I have noticed that in most videos that there are very few trains with a single locomtive on the head end. Most trains that I do see have multiple engines on the head end and/or DPu on the rear. I assume that this is due to the heavier cars and the fact that trains are heavier and longer with many more cars than there used tobe. Am I correct in this assessment.
In the steam era, as trains grew longer and heavier, locomotives grew with them because each locomotive required an engineer and fireman. Multiple locomotives have been typical since the occurrence of dieselization. Because they can be operated with just one engineer, diesels did not need to match the horsepower of the largest steam locomotives. Instead, diesels could be coupled together in a consist under the control of one engineer, and attain the sufficient horsepower.
That premise exists today even as the individual diesel horsepower has increased. Train tonnages have increased with it. A single diesel on a train has always been relatively rare, and typically for light trains such as switch runs or long drags running at a relatively slow speed.
caldreamer I have noticed that in most videos that there are very few trains with a single locomtive on the head end. Most trains that I do see have multiple engines on the head end and/or DPu on the rear. I assume that this is due to the heavier cars and the fact that trains are heavier and longer with many more cars than there used tobe. Am I correct in this assessment.
I think the whole 'power' issue speaks directly to an individual railroad's corporate policies (?). In this area we have two 'regular Class 1 tennants'. BNSF and UPR. WATCO has also got a presence in some area corridors; otherwise they rely on 'trackage rights/ or other agreements.
Observations of BNSF are fairly easily done as they are the area's predominent carrier [on and off the major E/W routes] UPR operated through here on the OKT sub [nee; RI ] North/South through Wichita. UPR seems to favor a pair of more modern power, 6 axle,etc. on Road Trains. If they use a DPU it is generally a single unit.
BNSF seems to favor multiple unit head-end Power on trains (to a combo of 3 to 4 units), generally. If a train(on BNSF) has any DPU's they are generally a pair, very seldom is a DPU a single unit. That same formula seems to work on their interchange trains BNSF to UPR ( over on the former MKT in Southeast Kansas, as an example.)
Saw my first (BNSF) single unit move while writing this,it was an eastbnd baretable move. Usually, even these have at least two units for headend power.
Both railroads,BNSF and UPR seem to favor six axle road power; with older four axle units reserved for uses on interchanges, and jobs requiring switching moves.
I've noticed more single engine trains over the last few years. A diesel engine is most efficient when operating at max output, a fact that apparently isn't lost on the rail operators around here. It has become quite common to see one ES4400CW on a 100 car train (for example), and lifting that tonnage upgrade out of Toronto. It's quite something to watch.. and to me more impressive than watching a train that has more than enough horsepower to spare doing the same thing. Looking at it one knows that every horsepower counts as the train slowly grinds its way upgrade!
The problem with current 'wide body' high horsepower single engine train is that one has to be careful of what facilities are at the destination of the train for turning power.
Wide bodies, for the most part, do not have ditch lights on the long hood end and thus are restricted in how they are permitted to operate over road crossings. Additionly with the 'desktop' control set up they are a monumental pain for an Engineer to operate backwards. Frequently Engineers will refuse to operate wide bodies backwards for any signifigant distance on the grounds of SAFETY. Do not argue with the S word. All the savings by operating a single engine train can be thrown away in not being able to use that same engine to move a train back to where the engine came from.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
The reliability issue and lightweight rail and sharper curves also plays in the decisions made. (GE's are a menace in the backtracks)
If my subdivision has:---
1. a route with no priority freight in each direction including the one engine train.
2. Balt's being able to turn loco
3. no other trains will be delayed due to single loco train failing
Ulrich Looking at it one knows that every horsepower counts as the train slowly grinds its way upgrade!
Emphasis on SLOWLY.
Makes running easy. Notch 8 throttle or dynamic. Count the ballast stones as they pass.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Altho' mentioned, if one locomotive alone failed, or ran out of fuel with long, heavy train, and nearest 'Rescue' locomotive and crew a hundred miles away in either direction, and no road to get to disabled unit w/shop or fuel truck, things could be tied up for a long, long time.Doesn't take long for traffic to back up for Subdivisions these days.If very cold weather, and no heat, the crew could be in for a bad time, as no longer cabeeses to retreat to.Back in the day, a train hit a rock exiting a tunnel and the Engineer was trapped in cab. Took 8 hours for rescue train to arrive with equipment to free him. He never worked again.Some 'Mountain' crews preferred Long Nose Diesels for that reason. A units dealt with rocks better, too.Thank You.
At least some RoadRailers - see at 6:30 in this Triple Crown Services video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnKxBKrSbrU
Many slow-moving, day-long MOW trains - tie & OTM distribution & pick-up, ditching, etc. But those tend to use older power which is a little easier to run in both directions.
- Paul North.
NS regularly runs 1 unit on their EB 20N intermodal train which is an international container train for Detroit. The train typically has 50-75 containers. Also on that line CP regulary has one unit on their auto rack trains, as does NS on their auto rack train for Gibson Yard - 31M.
Ed
The economics of train operation means that the longer the train the less it costs per car to move. Train lengths are limited by siding length, yard track size, etc. Since horsepower of an individual locomotive is limited by the weight of locomotive you have to add more tons (ie locomotives) to get more horsepower. This has little to do with reliability and more to do with how much train you can move down the tracks. Conveniently you can have locomotives pointed both ways and have a cab on the front. Now with distributed power trains can even be longer as the stress on the couplers is distributed and not so dependent on the one coupler at the front of the cars.
MP173 NS regularly runs 1 unit on their EB 20N intermodal train which is an international container train for Detroit. The train typically has 50-75 containers. Also on that line CP regulary has one unit on their auto rack trains, as does NS on their auto rack train for Gibson Yard - 31M. Ed
"... BNSF seems to favor multiple unit head-end Power on trains (to a combo of 3 to 4 units), generally. If a train(on BNSF) has any DPU's they are generally a pair, very seldom is a DPU a single unit..." Such practices seem to point to a Company(BNSF) Policy, as to powering trains(?)
It might bear mentioning, as well, BNSF, for several years, before the Triple Crown service was terminated through this area; BNSF handled it out of KC area and to final at Ft.Worth. Only on one occasion did i see a BNSF/NS unit on the point of one of those T/C trains. All the others always seemed to have NSx2 as head-end power.
Even the auto parts trains seem to have paired power going westbound.. If not 2 BNSFunits, then you'll see 2 CSX units, 2 NS units, or even a couple of CPR units; can't speak for eastbounds, they seem to get what ever units the power desk has available in the area of origin back(?)
This thread reminds me--a little over a month ago, on the Rochelle cam I happened to catch an EB double-stack on the UP pulled by a single EMD unit. I don't know for sure what it was, but it looked like an SD70MAC. I expected it to be either a short train or to have DPU's, but no to both. I didn't count the cars, but there were well over 100 cars.
Next day about the same time there was a single GE unit doing the same thing, and this time I counted 131 cars, again with no DPU. I figure these two units thought they were steam locomotives.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
petitnj The economics of train operation means that the longer the train the less it costs per car to move. Train lengths are limited by siding length, yard track size, etc. Since horsepower of an individual locomotive is limited by the weight of locomotive you have to add more tons (ie locomotives) to get more horsepower. This has little to do with reliability and more to do with how much train you can move down the tracks. Conveniently you can have locomotives pointed both ways and have a cab on the front. Now with distributed power trains can even be longer as the stress on the couplers is distributed and not so dependent on the one coupler at the front of the cars.
True. However:
Higher sustained speeds = increased track capacity = increased efficiency + more competitive timeliness for other, time-sensitive servives
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimmTrue. However: Higher sustained speeds = increased track capacity = increased efficiency + more competitive timeliness for other, time-sensitive servives
I think I read somewhere that CP was considering raising it's speed limit across it's entire system by 10 mph for high speed freight. No idea what that is going to cost them or if it is just one of those trial balloons they float to investors. Read it somewhere though.
CMStPnP schlimm True. However: Higher sustained speeds = increased track capacity = increased efficiency + more competitive timeliness for other, time-sensitive servives I think I read somewhere that CP was considering raising it's speed limit across it's entire system by 10 mph for high speed freight. No idea what that is going to cost them or if it is just one of those trial balloons they float to investors. Read it somewhere though.
schlimm True. However: Higher sustained speeds = increased track capacity = increased efficiency + more competitive timeliness for other, time-sensitive servives
Subdivisions end up running at the speed of the slowest regular traffic on the subdivision. When you try to inject 'high speed' and slow speed trains on the same territory everybody gets screwed. There are only so many 'hiding' spots to hold the slow trains for the fast trains and 'codlocking' is the frequent result.
Just because you see multiple locomotives on a train doesn't mean thay are all working. Fuel conservation often as some, or sometimes all, trailing units just along for the ride. You may be seeing more "single engine" trains than you realize.
Jeff
BaltACD CMStPnP schlimm True. However: Higher sustained speeds = increased track capacity = increased efficiency + more competitive timeliness for other, time-sensitive servives I think I read somewhere that CP was considering raising it's speed limit across it's entire system by 10 mph for high speed freight. No idea what that is going to cost them or if it is just one of those trial balloons they float to investors. Read it somewhere though. Subdivisions end up running at the speed of the slowest regular traffic on the subdivision. When you try to inject 'high speed' and slow speed trains on the same territory everybody gets screwed. There are only so many 'hiding' spots to hold the slow trains for the fast trains and 'codlocking' is the frequent result.
Q: What's worse than being on a slow train?
A: Being on a train that is behind a slow train.
We call those trains one unit wonders.If it breaks down you wonder what happened.Also have seen multiple times of trains with units DOT(Dead in Tow).Then the crew calls the next yard or dispatcher to say hey can you give us another unit.Also have seen where the lead unit has run out of fuel.
stay safe
Joe
Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener").
BaltACD Subdivisions end up running at the speed of the slowest regular traffic on the subdivision. When you try to inject 'high speed' and slow speed trains on the same territory everybody gets screwed. There are only so many 'hiding' spots to hold the slow trains for the fast trains and 'codlocking' is the frequent result.
You don't spend a lot of time on CN. CN is all about putting the least amount of power on a train as they possibly can.
My train on the way home today was a 14000 ton, 100 car grain train with an SD75i and a C40-8 for power. We were restricted to throttle 7.
CN has severe throttle restrictions on their trains. On my territory most of the westbound trains, with exceptions of the intermodals, are carrying mostly empty cars.
Most of these westbounds are 9-11000 feet and in the 7-11000 ton range.
A train that is 11k feet at 11000 tons will be Notch 6 or 7 restricted on two units with a max grade of .6%.
Most empty grain trains will be Notch 5 or 6 restricted, on one unit, with any other trailing units isolated.
Aside from our two priority westbound intermodals, they don't care how fast you're going. Everything gets tucked to the side for these two trains well in advance but other than those two, they'll keep a fast train behind a slow train and simply not care.
So, you could see a train with 2 or 3 units but the crew may only be allowed to use one of them, and even still be further restricted on the throttle.
CN has ditchlights and a rear pilot on the long hood of nearly all of their road fleet (cowl units and BC Rail units don't) so the reversing restrictions which are move restrictive in the US than in Canada, wouldn't be a bother on single unit trains where the power can't be turned.
10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ...
blue streak 1But better yet have some way to just use the extra HP when needed. So how to idle unneeded front end power?
That was a premise of Harmon Select-A-Power.
Didn't we have an exhaustive discussion of how CP handles specific power requirements for its trains via (very intricately modeled) computer programs, including when to isolate units and do effective throttle notch restrictions right down to milepost granularity?
The situation with a traditional 'one-unit wonder' is very different from the situation where you're power-balancing, or have units isolated or dead in consist, or are running with the head-end unit isolated to cut down on the cab noise, and are using only one locomotive for power but if that one were to die you have another one almost instantly available. (I am tempted to observe how obviously different the situation at Lac Megantic would have been if any other unit in the consist had been started when the burning one was shut down...)
As noted many times here, yes, if you can use the higher speed effectively, more power to you! (pun intended) but you will need a well-advanced computer system that tracks the state of the railroad to determine what the 'optimal' speed will be and, from that, derive the cheapest way to achieve that.
And provide the crews with a good interactive display that explains all about why the throttle, isolation etc. decisions are being made, lets them override it by category and not just 'switching it off', and that gives them good control over all the aspects of power management on a consist of any number of locomotives no matter how they are set up and MUed. That part isn't quite there yet, perhaps because a generation and a half of whiz-kid programmers haven't seen a need for it yet. But it's even more essential now than the Miller train-control 'user interface' was back before the First World War...
On CN you're not allowed to have the lead unit isolated unless there is a defect requiring such.
traisessive1On CN you're not allowed to have the lead unit isolated unless there is a defect requiring such.
That is not unique to the CN.
traisessive1 On CN you're not allowed to have the lead unit isolated unless there is a defect requiring such.
We aren't either, unless they tell us to do so. It's amazing what can be done with Time and Initials.
EMD has a thing called "Smart Consist". Smart is the last thing I would use to describe it. At least it's been tweaked so when balancing the loading of units (up to 3) in a consist it no longer drops the load completely on the lead engine. It's supposed to run each engine in a consist separately to deliver the power called for. For example if the engineer places the throttle in notch 5, SC may run the lead engine in notch 3 and a trailing unit in notch 7 to deliver the power. (I just used those notchs for an example. There's a chart on how it's supposed to work the units but I don't have it handy.) I've had the feeling from observing it that all it's really doing is making the older, less fuel-efficient units do more of the work. Making the new SC equipped engine look like it's using less fuel. A MOP told me that SC will be going bye-bye in the future. Fine with me.
When setting up the SC system, you enter the type (model) of trailing units to be controlled by the lead engine. It has an option for a GP9 on the list. I bet that choice isn't used very often.
jeffhergert traisessive1 On CN you're not allowed to have the lead unit isolated unless there is a defect requiring such. We aren't either, unless they tell us to do so. It's amazing what can be done with Time and Initials. EMD has a thing called "Smart Consist". Smart is the last thing I would use to describe it. At least it's been tweaked so when balancing the loading of units (up to 3) in a consist it no longer drops the load completely on the lead engine. It's supposed to run each engine in a consist separately to deliver the power called for. For example if the engineer places the throttle in notch 5, SC may run the lead engine in notch 3 and a trailing unit in notch 7 to deliver the power. (I just used those notchs for an example. There's a chart on how it's supposed to work the units but I don't have it handy.) I've had the feeling from observing it that all it's really doing is making the older, less fuel-efficient units do more of the work. Making the new SC equipped engine look like it's using less fuel. A MOP told me that SC will be going bye-bye in the future. Fine with me. When setting up the SC system, you enter the type (model) of trailing units to be controlled by the lead engine. It has an option for a GP9 on the list. I bet that choice isn't used very often. Jeff
Is GE's 'Trip Optimiser' in operation when being used in a engine consist with Distributed Power?
BaltACD Is GE's 'Trip Optimiser' in operation when being used in a engine consist with Distributed Power?
Yes. Trip Optimizer (and LEADER auto-throttle version) will put up the fence and operate the DP consist independently of the lead consist. When going back to manual control it leaves the fence up and requires the engineer to take it down, as needed.
jeffhergert BaltACD Is GE's 'Trip Optimiser' in operation when being used in a engine consist with Distributed Power? Yes. Trip Optimizer (and LEADER auto-throttle version) will put up the fence and operate the DP consist independently of the lead consist. When going back to manual control it leaves the fence up and requires the engineer to take it down, as needed. Jeff
My carrier is heavy on having Engineers run with Trip Optimiser in operation. They are just starting to talk about using Distributed Power to eliminate 4 manned helper areas.
Trip Op is the devil.
Throttling off 10-13 miles away from a slow so it can coast in and maybe use dynamic. It's awful. It's so slow. It's all over the place.
I don't know how any official can say with a straight face that is really is more optimal than an engineer.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.