privileges do include free rides in off-peak hours, so yes, I'll be taking a little more advantage of that (unfortunately, Pat still has to pay).
All of those photographs are fascinating, because I honestly didn't know how they were going to shoehorn the third track into some of those places (I still don't, but the pictures at least show where they'll be attempting to put them!). The complete shift of the main lines at the east end is something I hadn't counted on, and now I can see how things will be speeded up and connected up. The pilings I saw were for the bridge over the creek.
Prying the grandchildren free for a train trip would be nice, but those kids are so busily scheduled that that won't be possible at least until summer. Today we had a good lunch session with them, but the girls' hair was still wet from their swimming lessons, and kindergarten was right after lunch for the oldest one.
OK, so my batting average is only "1 for 3" there - but that's OK, since that "1" was a home run "outta da park" . . . I too was surprised at the extent of the changes at the east end.
And summertime seems like a good time for train rides and ice cream to me . . .
Next time I'll try to figure out how to coherently describe and ask which 'yard' performs which functions there . . .
That isn't too hard, Paul. The classification bowl (Yard 5) should be fairly obvious. East of there are Yard 4 (north) and Yard 2 (south). Those are basically departure yards. South of the classification bowl, surrounded by intermodal apparatus, is Global 2 (on the site of old Yard 1). Between Global 2 and the suburban mains are the departure mains, some of which can serve as running tracks when necessary.
No receiving yard here--that's Yard 9, around the corner to the north.
Hi, can anyone link me to a picture showing a hump and bowl of a yard? Thanks in advance.
Nance, I'm going to try this, in hopes that it gives you the same picture I saw:
(My URL didn't work--Larry was more successful in the following post! Thanks, Larry!)
This is the hump where I used to work. The hump leads (two tracks; there are cars on the top track) come in just to the right of the upper left corner, curving down and toward the right. You will see a road going under the lead; semi-trailers have ample clearance on that passageway, though it is below ground level directly under the tracks. Keep going to the right and you see a fairly large black square; this is the Top of the Hump yard office. The leads at this point are probably 30 feet or so above the surrounding area. Follow the leads further to the right, and there's a double-crossover, complete with diamond, in the leads, directly above another black rectangle. This rectangle is Tower A, which was my home away from home for many, many years. Keep going to the right, and you can see how the leads diverge and spread out into a number of classification tracks (66, in this case). Just to the right of where the road crosses from one side to the other, you can see the two lower towers, B and C, on the edges of the trackage. By this time, the tracks are fairly close to the surrounding ground level. This (from here on to the right) is the bowl, and these tracks each carry a classification. Freight cars are pulled out the other end and formed into departing trains (this description is a little idealistic--sometimes tracks have more than one classification; sometimes cars are pulled back up on the hump leads or out the main, etc.).
I hope this makes things a little clearer; because of the size of such an operation, this is about the only way you'd get both a hump and a bowl in the same photograph.
Try this.
tree68 Try this.
Larry had better luck than I did. Take his result, enlarge it one enlargement, move it two steps west and one step north, and you'll have pretty much what I was describing.
Great; thanks, guys. Nice teamwork!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.