Trains.com

Semi-official Rochelle webcam discussion thread

373260 views
3712 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Thursday, October 1, 2015 8:29 PM

Back to shunting. I think I asked this question about three months ago; someone answered it--and I have forgotten the answer. I looked for the thread, but could not find it.

I have noticed, along the former Q and former GN, "shunt" signs at public grade crossings--and wondered what their significance is.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Thursday, October 1, 2015 8:23 PM

Listening to the radio chatter in the morning I heard them mention insulated joint replacement. 

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • 192 posts
Posted by MrLynn on Thursday, October 1, 2015 7:40 PM

Thanks guys for the 'shunt' explanation.

I also couldn't tell what all the MOW equipment was doing on the BNSF line today, but couldn't watch for very long.  Looked like one of the trucks had a back bin full of ballast.

/Mr Lynn

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • From: Muskogee Oklahoma
  • 185 posts
Posted by MKT Dave on Thursday, October 1, 2015 7:39 PM

All Right, lets get the way back machine on, a couple of years since it happened, a UP WB hit a BNSF mow equipment on the diamonds, it tore it up pretty bad, I thought about it watching these guys dodging the UP's as they scrambled back and forth across the diamonds today.

I came in when the whole area was being worked with back hoes and such.

The CAM then was still the black and white, 3 inch by 2 inch, soundless. I went into the forums to see what had happened and was quite a bit of detail, and it had been witnessed on the cam.

Anybody remember it?

...
  • Member since
    September 2014
  • From: Muskogee Oklahoma
  • 185 posts
Posted by MKT Dave on Thursday, October 1, 2015 4:15 PM

I watched as these equipment came from the west, then started at the diamonds, and worked back to the west. For a while a six or seven were on the East side of the diamonds, and slowly, one by one, they returned across the diamonds and worked west. about 1500 they dissapeared from view around the curve. I'll try and get the pictures i've taken all day and post them in sequence. I don't know when all the trucks dissapeared, I was away about an hour. at 1600 they were all gone.

...
  • Member since
    June 2015
  • 43 posts
Posted by phkmn2000 on Thursday, October 1, 2015 1:32 PM
So... can someone please tell this newb what those machines are doing on the BNSF line today?
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, October 1, 2015 12:48 PM

mudchicken

* some of them are true knuckleheads that exceed (greatly) the rated speed for the hi-rail gear, forget about the relatively small flange of the wheels, are hard on bearings and hard rubber wheel coatings (tire/tread) and generally are a menace to the equipment. I've seen what happens to an ex-Trainmaster's Bronco Hi-rail when he derailed it at 60+ MPH on the Transcon.

I have pictures of former Track Inspector's truck - 20 feet up in trees, with 3 rail wheels on the truck and the high side front rail wheel broken and on the right of way.  He was found by river rafters and the former Track Inspector had to be Life Flighted to the hospital after the rafters transported him a mile or so downstream to a point where the Life Flight could land.  Bozo's have no craft distinction.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Allen, TX
  • 1,320 posts
Posted by cefinkjr on Thursday, October 1, 2015 12:18 PM

Penn Central didn't use shunts like these; at least, not while I worked in that area in Pittsburgh (1970-1972 or thereabouts).  We didn't have the "knuckleheads" you described, either.  (Of course, we didn't have the wide open spaces either; I am still a little uneasy at the sight of straight level track as far as I can see. Wink

My biggest problem was signal maintainers or track supervisors, who normally rode alone, insisting that they needed a 6-man crew cab.

Chuck
Allen, TX

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, October 1, 2015 10:53 AM

Out here, use of shunts is limited, usually in a few key hi-rails belonging to operating officials*. They have a penchant for wearing out the brushes (rail contacts/ "shunts") and the small pneumatic cylinders. MOW Hi-rails are created and thought of as work equipment. As such they have to flag crossings, prepared to stop (They can become liable, even if the moron motorist circumvents the gates & signals. Rules differ slightly between states.) 

A few track supervisors/ motor track inspectors have hi-rails with shunts in congested areas, but the hi-rail operator using them is well aware of pumping gates and interaction problems (ie - don't put a whole lot of faith in your Fairmont/Mitchell/ whatever gear around crossings. Boy Scout Motto applies!)

 

 

* some of them are true knuckleheads that exceed (greatly) the rated speed for the hi-rail gear, forget about the relatively small flange of the wheels, are hard on bearings and hard rubber wheel coatings (tire/tread) and generally are a menace to the equipment. I've seen what happens to an ex-Trainmaster's Bronco Hi-rail when he derailed it at 60+ MPH on the Transcon.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Thursday, October 1, 2015 9:33 AM

Looks like BNSF is installing new insulated joins today.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Thursday, October 1, 2015 8:32 AM

MrLynn
I don't understand this use of the term 'shunt'. In Europe 'shunt' refers to switching cars. Is this an electrical term here?

Its like a "loop" is completely different over here than in Great Britain/Europe.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Thursday, October 1, 2015 5:32 AM

Here is a great website that has explanations on crossing signal operations.

http://signaldepartment.com/articles/index/default.html

 

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Allen, TX
  • 1,320 posts
Posted by cefinkjr on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:59 PM

MrLynn

I don't understand this use of the term 'shunt'.  In Europe 'shunt' refers to switching cars.  Is this an electrical term here?

/Mr Lynn

Do you understand how a basic track circuit works on US railroads?  (A battery keeps a distant relay closed with the rails between the battery and the relay carrying the electricity.)  The wheels of locomotives and cars on the track between the battery and the relay allow the current to pass from one rail to the other without passing through the relay.  The relay, being without power, opens and the train has been detected.  You could say the power was 'shunted' around the relay.  I've more frequently heard the term 'shorted' to describe this.

Chuck
Allen, TX

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:58 PM

MrLynn

I don't understand this use of the term 'shunt'.  In Europe 'shunt' refers to switching cars.  Is this an electrical term here?

/Mr Lynn

In the US it is a term for completing the electrical track circuit between the rails.  As with many words in the English language, the same word can have multiple meanings depending upon the context in which it is used.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • 192 posts
Posted by MrLynn on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:17 PM

I don't understand this use of the term 'shunt'.  In Europe 'shunt' refers to switching cars.  Is this an electrical term here?

/Mr Lynn

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:12 PM

CatFoodFlambe

If you look at the ICC accident reports for the first 75 years of the 20th century, it seem as though at least 20% of the reported accidents (and even more of the incidents involving fatalities) involved MOW crews colliding with trains.   The old way doesn't seem to have worked very well - treating MOW/Inspectors as a "full-fledged train" was long overdue.

MofW are not treated as a train and have no authority to pass absolute signals, operate switches or occupy Main or other signaled tracks without the formal written permission of the Train Dispatcher that grants them exclusive use  of the track segments requested.  MofW equipment, hi-rails or otherwise is not governened by the activation of track circuits, even when the equipment does activate track circuits.

In days of yore, MofW operated on 'Track Car Line Ups' that were issued by the train dispatcher and identified the trains on the territory, their location and their relative operating ability - Scheduled trains were identified and timed by their schedules.  Very easy for mistakes to be made by everyone involved - thus the carnage.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 267 posts
Posted by CatFoodFlambe on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 6:37 PM

dehusman

 

 
tree68
Hi-Rails don't shunt at all - not even highway crossings. They have to "stop, look, and listen" at any crossing - rail or road.

 

Most modern hi-rails have the ability to shunt the rail.

 

 

If you look at the ICC accident reports for the first 75 years of the 20th century, it seem as though at least 20% of the reported accidents (and even more of the incidents involving fatalities) involved MOW crews colliding with trains.   The old way doesn't seem to have worked very well - treating MOW/Inspectors as a "full-fledged train" was long overdue.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 5:11 PM

BaltACD
Maybe they 'can', but they don't.

Only once have I seen a Hi-rail shunt. The signal maintainer was testing a track circuit.

Norm


  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:30 PM

dehusman
tree68

Most modern hi-rails have the ability to shunt the rail.

Maybe they 'can', but they don't.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 12:54 PM

tree68
Hi-Rails don't shunt at all - not even highway crossings. They have to "stop, look, and listen" at any crossing - rail or road.

Most modern hi-rails have the ability to shunt the rail.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 12:41 PM

rdamon
Do Hy-Rail vehicles just look both ways and cross the diamonds or do they have to get clearance or shunt to get a signal?

Hi-Rails don't shunt at all - not even highway crossings.  They have to "stop, look, and listen" at any crossing - rail or road.  

Back in TT&TO days, they knew when they had to be clear.  Nowadays, they'll have a track warrant/Form D/EC-1, or whatever method the railroad uses to grant exclusive use of the track.  Most I hear on CSX include a time component ("until 1600...").

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:36 AM

xjqcf
 
BaltACD

 

If either or both carriers have to 'request' a route through the plant, it is not truly a 'automatic' crossing - wherein, just the track occupancy of a train automatically requests the signal.

With Global 3 being immediatly West of the crossing, it would be in the UP's best interests to be able to use the WB signals over the crossing as 'hold out' signals to allow Global 3 crews 'head room' out of Global 3 down to the diamond.  I have always suspected that the crossing was 'semi-automatic' where either carriers Dispatchers had to request a route through the crossing before the 'automatic' circuitry would become effective.  It would be interesting to know what level of 'land line' communications take place between the UP & BNSF Dispatchers in lining up traffic over the crossing.

 

 

 

 

Yeah I think that this plant is what I would call "Semi-Automatic" in function; it won't auto clear unless the movement was requested. If a request is locked out due to a prior request or conflicting occupancy the locking condition clearly has the highest priority, being a "vital" interlocking function. I do wonder, however, if requests are "stacked" to become effective after all locks are cleared.

Movements out of G3, departures or shifts, seem to proceed  without regard to a clear at the diamond; they just proceed as permitted by the plant, just like other, trough movements. As for the dispatcher coordination, I have no definite idea, nor do I have any sense of any formal agreement that may govern prioritiy of movement; it really seems to be first grab, first through (enforced by the timeout feature to prevent excessively advanced requests). I regularly seen high priority intermodals ( Z trains) delayed for 10 minutes or more for some conflicting lower priority movement with little scanner comment by crews or dispatchers, lthough on rest of their lines they are treated with kid gloves. But who knows what transpires over the phone.

 

On the UP side, the time table shows the crossing as an automatic interlocking.  There is no control point identity for the crossing.  There are instructions for use of the release box for trains not having a signal.  There is also mention of another control box for trains that may need to use the plant for multiple moves.

An earlier post mentioned the BNSF dispatcher had requested a line up through the interlocking.  The DS may have ment the entire line segment between controlled points east and west of the diamond.

See Dave H.'s post.

Jeff

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:53 AM
Do Hy-Rail vehicles just look both ways and cross the diamonds or do they have to get clearance or shunt to get a signal?
  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 174 posts
Posted by xjqcf on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 5:04 PM

BaltACD

 

If either or both carriers have to 'request' a route through the plant, it is not truly a 'automatic' crossing - wherein, just the track occupancy of a train automatically requests the signal.

With Global 3 being immediatly West of the crossing, it would be in the UP's best interests to be able to use the WB signals over the crossing as 'hold out' signals to allow Global 3 crews 'head room' out of Global 3 down to the diamond.  I have always suspected that the crossing was 'semi-automatic' where either carriers Dispatchers had to request a route through the crossing before the 'automatic' circuitry would become effective.  It would be interesting to know what level of 'land line' communications take place between the UP & BNSF Dispatchers in lining up traffic over the crossing.

 

 

Yeah I think that this plant is what I would call "Semi-Automatic" in function; it won't auto clear unless the movement was requested. If a request is locked out due to a prior request or conflicting occupancy the locking condition clearly has the highest priority, being a "vital" interlocking function. I do wonder, however, if requests are "stacked" to become effective after all locks are cleared.

Movements out of G3, departures or shifts, seem to proceed  without regard to a clear at the diamond; they just proceed as permitted by the plant, just like other, trough movements. As for the dispatcher coordination, I have no definite idea, nor do I have any sense of any formal agreement that may govern prioritiy of movement; it really seems to be first grab, first through (enforced by the timeout feature to prevent excessively advanced requests). I regularly seen high priority intermodals ( Z trains) delayed for 10 minutes or more for some conflicting lower priority movement with little scanner comment by crews or dispatchers, lthough on rest of their lines they are treated with kid gloves. But who knows what transpires over the phone.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 4:23 PM

Since its an automatic interlocking in CTC, the interlocking doesn't even show on the dispatchers board.  If you looked at a dispatcher's board you would never know the crossing at Rochelle exists, it isn't even a label.  the dispatcher can request a route through the block that contains Rochelle, but can't do anything with the interlocking itself.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 174 posts
Posted by xjqcf on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:56 PM

CShaveRR

That's just it:  the dispatchers or crews have to be in communication with each other--just the assurance that nothing else is close on their line would serve to allow a train from the other railroad to come into town on signal indication.  There are rules against sharing signal indications with other crews, but telling a crew that they shouldn't have to wait too long for the crossing to clear is probably legal, and definitely heads-up railroading.

Balt, what you said about special instructions is accurate, but doesn't jibe with the observation that opposing trains were sounding their horns for crossings before the other train cleared.  Hence my observation that something "above and beyond" is going on in this instance.

 

 

Probably most trains on both railroads prety much know if they are approaching a stop signal at the diamonds by the aspect of the first signal in advance of the appropriate home signal at the diamond and stop accordingly. The eastbound UP trains  usually stop clear of the road crossing just to the west of the diamonds (According to Google Maps it's either 1st Ave. or Jack Dame Dr.) They might be able to see the signal from there.   UP westbounds mostly stop clear of the crossings, but often don't, especially the "Z" trains. BNSF eastbounds usually stop short of their road crossing (Lincoln Hwy., the historic US 30). Their home signal is located well wet of the diamonds (Apparently to provide better apprach visibility around the 35 mph curve locted immediately west of the diamonds; after a UP movement clears I can always hear them whistle for the road crossing. Westbound  BNSF trains stop at the intermediate signal in dvance of the home signal per special instruction:

"(UP) NX XING Rochelle—In order to minimize blocking of road
crossings in the city of Rochelle, westward trains, not working at
Rochelle, are to be governed by the following instructions:
When the signal at MP 82.0 displays a less than clear aspect,
trains are to remain east of the Steamplant Road Crossing
(MP 81.9), and will proceed to the UP diamond after receiving
instructions from the train dispatcher."

The scanner chatter I've heard seems to confirm this practice.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:42 PM

xjqcf
 
BaltACD

If Rochelle is a truly 'automatic' crossing at grade (as I have been told), the Dispatchers have nothing to do with it's operation.  The movement of trains across the crossing is goverened by the activation of the various relays in the signal mechanisms that govern the crossing.

Either TTSI (Timetable Special Instructions) or local custom will govern the operation of trains when operating on less than Clear Signal indications and those Instructions or customs will instruct trains where to hold their trains, based upon train length, when the signal system does not indicate that the trains have clear movement across the crossing so as to prevent blocking road crossings for extended periods of time. 

I was wondering about that myself. I did get a hint from an incidental remark made by the BNSF Dispatcher to a train that did not have the signal to cross the diamond although the dispatcher's screen did not show an occupancy by UP. The dispatcher indicated he had "requested" the route through the diamonds. That seems to indicate that either one or both railroads have the ability to request routes through the plant. There also appears to be a timeout function; if it's desired to let a timed-out request be renewed there is a "restart" function. But this is all speculation on my part frome these snippets of conversation. 

A request feature seems logical at this crossing since all main tracks are CTC and the dispatchers need the ability to maintain any  directiosomeonen of traffic they may have set outside the crossing limits; wouldn't want an improper movement against the set direction of traffic to proceed through the crossing just because it triggered the track circuit in advance of the home signal.

If either or both carriers have to 'request' a route through the plant, it is not truly a 'automatic' crossing - wherein, just the track occupancy of a train automatically requests the signal.

With Global 3 being immediatly West of the crossing, it would be in the UP's best interests to be able to use the WB signals over the crossing as 'hold out' signals to allow Global 3 crews 'head room' out of Global 3 down to the diamond.  I have always suspected that the crossing was 'semi-automatic' where either carriers Dispatchers had to request a route through the crossing before the 'automatic' circuitry would become effective.  It would be interesting to know what level of 'land line' communications take place between the UP & BNSF Dispatchers in lining up traffic over the crossing.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 174 posts
Posted by xjqcf on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:26 PM

BaltACD

If Rochelle is a truly 'automatic' crossing at grade (as I have been told), the Dispatchers have nothing to do with it's operation.  The movement of trains across the crossing is goverened by the activation of the various relays in the signal mechanisms that govern the crossing.

Either TTSI (Timetable Special Instructions) or local custom will govern the operation of trains when operating on less than Clear Signal indications and those Instructions or customs will instruct trains where to hold their trains, based upon train length, when the signal system does not indicate that the trains have clear movement across the crossing so as to prevent blocking road crossings for extended periods of time.

 

 

I was wondering about that myself. I did get a hint from an incidental remark made by the BNSF Dispatcher to a train that did not have the signal to cross the diamond although the dispatcher's screen did not show an occupancy by UP. The dispatcher indicated he had "requested" the route through the diamonds. That seems to indicate that either one or both railroads have the ability to request routes through the plant. There also appears to be a timeout function; if it's desired to let a timed-out request be renewed there is a "restart" function. But this is all speculation on my part frome these snippets of conversation.

 

A request feature seems logical at this crossing since all main tracks are CTC and the dispatchers need the ability to maintain any  directiosomeonen of traffic they may have set outside the crossing limits; wouldn't want an improper movement against the set direction of traffic to proceed through the crossing just because it triggered the track circuit in advance of the home signal.

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 9:34 AM

cefinkjr

Gotta close that window.  I'm not getting anything else done.

 

I have the same issue here.

 

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 7:44 AM

That's just it:  the dispatchers or crews have to be in communication with each other--just the assurance that nothing else is close on their line would serve to allow a train from the other railroad to come into town on signal indication.  There are rules against sharing signal indications with other crews, but telling a crew that they shouldn't have to wait too long for the crossing to clear is probably legal, and definitely heads-up railroading.

Balt, what you said about special instructions is accurate, but doesn't jibe with the observation that opposing trains were sounding their horns for crossings before the other train cleared.  Hence my observation that something "above and beyond" is going on in this instance.

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)

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy