Test
And if the lumber operation says the cost of the siding won't pay for itself in saved freight charges for many years, then spending more money to make the siding work better doesn't make sense. If BNSF can provide decent service under the present arrangement, keep the status quo. You might also offer to assist them in finding other shippers to relocate on the siding. If there are more shppers, then it will be in BNSF's own interest to modify the siding to make its use more efficient.
BNSF may wish to keep the business as a loss leader to entice other customers to locate on the siding.
Murphy Siding What is that man protecting the lead car from, when it's just one car being pushed through an alfalfa field?
What is that man protecting the lead car from, when it's just one car being pushed through an alfalfa field?
Maybe your 'self proclaimed railroad expert' should trip and fall in the gauge of the track and not be able to get up and see what happens when a blind shove into your track comes his way. Not Pretty!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BNSF safety rules, and almost every class one carrier’s rules prohibits “blind shoves” into any stub track, any industry under any circumstance, and any siding where there is a public crossing.
There are exceptions, such as when in CTC, or if the crossings have full automatic protection, but that doesn’t apply here.
Who owns and maintains the track?
Most industries own and maintain their own track; usually from about 50 feet in from the main line switch….and they may, or may not have much in the way of a maintenance budget…even shoving one car with no one on the point is a great way to find a broken rail the hard way.
Riding a shove for a mile or two isn’t that big a deal…I do it every day with 100 plus cars, we drag it out of the receiving yard and shove around into the yard proper, filling up holding tracks with switch cuts, but that also would depend on the local union contract.
The difficulty I see here is getting the car cut out of the inbound and placed so the local can bring it back out to you asap.
The easiest solution I see is to have a short, three or four hundred foot siding installed, which ties in to your track on the north end, and the main on the south end…that way the south bound can stop, cut your car out, shove it north back in the siding, then get back against their train and go to Marion, while your switch crew takes their dingy up and reaches into the siding from your track, drags back onto your track, and shoves the rest of the way to the dock…same can be done with the local, they just cut the car out to the siding, and get out of Dodge!
Not being a jerk here, but blind shoves, even one car movements, gets people hurt and killed all the time…there are endless reports of guys hitting all kinds of stuff, including themselves when doing so.
23 17 46 11
My experience with the lumber business as it relates to railroads has been that the Shipper consignes the car to themselves at some distant point, as they have not yet sold it's contents to the ultimate buyer. While the car is in transit, the Shipper finds a buyer and contacts the railroad where the car currently locates and initiates a reconsignment and diversion order to send the car to the buyer of the contents.
Such a operation keeps the shipper fluidly loading product as well as creating a shorter delivery time frame for the final buyer of the car load.
daveklepper Right, never push a train blind. But I can ask the lumber salesman: Look, the siding has been bought, the track is in. If your freight costs are less by rail, by all means you should make every effort to get reliable rail service before moving to trucks. What your getting reliable service does to BNCF's bottom line isn't your worry. The railroad is plenty profitable and won't go out of business subsidizing your timely freight deliveries. Now, does that make sense?
Right, never push a train blind. But I can ask the lumber salesman: Look, the siding has been bought, the track is in. If your freight costs are less by rail, by all means you should make every effort to get reliable rail service before moving to trucks. What your getting reliable service does to BNCF's bottom line isn't your worry. The railroad is plenty profitable and won't go out of business subsidizing your timely freight deliveries. Now, does that make sense?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Dakguy201 Where did the delivery come from? The same problem would exist with a north facing switch regardless of the length of the delivering train. Looking at maps it appears they would have to run the special train past you clear to Canton to have a place to put the engines on the other end of the train. As I recall, that facility is about five years old. Isn't your real problem with whoever it was that designed the north facing switch? Perhaps they thought there was a major sawmill somewhere on the plains to your south?
Where did the delivery come from? The same problem would exist with a north facing switch regardless of the length of the delivering train. Looking at maps it appears they would have to run the special train past you clear to Canton to have a place to put the engines on the other end of the train.
As I recall, that facility is about five years old. Isn't your real problem with whoever it was that designed the north facing switch? Perhaps they thought there was a major sawmill somewhere on the plains to your south?
daveklepper Right, never push a train blind.
Right, never push a train blind.
Unless you're backing up to pick up a crew member in accordance with UP GCOR Rule 6.6 (Back up movements).
Jeff
Go back and look at "restricted speed".....I spent too much of my time as a roadmaster cleaning-up after crews fired themselves on blind shoves (and watching my budget get destroyed instead of the ^$#@%%^^!! trainmaster's)
(1) Crap fouling the track (agri-dummies and industry-dummies no savvy the concept of "foul".
(2) broken or damaged rail
(3) stupid people and somewhat smarter livestock
(4) road crossings
(5) docks, dunnage et al
(6) Track bumpers, derails, wheel stops (no toucheee!)
(7) misaligned couplers, switches
(8) clearance points/ visual cues/ gate circuits
It would amaze you what a unprotected shove can hit or derail on!
daveklepper Actually, the good solution proposed IS IN USE!!! By the Providence and Worcester. I think in their case freight crew members are cross-trained, and engineers are qualified as conductors and visa versa, so they do not need distributed power, just one unit on each end of the train, with three-man crews. But I don't know the union situation there.
- Paul North.
Murphy Siding One of the things the railroad guys dislike about our spur is that it's about a quarter mile from the switch to the dock. Some poor guy rides on the front of the car all the way in. Why? In the industrial park in town, they utilize a caboose shoving platform, so that, as I understand it, some poor guy doesn't have to ride on the front of a car for a quarter mile. Now, I wouldn't recommend they drag that old caboose all over creation just to spot one car, but why doesn't the switch man just ride in the locomotive, and get out when they are close to the dock?
One of the things the railroad guys dislike about our spur is that it's about a quarter mile from the switch to the dock. Some poor guy rides on the front of the car all the way in. Why? In the industrial park in town, they utilize a caboose shoving platform, so that, as I understand it, some poor guy doesn't have to ride on the front of a car for a quarter mile. Now, I wouldn't recommend they drag that old caboose all over creation just to spot one car, but why doesn't the switch man just ride in the locomotive, and get out when they are close to the dock?
I believe the current UTU contract requires a 'shoving platform' (it may or may not look like what was formerly known as a caboose) for shoves of over 1 mile. For moves of less than 1 mile the leading end of the move must be protected by a man on the lead end of the lead car. It gets even more fun when there is a road crossing involved.
daveklepper I think the scheme proposed would work, and might be adopted in quite a few similar cases. Assuming distributed power and three-man crews.
I think the scheme proposed would work, and might be adopted in quite a few similar cases. Assuming distributed power and three-man crews.
The only problem, again, is communication. While unlikely, voice radio can also fail, even in fairly close range. Should this happen, and the guy riding the DP not realize in time, you could have a problem. The big thing now-a-days is eliminating risk. It's not that things will go wrong, 99 times out of 100 they don't, but that things might go wrong. That 100th time. That's one of the reasons why things that may have only taken 10 or 15 mins in the past now take much longer.
I've heard the procedure that Greyhounds originally proposed actually being done once. Spotting the rear third of a loaded coal train no less. Nothing bad happened, but the engineer was reminded of the comm loss feature and that it wouldn't be a good idea to do it again.
Actually, the good solution proposed IS IN USE!!! By the Providence and Worcester. I think in their case freight crew members are cross-trained, and engineers are qualified as conductors and visa versa, so they do not need distributed power, just one unit on each end of the train, with three-man crews. But I don't know the union situation there.
Murphy Siding [snipped - PDN] . . . Some time back, Mark W. Hemphill wrote about how there is some business the railroads just don't need. We fit that bill, right down to his telling a story about a receiver seeing his car go by, but never see it spotted. . . .
John Kneiling wrote a column once (mid- to late 1960's) about a lumber business that ordered 3 cars, and after a while when they didn't show up, was told it would take something like 60 to 90 days in transit. He also had some comments about how many men, how much equipment, and how long it took the lumber operation to unload the cars when they did show up - at a team track, yet.
All of this shows the weak points of 'loose-car' (or single car) railroading. The solutions that have evolved are either domestic containers, and/ or transload facilities (formerly called team tracks).
Someday I'll find the cites for both of those columns- maybe over the New Year's holiday.
schlimm Pretty high horsepower to tonnage ratio? The 3 locomotives always seem to operate together, even when doing yard switching.
schlimm Pretty high horsepower to tonnage ratio?
Pretty high horsepower to tonnage ratio?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
jeffhergert It could be done if the local engines are DP equipped. I bet (like UP's local/yard power) they aren't. Even if they were equipped, it wouldn't be a good idea. DP operation has a feature that during communication loss between the controlling unit and DP units, the DP units will stay in the last throttle/brake position command they received before comm was lost up to 90 mins. There is a way to override a DP in power (but not dynamics) by making a brake application, but that requires air brake continuity between the lead and DP. Something you wouldn't have with the rear portion detached from the head end. An inopportune and sustained comm loss could cause problems on Murphy's siding. Jeff
It could be done if the local engines are DP equipped. I bet (like UP's local/yard power) they aren't.
Even if they were equipped, it wouldn't be a good idea. DP operation has a feature that during communication loss between the controlling unit and DP units, the DP units will stay in the last throttle/brake position command they received before comm was lost up to 90 mins. There is a way to override a DP in power (but not dynamics) by making a brake application, but that requires air brake continuity between the lead and DP. Something you wouldn't have with the rear portion detached from the head end.
An inopportune and sustained comm loss could cause problems on Murphy's siding.
Thank you for the information. Got to stay safe.
But this brings up another question in my mind. (Again, it's a question. So please, nobody get upset.)
OK, here's what we've got assuming the railroad puts two DP equipped locos on the local, one at each end. The rear loco can push the load into Muphy's Siding but it's not safe to do so because a commo loss to the rear loco will cause it to just keep pushing and create a very unsafe condition.
But, it's a local, and we've got three crew members to work with. Two can work on the ground. One of them will have to eventually be on the rear loco to protect the movement out of the siding anyway. I know brakemen and conductors aren't supposed to run locomotives. But they can dump the air in case of emergencies such as a commo loss.
So would this work safely?
1) Local approaches facing point set out location.
2) Crew person #1 drops off, train puls by, then that crew person boards rear locomotive.
3) Crew person #2 gets off short of the facing point switch, uncouples the train ahead of the car to be set out, tells the engineer to move the front portion of the train ahead into the clear, then lines the switch for the siding, and mounts the car to ride the shove.
4) Crew person #2 then tells the engineer to come ahead with the rear portion of the train. He/she rides to the spot and tells the engineer to stop.
5) Meanwhile, back on the rear end, crew person #1 sits ready to dump the air in case of a commo failure.
6) Crew person #2 uncouples the set out car and tells the engineer to back out of the siding with the rear portion of the train. (Crew person #1 is already on the rear locomotive to protect the movement out of the siding.)
7) After passing the switch the rear portion of the train is stopped. Crew person #2 backs up the engineer with the head end and recouples the train. He can then walk up to the head end. This puts two crew members up front.
8) Crew person #1, on the rear locomotive can either continue to ride there or walk up to the front. His/her choice.
Now, does the presence of a crew member on the rear locomotive, ready to dump the air in an emergency, provide enough of a safety factor to make this feasible?
Just asking. And having some fun thinking about railroading.
When our car did arrive, it came special delivery- 1 car with 3 locomotives on the front end. Our know it all yard foreman said the railroaders were "stupid" for not putting 2 locomotives on front, and 1 on the tail. But, then the world's smartest man is operating a forklift and not a railroad. I imagine a lot of things could be done differently, if the world revolved around us.
Paul_D_North_Jr Re: greyhounds' question: NS does that routinely with its local freights here in eastern Pennsylvania - one (older) loco on each end - but I doubt if they're DPU equipped. Doesn't seem to matter - the operation works fine anyways. Sometimes the only way to tell the 'proper' direction in which the train is heading is by the track it's on (the normally or mainly EB track), or watch the direction it arrives from, and/ or which loco the engineer is on when it arrives. - Paul North.
Re: greyhounds' question:
NS does that routinely with its local freights here in eastern Pennsylvania - one (older) loco on each end - but I doubt if they're DPU equipped. Doesn't seem to matter - the operation works fine anyways. Sometimes the only way to tell the 'proper' direction in which the train is heading is by the track it's on (the normally or mainly EB track), or watch the direction it arrives from, and/ or which loco the engineer is on when it arrives.
Murphy stated that his car was in the middle of a 40 or so car train, if engines were on either end of the train it would still entail approximately a 1/4 mile walk for the engineer between the engines on either end - unless the run was alloted a engineer for each end (fat chance), A Engineer walking 1/4 mile on Main Track ballast brings the S word into the discussion, especially when you are talking the Dakota's in December.
First, let me say that the train crew didn't have any business getting in to a argument with the customer. The customer may have been very unpleasant with the crew. But sometimes you have to put up with unpleasant customers. They make your paycheck possible.
I've got a question. It's just a question, so don't nobody get upset.
If a local has customers with facing point switches, and that local runs with two or more engines, why can't the power be run as distributed power? If the rear locomotive could be isolated the train could be cut just ahead of the car to be delivered and the lead engine with cars pulled past the switch. Then the rear locomotive, under the control of the engineer in the lead unit, could shove the car to spot. Then with one of the crew providing point protection it could pull back out on to the main line. Reline the switch and put the train back together.
Would this cost too much? Would it take too much time? Or would it work?
This is several responses to post above. That's why the paragraphs will seem unconnected, or maybe I'm not that good of a writer... First, we found out the answer to the time frame question. This morning, the local cruised on out to our location and spotted the car. It was a 3 man crew, with 3 locomotives pulling one car the 7 miles out to our location, then back to town empty. The actual switching and spotting took about 35 minutes- mainly because the car was directly behind the locomotives. The trip out and back took probably a half hour each way. Add to that, the switch time in town. So roughly, delivering our car took about 1-1/2 hours. At that rate, a 3 man crew with 3 road locomotives could conceivably deliver 9 cars in a 12 hour shift. The problem is most definitely on our end, and it has many levels of dysfunction
. Some time back, Mark W. Hemphill wrote about how there is some business the railroads just don't need. We fit that bill, right down to his telling a story about a receiver seeing his car go by, but never see it spotted. Our new location, built 5 years ago, should never have had a rail spur. But, no one asked me. In 100 years, we will not save enough in freight to pay for the investment. What rubs me the wrong way, is that at nowhere along the planning stages did anyone from the railroad have the gumption to tell our owner that a rail spur was really not a good idea. The rail connection layout was designed by dummies. It makes me think of Mud Chicken's reference to agri-dummies. Lumber-dummies perhaps? We were a tour old location for something like 103 years. I imagine, that we'll be here for quite a while- long enough for big ol' weeds to grow up around our tracks, once we admit that it's not worth the effort. In the long run, I forsee someone getting lucky, when more industry fills in around us, that needs a rail car more than once a month. In fact, I forsee the day when someone views this spur as being a case of foresight. One of our options to shipping in a car of lumber to our yard, would be to buy a car load of lumber from one of the 3 wholesale suppliers we buy from in town, and have them unload it in their yard. Ironically, one of the 3 is a Co-Op type company, and our company is a major stock-holder. () At this point, our yard crew and the railroad crew have crossed each other off Christmas card lists. The road crew has mentioned many times, that our drop off is a "pain in the a.s.s. Our yard foreman, who once worked for a grain elevator and knows everything about railroads, makes it a habit to tell the railroad guys what they're doing wrong. This is the same guy who argued that the railroad could switch in our car going south in 10 minutes flat- if they knew what they were doing.. Someone posted the answer- trucks, and lots of them. I'm a sales guy, but I need wood to sell. Thanks for the responses everyone.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.