Train Order vs Track Warrant

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

See also the article on "Railroad's Traffic Control Systems" by Frank W. Bryan in the "Railroad Reference - ABC's of Railroading" section here, at:  

http://trn.trains.com/Railroad%20Reference/ABCs%20of%20Railroading/2006/05/Railroads%20traffic%20control%20systems.aspx

A couple of further questions:

1.  How does the amount and detail of information needed vary for a Track Warrant or Form D as compared to an old Form 19 or 31 Train Order ?   

2.  [Hang on, now]  In an age when most rail lines and DiSpatchers are very busy, would it be more efficient to reinstate TT&TO authority for certain regular and repetitive train movements, rather than have to treat each on as a special project ?  For routes that have a number of Amtrak and intermodal trains that pretty much have to run on set schedules and have priority over most other trains, their authority would then exist by 'default' and wouldn't need to be re-created anew each day, nor their meets and passes, etc.  More importantly, it would reduce the workload on the dispatcher desks and redirect it to the out-of-the-ordinary and truly unusual train movements, and maybe making shorter the waits by train crews and MOW and C&S folks in the field for attention from the DS.  And most importantly, it would free up the radio system from messages that the Timetable could handle, thereby  relieving some of the crowded airtime problems without having to add additional channels and install additional base stations and repeaters, etc.  

- Paul North.

[Deggesty]

cx500

Deggesty:

.............

What a difference reliable radio communication has made!

By the way, I wonder just how an order directing a southbound manifest freight to back over onto the wrong main at Wesson, Miss., to allow #1 (the City of New Orleans) to overtake and pass the freight would have been written. I saw this operation, trackside, one night in 1965, and did not think to ask the conductor of the freight how the order was written.

 

Possibly the reverse movement was within yard limits, if this option existed in the rules for that railroad.  That might have simplified things.  Using Canadian rules, within yard limits the main track could be occupied by local movements, but they had to clear the schedule times of 1st and 2nd Class trains, and first check the register to be certain there were no overdue trains or additional sections.

It might also depend on what, if any, type of signaling system was in place.  In CTC territory, movement is governed by signal indication so no train orders would be required.

Interesting question, anyway, and I'll hope for more information.

John

ABS, with the crossover switches tied into the signal system. I do not think that there were yard limits in the town (there was very little switching activity, which usually could be handled by the local without interfering with the four each way passenger and three each way manifest freight trains). I can dig an ETT out to check if you want me to.

I was standing on the east side of the track, so I did not see just when #1 arrived at the south main switch, but by the time the freight engine cleared the fouling point and the switches were lined back, #1 was right at the south main switch--and I had the impression that #1 did not stop there at all (she may have stopped at the previous block signal).

[cx500]

Deggesty

.............

What a difference reliable radio communication has made!

By the way, I wonder just how an order directing a southbound manifest freight to back over onto the wrong main at Wesson, Miss., to allow #1 (the City of New Orleans) to overtake and pass the freight would have been written. I saw this operation, trackside, one night in 1965, and did not think to ask the conductor of the freight how the order was written.

Possibly the reverse movement was within yard limits, if this option existed in the rules for that railroad.  That might have simplified things.  Using Canadian rules, within yard limits the main track could be occupied by local movements, but they had to clear the schedule times of 1st and 2nd Class trains, and first check the register to be certain there were no overdue trains or additional sections.

It might also depend on what, if any, type of signaling system was in place.  In CTC territory, movement is governed by signal indication so no train orders would be required.

Interesting question, anyway, and I'll hope for more information.

John

[tree68]

Deggesty

By the way, I wonder just how an order directing a southbound manifest freight to back over onto the wrong main at Wesson, Miss., to allow #1 (the City of New Orleans) to overtake and pass the freight would have been written. I saw this operation, trackside, one night in 1965, and did not think to ask the conductor of the freight how the order was written.

During my school tours at Chanute AFB, I hung around at the ICG station in Rantoul a lot.  Occasionally the station agent would hoop up orders to the northbounds to cross over just north of town and run on the wrong main, usually due to track maintenance.

It never occured to me to ask to see a copy of one of the orders.

[Deggesty]

And, we can add to Larry's comment, for maximum efficiency when a large number of trains are operated, all train order offices should be open continuously, so that new orders can be issued to engine and train crews when necessary. However, the practice on less heavily-traveled lines was that only offices in major towns and cities were open 24 hours a day, and most offices were open only during daylight hours, though some had what may have seemed to the non-railroader odd hours of operation. Of course, all orders were issued by a dispatcher, often over the chief dispatcher's signature, and sent to the applicable TO office(s) to be delivered to the affected train(s).

What a difference reliable radio communication has made!

By the way, I wonder just how an order directing a southbound manifest freight to back over onto the wrong main at Wesson, Miss., to allow #1 (the City of New Orleans) to overtake and pass the freight would have been written. I saw this operation, trackside, one night in 1965, and did not think to ask the conductor of the freight how the order was written.

[tree68]

One factor of T&TO operation that RWM didn't mention was the train order offices, usually located in stations and other such facilities, but occasionally a site in and of itself.

Train order offices were used to issue train orders when they were needed.  But possibly more importantly the operator there (such as AK's dad) reported when scheduled trains went past to the DS, who could now track a train's progress and make plans if a train was running late.  That might include changing a meet point. 

[AgentKid]

RWM, as the son of a Station Agent and Train Dispatcher, I have only one word for the above post; BRAVO!

Thank you.

Bruce

 

[Railway Man]

Track Warrant Control and Timetable & Train Order are both a Method of Operation for trains on a main track, but they function in a fundamentally different manner.  Without going into all the exceptions (which fill the rulebook):

1. When a main track has Track Warrant Control as its Method of Operation, a train has no authority to operate on the main track unless it holds a valid track warrant, which authorizes the train to operate between two fixed geographic points.  No warrant, no authority, no movement, no anything.
2. When a main track has Timetable & Train Order as its Method of Operation, it is the Timetable that provides the authority to occupy the main track.  Only when the train dispatcher wishes to vary from the sequence and location of meets, passes, and times published in the timetable, or create trains that have no times published in the timetable (extra trains), does he issue a train order.  Thus under normal operation, no train orders are needed at all.  The train crew leaves their initial station not before the departure time published in the timetable, clears the main track before the time when superior trains are to arrive, and no input or conversation is required with the dispatcher.  Typically, though a clearance card is required to leave the initial station, so that the dispatcher is aware that a train shown in the timetable in fact does exist that day, and to communicate information such as engine number, crew names, length, and tonnage to the dispatcher.

One way to think about this is that under T&TO, the timetable is in effect a sort of giant permanent track warrant that sets up all the meets and passes for most of the trains all of the time, and the train orders are issued to address exceptions that the dispatcher wishes to make.  Under T&TO, the assumption is that operations are going to be highly uniform every day, with the same trains running at the same times and doing the same things.  In contrast, under TWC, the assumption is that operations will be variable, and there is no point in having a timetable because you're effectively going to tear it up every day and come up with a new operating plan.

T&TO was a very good Method of Operation in a world before the advent of reliable, cheap, mobile radio communications equipment, and was designed both to minimize reliance on communications between dispatchers and trains, and to compress an enormous amount of information into a single instruction to a train.  But it was not very efficient at reacting and adapting to exigencies or unforseeable events, and very much required a train crew to know what they were up to.  TWC in contrast enables rapid and efficient response to traffic variability and unforseen events, and simplifies the instructions to the train crews.  T&TO worked well in a world where labor was cheap and machines were expensive, whereas TWC is better adapted to a world where labor is expensive too.

You didn't mention Direct Traffic Control, which is similar to TWC except it uses permanent, geographically fixed locations where authorities begin and end -- typically the ends of sidings, junction switches, and yard limits, whereas in TWC, the dispatcher chooses the limits of the authority on the fly.  From a safety, efficiency, and control standpoint, my preference as a dispatcher was for DTC, particularly when coupled with Manual Block rules.

RWM

 

[WMNB4THRTL]

Can someone please explain to me what the difference between a train order vs a track warrant is? I thought I understood them, at least somewhat, but, since I read a bit more, now I'm confused. Thanks.