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...
QUOTE: Originally posted by ValleyX That's really what we're talking about here, speeding things up and it won't speed things up so much that it would be cost-beneficial, I simply don't believe it. The railroads would have to invest vast amounts into infrastructure to make this speed up traffic and, as Mark Hemphill has pointed out previously, at what point do they break even. The business has to be there and will have to be there in the future for them to invest the money and they're not going to invest if it doesn't benefit long term. Regardless of the crew change points, be it cross-country or what we have today, you're still going to have to meet other trains, inspect trains, work your way through terminals, with the structure in place today. It won't matter whether the crew is going through or changing at the terminal, there usually isn't much time lost in crew changes, it's all the other things that happen throughout the course of a normal trip. And, some genius would screw it up anyway, things always work like clockwork on the railroad the first week or so they try it but then. . .
"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
QUOTE: Originally posted by erikthered I can empathize somewhat with what you say, except for your argument that "technology doesn't work". It's the same line used by "old heads" about something called the telegraph. No doubt there's a steam locomotive engineer out there somewhere who shook his head and said "Yeah, but you'll never get me to run one of those things for a couple of hundred miles." when he saw his first diesel. It's easy, and human, to wi***hat life didn't change... that it was somehow safer and better in "the old days". No one really figured that the powered box kite Wilbur and Orville put together would turn into a major form of transportation. At the same time, folks figured the Model T wasn't going to do much of anything, either. Both forms of transportation wiped out the passenger rail service in the USA. When Americans figure out that a car costs more and is more hassle to operate than riding a train, they might come back. (The Long Island Rail Road is about the only US railroad to make a living off carrying people. The Long Island Expressway is the reason why.) Flight engineers on airlines screamed when Boeing and Douglas started designing aircraft that only needed two people to fly them. The pilots are complaining about the so called "glass cockpits", saying that a power failure will wipe out their ability to fly a plane successfully. Of course, many of the power systems that run those glass cockpits also run fun things like flight controls... so if the power fails, the plane is going to lose altitude at a rapid rate. I haven't checked with him lately, but my mailman gets through his route faster these days. I send cards, but I don't remember when I last sent a letter out to anyone... it's all done by E-mail, which is faster and more reliable. The point of the thread is that railroads have to figure out some way to move freight faster, safer, and cover more distance. Yes, they have to upgrade their infrastructure to carry more freight. The easiest solution, and one that's able to be put into place almost immediately, is to come up with ways to more efficiently use the work force they have. The sad truth is that American corporations- not just railroads- expect more out of their employees for less pay and more hours. They can do this because it's cheaper to retire someone who wouldn't "live on board one of those things for 30 days" with someone who will, and doesn't know any better. And is astonished at the paycheck they get. If American railroads can come up with a more effective way to get their people to work harder, faster, more efficiently, and oh, by the way, don't drop the chemical train in the river, they will. If the unions can figure out how to improve 21st century labor costs and working conditions without making a corporation dive for bankruptcy, more power to them. But the guy who says "I ain't going to live on one of those things for thirty days" could very well be told to "reevaluate his career path.... and get on the train or get off the property." That's the plain, simple unvarnished truth. Erik
QUOTE: Originally posted by jashauer1 [V][V][V] It's entirely obvious to me that most of the people in favor of this idea have never actually tried to be locomotive engineers, and probobly never driven long distance trucks for a living either. I've done both, there is no comparison between the two. Most trips on the railroad are a TWELVE HOUR shift. When I drove truck you only slept when you couldn't keep you eyes open any more. You don't stop to eat on a train, same with a truck. You eat what you can while you are moving. Keep an occupied passenger car on a freight train? Ever hear of slack action? Even good engineers have run ins and run outs. They just try to control them. Ever try to sleep in a moving semi? Not much slack action but a lot of incredably bad pavement, and sometimes no pavement at all. Technology is great when it works. Too bad it doesn't work all the time. And of all the computer and high-tech gizmos that I have been able to try, most just don't stand up to use on the railroad. L.A. to Chicago with only two crews? Depending on a computer screen to tell me how to run a train? Ever try to run a train from a track chart? Ever gotten unexpected results from a minimum break application? And I should live on this thing for HOW long? Somebody who never worked on a for-profit freight railroad dreamed this up. I wouldn't want to live on a passenger train for a living, and freight railroading is incredably more dirty and dangerous than riding Amtrak. When I am FORCED to do this it will be the LAST time I run a train. [ V[V][V]
QUOTE: Originally posted by ValleyX All in all, I think it is far more likely that trains may someday be controlled from a remote location than it is likely that this idea would ever develop past speculation. The points made about maintenance of the facilities, as well as eating and proper rest, are exactly right, the railroads don't do that well maintaining what facilities currently exist. It would take a special breed to sign up for what would be a month long train ride. And regardless of what kind of system would be developed for previewing the road ahead, I'm sure my fellow engineers would agree with me that a heavy fog would do them in, not to mention heavy snows, rains, not being THAT familiar with the road would override the map in the human brain, at least it would in mine.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod Hugh, I agree... but isn't this addressable by better cab isolation, soundproofing, etc.? (Or even better air-ride seats...something that ought to be easy to do with converted truck technology) I've never heard that long periods of exposure to Pullman accommodations were unhealthy... Granted, modern locomotive riding quality isn't too good. But the 'kinder' a locomotive is to expensive track geometry, the kinder it's likely to be to people riding on it. And THAT is a future that needs to come soon (independent of the number of people in the cab) csxengineer98, what's WRONG with a cubicle in Jacksonville this time of year? After your '8 on' you can head to the beach...
QUOTE: Originally posted by tpatrick Bring back the caboose.
TG3 LOOK ! LISTEN ! LIVE ! Remember the 3.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.