I've been meaning to say this for a while, and now's my opportunity to put on my "John G. Kneiling, Professional Iconoclast" hat and 'channel' him once again, by pointing out that:
This problem really wouldn't occur much if the trains were kept moving consistently, as they're supposed to be ! It's when they're stopped so often and for so long that all kinds of mayhem - some operational, some financial, some safety, etc. - starts to ensue. Keep them moving, and the problem goes away (or occurs much less often and becomes much less in magnitude).
- Paul North.
I was tempted to title the thread "How to keep a rolling train from stopping".
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
gardendanceI was tempted to title the thread "How to keep a rolling train from stopping".
That's its own new thread, and you should start it.
Euclid The new rules call for the railroads to develop a process for verifying that the hand brakes applied are sufficient to hold the train. I thought we already had a process.
Here is a quote mentioning the application of handbrakes being applied to locomotives as part of the securement.
And that is consistent with most railroad's rules, that the handbrakes must be applied on the engines when the train is secured.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
dehusman Euclid The new rules call for the railroads to develop a process for verifying that the hand brakes applied are sufficient to hold the train. I thought we already had a process. Once again, requiring a process does not mean that it has to be "new" process or that an existing process has to be thrown out, all it means is that the railroad has to document a process that covers the steps required in the law. The majority of current railroad rules for class 1 carriers already cover the points required in the law or their rules have already been changed to reflect the proposed rules. The FRA rules are not issued in a vacuum. There are public hearing and commentary, etc, etc. that the railroads are part of. They pretty much know 95% + of what the rules will be before they are finally issued. It takes months for Federal ruelmaking, while railroads can issue new General orders and change training in a matter of weeks. Here is a quote mentioning the application of handbrakes being applied to locomotives as part of the securement. And that is consistent with most railroad's rules, that the handbrakes must be applied on the engines when the train is secured.
To your last sentence: Do you mean that handbrakes must be applied to locomotives after the train has been secured and tested with the proper number of handbrakes; or do you mean that handbrakes on locomotives may be counted as part of the total number of airbrakes needed for securement?
Others here seem to have said that counting the locomotive handbrakes as part of the total brakes required for securement is uncommon practice.
To your first point:
When I referred to a "new" rule, I meant the rule calling for verification of securment above and beyond setting the handbrakes and doing a pull test. I was not referring to that securement procedure being a new rule.
My question wondered how this "verification" was to be done. Appparently, it is just a matter of telling someone else that you have secured the train.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.