charlie hebdo tree68 A 700 axle train A 700 axle train today is a whole lot longer than one in 1950. 700 axles x ~40' average car length then was long, but only 7000 feet. Now it would be ~75' average car = 13125 feet, almost twice as long.
tree68 A 700 axle train A 700 axle train today is a whole lot longer than one in 1950. 700 axles x ~40' average car length then was long, but only 7000 feet. Now it would be ~75' average car = 13125 feet, almost twice as long.
My Dad and I worked the same yard in Baltimore - roughly 40 years apart. He viewed the yard as having all kinds of room, I viewed it as a nighmarish band box that was too small to do its job with the size of the cars that were being used.
In my Dad's day the 'BIG' car was a 50 foot box car, with most other cars being 40 foot or 36 footers. In my day the normal cars were 89 foot High Cube box cars and 89 foot open auto racks. Additionally most of the auto parts that weren't in the High Cube boxes were in 60 foot boxes. The 36 foot gondolas of my fathers era were 52 and 65 footers in my era.
Dad worked it in the late 30's; I worked it in the late 70's. Today the two biggest business concerns that both of us had to deal with no longer exist. Bethlehem Steel and the mill at Sparrows Point and the General Motors Assembly Plant at Holabird no longer exist. The footprint of the GM plant has morphed into any number of business buildings - including a UPS terminal. The former Beth Steel property has been renamed into TradePoint Atlantic, with a number of business undertaking being house there. It was recently announced that a container terminal for ocean going vessels is to be developed at TradePoint Atlantic.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
charlie hebdoSurprising is how operating rail employees seem to always defend most of management schemes other than PSR. Long train lengths cut labor costs and reduce the numbers of needed employees. Pretty sure NKP's teachers Union, whether AFT or NEA took a dim view of increasing maximum class sizes by almost 100%.
I think public opinion is shifting in this area against railroads. Look what happened with airlines and the sitting on the tamarac for ungodly periods of time because the airline did not want to return the plane to the gate. New Federal regulations there and soon to be new Federal regulations with the various airline fee rip off schemes. Likewise I think a railroad executive is challenged to say to the least on their ability to explain how they can hold their hand out for Federal and State money for their properties while at the same time giving the traveling public the shaft when the public is on an Amtrak or any other passenger train for that matter.
I could understand a railroad position if they even made a business case to the Federal or State government of money for infrastruture to support Amtrak trains and Amtrak train timeliness but none of them have to my knowledge outside of Amtrak expanding frequencies. Instead a calculated decision was reached some time ago they can screw over the traveling public on long distance trains because little or no heat or pushback will happen.
charlie hebdoA 700 axle train today is a whole lot longer than one in 1950. 700 axles x ~40' average car length then was long, but only 7000 feet. Now it would be ~75' average car = 13125 feet, almost twice as long.
Most assuredly! I didn't time the trains I mentioned. Suffice to say they took a while. And while they were manifest freights, they did include some autoracks.
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...
Surprising is how operating rail employees seem to always defend most of management schemes other than PSR. Long train lengths cut labor costs and reduce the numbers of needed employees.
Pretty sure NKP's teachers Union, whether AFT or NEA took a dim view of increasing maximum class sizes by almost 100%.
tree68A 700 axle train
A 700 axle train today is a whole lot longer than one in 1950. 700 axles x ~40' average car length then was long, but only 7000 feet. Now it would be ~75' average car = 13125 feet, almost twice as long.
tree68NKP guy How would the railroads like it if the public would block their tracks ("Sorry, we have a parade scheduled")? After all, two can play the same game.
Anyone here remember the First Nations rail blockades in Canada in early 2020 right before the pandemic? Very effective, thanks to the sensitive nature of relations with First Nations people in Canada. Just imagine what could happen if groups wanting CSX and NS to pay compensation for the activities of their southern predecessors descended upon Pine Junction, Indiana and blockaded the two busiest mainlines in the eastern US.
Edit: If a blockade were erected a few hundred feet further north, CN's access to Kirk Yard could be cut off too.
tree68Who gets the say depends largely on who was there first, just like diamonds. In many cases, it was the railroad. MC can probably cite some examples...
In the case of the UP West main, ex-CNW Galena Division line through the western Chicago burbs, the towns were mostly first, often inviting the railroad with incentives, such as free land.
A major problem in the 21st century is retaining privately-owned rail lines with ROWs laid out 150 or more years ago. Switching to upgraded state controlled infrastructure (as roads are) could solve the problem and leave maintaining rolling stock and operations to private rail operators. If they struggle with either of those areas, they would lose licenses to operate.
NKP guyHow would the railroads like it if the public would block their tracks ("Sorry, we have a parade scheduled")? After all, two can play the same game.
Depending on the railroad, they have held traffic for such events. OTOH, those events are infrequent (maybe annual, in most towns), so it's less of a deal.
I fully agree that extended blocking of crossings is a problem, especially if it's stopped trains and it's a regular/frequent event. I see this regularly on the Deshler cam (and when I'm there). A 700 axle train rounding one of the transfers (at ~10MPH) can essentially cut off a quarter of the town.
A garage fire while I was in Deshler this summer saw some responding units delayed by a train coming through. Didn't really change the outcome (I was there before the FD, and the entire garage was aflame, inside and out).
Who gets the say depends largely on who was there first, just like diamonds. In many cases, it was the railroad. MC can probably cite some examples...
I joke about Starbucks mainly because that's probably who complains the longest and loudest (Karen, anyone).
n012944 NKP guy The public never agreed to PSR. It doesn't matter. One only has to look at the amount of collisions Metra has had with autos over the years. At best, the gates will be down for less than a minute for a commuter train, but often that is too long for the general public. Complaining about train length is just an excuse.
NKP guy The public never agreed to PSR.
The public never agreed to PSR.
It doesn't matter. One only has to look at the amount of collisions Metra has had with autos over the years. At best, the gates will be down for less than a minute for a commuter train, but often that is too long for the general public. Complaining about train length is just an excuse.
It does matter. The public is fed up with some railroads'utter contempt for the people in the many towns through which they pass. Arrogant attitudes do not make for good neighbors
Beware of the inevitable eventual pushback.
n012944Complaining about train length is just an excuse.
I see I need to clarify: Here in town people don't really mind waiting at the crossing as long as the leviathan on the tracks keeps moving. It's stopped trains that drive folks to distraction and can be a danger.
So you make a good point, n012944.
An "expensive model collector"
tree68The public doesn't want to be delayed on their way to Starbucks.
I agree with three of your points:
If the railroads want 400 car trains with one crew member, let them build and pay for the necessary long sidings or better yet, bridges.
There is a happy medium and, as in nearly everything in life, it's all about finding the balance; the ancient Greeks knew that.
But I think it's too heavy-handed to make the public seem frivolous. What I see at the crossings in my town daily are people going to work or to college, or just trying to get somewhere. The public has as much right to use their roads as the railroads do theirs.
In my town, the citizens built a second fire station on the west side in 1949 because Erie trains frequently blocked all three crossings; being late for school because of a stopped train was common to teachers and students and considered an excused tardiness (where else but in school is "tardy" used?). Finally, two overpasses were built, just in time (1971 or '72) for the Erie Lackawanna to go out of business and NS to more or less abandon their W&LE line here.
How would the railroads like it if the public would block their tracks ("Sorry, we have a parade scheduled")? After all, two can play the same game.
As usual,I agree with you tree, but waiting for a train to clear the crossing while one is trying to get to work, the hospital, the doctor's office, to school or an appointment, or somewhere similar, is not frivolous. The public never agreed to PSR.
I read something within the last year that the railroads and EOT makers are working on an EOT that can maintain communication with the lead engine without the use of a midtrain repeater. The distance between the engine and EOT they are trying to make work is 5 miles.
Jeff
tree68 Psychot Following your logic to its conclusion, we shouldn't regulate anything because some people complain about everything. It's all about finding the balance. The railroads would like to run 400 car trains with one crew member. The public doesn't want to be delayed on their way to Starbucks. Somewhere in there is a happy medium. The problem is finding a point where both sides complain equally...
Psychot Following your logic to its conclusion, we shouldn't regulate anything because some people complain about everything.
It's all about finding the balance.
The railroads would like to run 400 car trains with one crew member.
The public doesn't want to be delayed on their way to Starbucks.
Somewhere in there is a happy medium. The problem is finding a point where both sides complain equally...
That's spot on.
Reading467According to the 16-page complaint, the issue of long trains primarily deals with the inability of Amtrak's Crescents to overtake long slower frieghts traveling below the 79 mph passenger limit. In those cases, the frieght taking the siding wouldn't matter, since the front or back would still foul the main. Another area of complaint is freights blocking access to station tracks. There were 3-4 examples given, all of which caused avoidable delays by questionable dispatching/train operations. There was one other example of a SB Crescent being stuck behind a CSX frieght #605 (on trackage dispatched by NS) for 3 miles. The Crescent was 10 miles from NOUPT and would've been on time if it didn't get stuck by the CSX frieght, which was heading west from CSX's Gentilly Yard. The Crescent wound up being 55 minutes late into Nawlins. There were also complaints about the Crescents being put into sidings to allow for multiple frieght meets in northern Mississippi. I can see how that would be necessary for Amtrak to take the sidings to keep freight traffic moving fluidly on the mostly single track NS line. Here's the URL for the complaint: https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1362071/dl?inline
Another area of complaint is freights blocking access to station tracks. There were 3-4 examples given, all of which caused avoidable delays by questionable dispatching/train operations.
There was one other example of a SB Crescent being stuck behind a CSX frieght #605 (on trackage dispatched by NS) for 3 miles. The Crescent was 10 miles from NOUPT and would've been on time if it didn't get stuck by the CSX frieght, which was heading west from CSX's Gentilly Yard. The Crescent wound up being 55 minutes late into Nawlins.
There were also complaints about the Crescents being put into sidings to allow for multiple frieght meets in northern Mississippi. I can see how that would be necessary for Amtrak to take the sidings to keep freight traffic moving fluidly on the mostly single track NS line.
Here's the URL for the complaint:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1362071/dl?inline
Nothing more that NS 'sticking it to the man' - the man being Amtrak. There are ways to Dispatch terrirories with 'restrictive' operational parameters and not screw over 'the man'. NS has always be antagonistic toward the operation of Amtrak - Not as bad as CN but close.
According to the 16-page complaint, the issue of long trains primarily deals with the inability of Amtrak's Crescents to overtake long slower frieghts traveling below the 79 mph passenger limit. In those cases, the frieght taking the siding wouldn't matter, since the front or back would still foul the main.
PsychotFollowing your logic to its conclusion, we shouldn't regulate anything because some people complain about everything.
Psychot tree68 charlie hebdo The point of the thread was long trains cause very long delays at crossings of 5 or more minutes. Add to that the increase in the number of trains and parking trains because of inadequate yard space and crossings can be tied up for 30 minutes or more. Monster trains also are more suseptible to air hose disconnects leading to blockages of an hour. I see these events first hand on the UP mainline. Agreed - but my point is that "long train" is subjective in the public's eyes. And that to some people (likely the most vocal, at that) is that any train is too long... Following your logic to its conclusion, we shouldn't regulate anything because some people complain about everything.
tree68 charlie hebdo The point of the thread was long trains cause very long delays at crossings of 5 or more minutes. Add to that the increase in the number of trains and parking trains because of inadequate yard space and crossings can be tied up for 30 minutes or more. Monster trains also are more suseptible to air hose disconnects leading to blockages of an hour. I see these events first hand on the UP mainline. Agreed - but my point is that "long train" is subjective in the public's eyes. And that to some people (likely the most vocal, at that) is that any train is too long...
charlie hebdo The point of the thread was long trains cause very long delays at crossings of 5 or more minutes. Add to that the increase in the number of trains and parking trains because of inadequate yard space and crossings can be tied up for 30 minutes or more. Monster trains also are more suseptible to air hose disconnects leading to blockages of an hour. I see these events first hand on the UP mainline.
Agreed - but my point is that "long train" is subjective in the public's eyes. And that to some people (likely the most vocal, at that) is that any train is too long...
Following your logic to its conclusion, we shouldn't regulate anything because some people complain about everything.
Isn't that the 21st Century already?
Even two-track mains like the Chicago Line through Utica, NY will evidence the "Amtrak halo." I've seen it many times.
Amongst the Class 1's that operate Amtrak over their lines - some carriers give Amtrak some priority, some carriers errect operating/financial roadblocks - let alone no priority to Amtrak.
The carriers know who they are.
Remember for Amtrak to see Clear signals - any train (freight or passenger) must be AT LEAST two signal segments ahead of a following train. At the start of the Century, signal segments were the approximation of two miles between signals, as the Century approaches the Quarter Post on many lines the signal spacing has been increased to three miles and in some cases more.
Trains were getting longer before PSR. If they abandoned the worst parts of PSR, some trains would undoubtedly still be huge.
I don't think the DOJ lawsuit is about legislating train length, although it will probably be used by proponents of such legislation as a reason it is needed. The lawsuit isn't about which train takes the siding or holds the main. Rather it's the fact that the Amtrak train has to stop to let a freight train clear a route for it.
Some times a small delay in one spot will prevent a big delay somewhere else. I imagine that there are those, including some on railfan sites, who think passenger trains should see nothing but green lights. After all that's how it used to be. It used to be freight trains were shorter, but there also was more of them. There were also more sidings to make meets and passes. Even then, not all trains could fit in all sidings.
Those days are gone. Now you have sidings maybe every 20 to 30 miles. The dispatcher has to keep his territory fluid. Holding a train that fits at A so Amtrak doesn't stop. This can also cause a domino effect delaying other trains that can start hogging out on HOS. Eventually there's no where for anyone to move. So maybe putting Amtrak in the hole at B or C for a few minutes may be the better option.
Like those motorists that turn around at the sight of xing signals starting, many won't countenance any delay for Amtrak.
I haven't read the lawsuit, but imagine it way downplays delays Amtrak itself is responsible for while focusing a laser like attention on NS caused delays.
charlie hebdoThe point of the thread was long trains cause very long delays at crossings of 5 or more minutes. Add to that the increase in the number of trains and parking trains because of inadequate yard space and crossings can be tied up for 30 minutes or more. Monster trains also are more suseptible to air hose disconnects leading to blockages of an hour. I see these events first hand on the UP mainline.
tree68Not at all. You've missed my point entirely.
The point of the thread was long trains cause very long delays at crossings of 5 or more minutes. Add to that the increase in the number of trains and parking trains because of inadequate yard space and crossings can be tied up for 30 minutes or more. Monster trains also are more suseptible to air hose disconnects leading to blockages of an hour. I see these events first hand on the UP mainline.
It also has nothing to do with which train fits into a passing siding during a meet.
One of the chief reasons given for the physical Crescent delays was in fact 'trains too long for the passing sidings'. This would be remediated by operating shorter trains during the 'window of time' needed by a given Amtrak train... but terminal delays, other congestion, earlier Amtrak delays, etc. could require the necessary "window" to be longer, or involve considerable advance planning and losses in 'throughput' efficiency to assure.
Another amelioration might be to relax 'fifth-notch' restrictions on trains ahead of an Amtrak move -- the problem then being the whole higher-speed-can-lead-to-worse-accidents issue NS now faces after East Palestine.
I have little doubt that this is brought now because of the pending Dallas-to-Meridian trains, which as currently planned double both the impact on Atlanta traffic but the section between Atlanta and Meridian. So they kill two birds with one stone: re-establish the absolute Amtrak priority that was (somewhat snottily) advanced at the STB hearings over the Mobile trains, and chasten NS in advance for what will be more trains in a congested situation.
OvermodThe Justice Department suit against NS specifically mentions trains that were too long to take siding to allow Amtrak trains to proceed...
Only one train must fit a siding for a meet - Amtrak fits most all sidings.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.