EuclidWell I am just guessing, but I think it might mean "Track Occupied Light" and it lights up on the dispatcher's board when a switch is opened, and it indicates the block facing the points is occupied. But if I am wrong, I am hoping someone will chime in with the right answer.
Yeah. track occupancy light, track light, I'm sure there's other terms as Jeff says. Dirty definition: Just shows when something is shunting/interupting the current in a block of track. Could be open switch, broken rail, shunting device, boxcar that rolled away from a siding, parked train, flooded tracks, broken bond wire, or something else.
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
TOL--sounds as though it is related to what the DS used to use to keep track of who was where when--and what each operator used to show who went by when. I won't give the old name; must keep it a secret.
Johnny
Kind of like OSing?
One desk I worked had a clipboard. Used it to keep track of what was in the various sidings/holding spots/ industries.
Old head told me "I don't care what you do - just keep that clipboard updated!"
I don't miss those days.
zugmann Euclid Well I am just guessing, but I think it might mean "Track Occupied Light" and it lights up on the dispatcher's board when a switch is opened, and it indicates the block facing the points is occupied. But if I am wrong, I am hoping someone will chime in with the right answer. Yeah. track occupancy light, track light, I'm sure there's other terms as Jeff says. Dirty definition: Just shows when something is shunting/interupting the current in a block of track. Could be open switch, broken rail, shunting device, boxcar that rolled away from a siding, parked train, flooded tracks, broken bond wire, or something else.
Euclid Well I am just guessing, but I think it might mean "Track Occupied Light" and it lights up on the dispatcher's board when a switch is opened, and it indicates the block facing the points is occupied. But if I am wrong, I am hoping someone will chime in with the right answer.
So was that working at the collsion site during the signal supension? Or was it shut off because of the signal suspension?
EuclidSo was that working at the collsion site during the signal supension? Or was it shut off because of the signal suspension?
that is the signal system.
zugmann Kind of like OSing? One desk I worked had a clipboard. Used it to keep track of what was in the various sidings/holding spots/ industries. Old head told me "I don't care what you do - just keep that clipboard updated!" I don't miss those days.
Deggesty zugmann Kind of like OSing? One desk I worked had a clipboard. Used it to keep track of what was in the various sidings/holding spots/ industries. Old head told me "I don't care what you do - just keep that clipboard updated!" I don't miss those days. Zug, DON'T give it away!
Zug, DON'T give it away!
The ***** ***** that the dispatcher used to maintain in ink, is now maintained by computer. Zug's clip board sounds like a column on the ***** *****s I have from the RI called a yard report. Actually ***** ***** is probably more slang. I have some from the RI, MILW and FTDDM&S and the form name is a bit more formal. On the RI the form was called ************ ****** ** ***** ********. The RI form the operators used to record train arrival/departure/passing was ******* ****** ** ***** ********.
Now we can discuss OS. Is it "On Sheet", "Out of Station" or "Over Switch"? I'm in the On Sheet camp.
Jeff
OS = On sheet.
My first rules qualification was in the consolidated code of operating rules..
Then it was GCOR, then it was CROR, then NORAC, now again GCOR. And don't forget the CORA book for Chicago. So many rules, so little memory...
I’m new here. More than four decades ago, I spent two years working on a small southern railroad. And I have been a railfan for more than 60 years.
Some of Euclid’s questions and comments strike me as perhaps coming from someone relatively uninformed, unrealistic, naive, or some combination thereof. But they seem like honest, sincere remarks, by and large. (Maybe with an exception or two.)
But I find some of the snarky, condescending responses to his/her posts to be infinitely more offensive than anything Euclid has posted.
Just sayin’.
I personally learn more from instructive posts than from ones whose primary purpose seems to be to throw one‘s weight around and show who the “real railroaders” are.
Still in training.
Randy StahlOS = On sheet. My first rules qualification was in the consolidated code of operating rules.. Then it was GCOR, then it was CROR, then NORAC, now again GCOR. And don't forget the CORA book for Chicago. So many rules, so little memory...
So many rules nearly the same - but not! And the devil is in the differences.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
LithoniaOperator I But I find some of the snarky, condescending responses to his/her posts to be infinitely more offensive than anything Euclid has posted. Just sayin’. I personally learn more from instructive posts than from ones whose primary purpose seems to be to throw one‘s weight around and show who the “real railroaders” are.
I
Well said.
BaltACD Randy Stahl OS = On sheet. My first rules qualification was in the consolidated code of operating rules.. Then it was GCOR, then it was CROR, then NORAC, now again GCOR. And don't forget the CORA book for Chicago. So many rules, so little memory... So many rules nearly the same - but not! And the devil is in the differences.
Randy Stahl OS = On sheet. My first rules qualification was in the consolidated code of operating rules.. Then it was GCOR, then it was CROR, then NORAC, now again GCOR. And don't forget the CORA book for Chicago. So many rules, so little memory...
Yes, but I've never released my main track authority with a switch reversed unless I had a clearance or track warrant line item to do so regardless of what rulebook I was using.
243129 LithoniaOperator I But I find some of the snarky, condescending responses to his/her posts to be infinitely more offensive than anything Euclid has posted. Just sayin’. I personally learn more from instructive posts than from ones whose primary purpose seems to be to throw one‘s weight around and show who the “real railroaders” are. Well said.
But still wrong...
An "expensive model collector"
LithoniaOperator I’m new here. More than four decades ago, I spent two years working on a small southern railroad. And I have been a railfan for more than 60 years. Some of Euclid’s questions and comments strike me as perhaps coming from someone relatively uninformed, unrealistic, naive, or some combination thereof. But they seem like honest, sincere remarks, by and large. (Maybe with an exception or two.) But I find some of the snarky, condescending responses to his/her posts to be infinitely more offensive than anything Euclid has posted.
Deal with Euclid, or Bucky, or whatever screen name he or she decides to use today for the last 5 years, and you will find them less naive. It has gotten to the point that I will not even respond to him/her. It just isn't worth the effort. Most of the real railroaders, along with the coach cleaners feel the same, and show it with the "snarky" responses. Stick around for awhile and you will see.
zugmann tree68 Are you proposing restricted speed (a method of operation which is specifically spelled out in the rules), or "a restricted speed?" And if you're suggesting "a restricted speed," what would you suggest it be? Restricted speed isn't necessarily necessary. If you're just concerned with switchpoints, you can operate prepared to stop at each facing one. We had that rule for running opposed in 251 territory for a bit. Never understood it, really.
tree68 Are you proposing restricted speed (a method of operation which is specifically spelled out in the rules), or "a restricted speed?" And if you're suggesting "a restricted speed," what would you suggest it be?
Restricted speed isn't necessarily necessary. If you're just concerned with switchpoints, you can operate prepared to stop at each facing one.
We had that rule for running opposed in 251 territory for a bit. Never understood it, really.
I remember it being a rule where you had double track ABS and running against the current the facing point hand throws weren't wiried into the block signalling. I'm thinking the rule was in place on the ex-Reading and carried into NORAC, but dont' quote me...
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Only one I can think you missed would be track circuit out of calibration.
ChuckCobleigh A little off topic vis a vis where the thread is at the moment, but apropos to the subject line on the thread, 93 years ago on February 7, Mopac passenger train 104 from Omaha to Kansas City hit a switch on the main and careened into the engine of a stopped freight on the siding, killing both engineers and firemen and apparently a rod-riding soldier from Ft. Leavenworth. This occurred near Nearman, KS. So, Cayce is not a recent phenomenon.
No, NJT ran a train into a spaghetti factory at speed a couple decades ago, too.
Everyone ignores me, so I can get away with this: I think this person is a plant. Used to keep things moving on the forum. A pot stirrer that someone behind the scenes knows very well and approves. Admit it. You all enjoy poking a stick at this person or they would evaporate due to being ignored. Takes two to argue - ahem, discuss.
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
MookieA pot stirrer that someone behind the scenes knows very well and approves.
You are not alone in that belief.
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...
Yeah, I like that. It takes so little to stir the pot here.
n012944 . . . the real railroaders, along with the coach cleaners . . .
Sigh.
I better make more popcorn, this is getting good!
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
oltmanndNo, NJT ran a train into a spaghetti factory at speed a couple decades ago, too.
Did the engineer have a meat-ball signal to do that?
ChuckCobleigh oltmannd No, NJT ran a train into a spaghetti factory at speed a couple decades ago, too. Did the engineer have a meat-ball signal to do that?
oltmannd No, NJT ran a train into a spaghetti factory at speed a couple decades ago, too.
And if this caused the sauce to be spread over the lumber scattered by the accident, would you have a bunch of "red boards"?
So far as I can derive from available info. we had a human failure to properly align a hand switch. Most if not all operating rules on the RR are the result of such failures over many years and adjustments to requirements. The rules also require that employees are aware of their actions with respect to safety.
As to the question of whether restricted speed would be most advisable, I suggest not when the limits of operating authority are "known" to be clear. It may be the result of the investigation into this matter requires that within signal suspension limits all facing point switches are required to be spiked before passenger (or all) trains are allowed to enter the limits; or use of hand switches and taking CTC switches off power to hand throw them is prohibited. Apart from this particular event, the signal system may be inoperative owing to weather, wherby locations in a territory cannot be accessed other than by rail, or that movement of traffic is so slowed that crews may expire on their hours of service unless there are means to advance traffic, and restricted speed does not sufficently accomplish this over significant distances. I do not think the rules are ambiguous or unclear so that there should have been any mistake in this event, from what I can ascertain. Moreover, as others have stated, "dark" territory has been operated for more than a century and a half, relying upon the integrity of those associated with the movement of trains. Whether PTC proves to be a fail-safe mode remains to be seen.
I would question whether CSX had any (qualified) supervisory personnel briefing crews about the nature of the signal suspension that required train movements in an unusual circumstance.
In short, I would characterize a suggestion that restricted speed would be safer as akin to requiring that all traffic moving in a highway construction zone move at 20mph - such as ten miles of all traffic using lanes of what is normally highway in one direction. Safer? Perhaps. Practical? Not.
He musta pasta red signal
LithoniaOperator n012944 . . . the real railroaders, along with the coach cleaners . . . Sigh.
Snicker.
Mookie Everyone ignores me, so I can get away with this: I think this person is a plant. Used to keep things moving on the forum. A pot stirrer that someone behind the scenes knows very well and approves. Admit it. You all enjoy poking a stick at this person or they would evaporate due to being ignored. Takes two to argue - ahem, discuss.
I thought I was the "plant" . I can be disruptive too, ask my boss..
Oh, the late night humor! I'm glad I was in bed
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.