Remote Control Rail-Roading?

[Anonymous]

Remote Control R.R. (RC) is gradually becoming a joke in the Seattle Terminal of the B.N.S.F.. Little work is being done, the vests that are supplied by our 'carrier' don't fit very well, thus making the carrying of the Canac Pack's uncomfortable to say the least, and could very likely creat a liability issue down the road for the 'carrier'. After the first few weeks of use by our yd. crews, they have told me the fun factor has worn off, and reality set in. The humorous part in all of this is that some yards 'switch with air', and the R.C. engines won't rev-up to 'pump-off' the cars so they may be moved. The highest air pressure these units can achieve is 55lbs. Then they shut down because of compressor malfunction. At these yards, I believe that the 'carrier' is about to 'cry uncle' and move on. But any R.R. employee out there knows how tenatious our Class 1's are when it comes to implementing new technology. We all should recognize the need to look forward, but R.C. realistically is'nt doing the job. Every job of R.C. nature frequently requires the use of a 'utility' yard employee for said job to complete yard moves during their shifts. This nulifies the benefit of eliminating an employee! I realise I'm being somewhat long-winded on a subject that may seem boring to non-employees, but this is the dynamic issue facing the Class 1's being currently used as Guiney-Pigs, and I would like to hear from people who would like to give me their input. I won't be training on these myself...thank G**...Hommie

[Anonymous]

Bruce,Glad to hear that the RCO's are proving to be the joke that they are.I work for the BNSF in Denver and the company is planning on implementing them next month.One of the yards they plan on using them in is on a almost 1% grade and switching with air is a necessity.But your right,their bound and determined to make them work.Even if it costs them dearly.No substitute for a real engineer in the cab.For safety and the efficient operation of engines.How can a man on the ground have a feel for what he's operating?He cant!

[Anonymous]

Reality check guys. Remote control has been around a long time in industries that do their own switching. The first one I ever saw was in the early 70's in Ohio, and it worked well. Granted, it was flat yard switching as well as spotting and pulling, but it worked. Everyone knows it will not work everywhere, but new technology has to be tried. Remember, the brothers said there's no way road trains can operate without firemen...but they did. Then no way trains could run with 3-person crews, but they did, then 2-person crews, but they do and safely as well. Everyone said the utility brakeman was inefficient and unsafe, but it isn't. On NS, pushers run engineer only and have for years with no loss of life or injury because of it. Guess who has had the best reportable injury record 11 years in a row? If switching with air using remote control is not working, why not find ways to make it work? It seems that you've already identified one reason, the inability to pump up enough air. Doesn't anyone listen to you? You're the ones who can make it work, or make it fail, but I'm afraid if you choose the latter, it is all of us who will suffer...and you the most. My opinion guys and that's what you asked? Check your switches and have a safe day! gdc

[Anonymous]

Might work ok on a small scale,but the jury's still out in a major class one RR classification yard with dozens of switch engines and trains constantly coming andd going.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the response...I realise that part of the R.C. problem is the ancient equippment we are trying to upgrade for said operations. It's hard to even find wiring diagrams, let alone do the mechanical upgrades. If R.R.'s don't use reasonably modern units--such as at least GP-50's for example, these R.C. problems will always hamper switching operations, and compromise safety...Hommie

[Anonymous]

The first one I saw was on a GE 60-Ton industrial locomotive. Yep, it took some getting use to, but that came quickly! I had the confidence to couple to cars after 15 minutes! After about 2 hours, I was able to pull ten loads, about all that old GE would do. No kidding, R.C. will make your jobs safer, easier and more efficient. Check your switches and have a safe day. It's your right. gdc

[Anonymous]

This is whats scary about remotes.False confidence and a attitude that its a piece of cake moving cars around from the ground.Safer?Easier?More efficient? You've got to be kidding.

[Anonymous]

The Canadian roads have used it in major terminals for ten years. Safety HAS IMPROVED.
Just retired from the UP after 43 years in transportation dept, brakeman conductor switchman, switch foreman, yardmaster. Our biggest enemy was and will be ourselves until we face the fact progress will happen and we adapt and gain from it.

[Anonymous]

No, I'm not kidding! You control your own confidence! If you've been a brakeman or engineer two years or more, working with R.C.'s will come right to you. If you're on the ground, you won't feel the buff and slack forces (at least I hope you don't), and you wear that waist halter that makes you look pregnant, everything else is the same. You sound like a pretty savvy railroader, so I would suggest you ask the following question to yourself: Is my concern really safety, practicality and feasibility or is it something else, having to do with seniority rosters, perhaps? We all care, so if you take those elements that are self-serving out of the mix from all sides, positive solutions pop right up! A win/win ending. Good luck and have a safe day! Check your switches. gdc

[Anonymous]

Good luck with your RCO future.I disagree with all you've said.You want the feel of the train under your ***.If you think two yrs make you a engineer and you've learned all their is to learn you'll find out the hard way that theirs no substitute for experience.With 26yrs senority RCO's aren't going to affect me one bit, senority wise.Hope you enjoy your career as your the one who will be experiencing the new and better way of railroading. Don't get run over while your playing with your engine and checking those switches.

[Anonymous]

Sir, you have acquired a misconception. I've been on the railroad 38 years with a clean record...started as a fireman, and actually was the youngest qualified passenger fireman. I've been a qualified engineer since 1971 and been through all the seniority issues, so I'm not a rookie and I understand your concerns. While I was able to move into a non-agreement job, I never lost my care and concern for all rail employees and the good of the industry. Over the years, though, the greater value of increased productivity has become glaringly apparent. I was disappointed to see you use derisive wording. No one can be on the railroad as many years as you and I and think it is a toy. Differences of opinion should not replace respect and the fact that we are conversing on this website illuminates a common interest. How many non-rail enthusiasts would even know to look here, or would, even if they did know about it? Not many, I'll bet.
The expression "check your switches" refers to the practice of double checking the blades to see that they are properly aligned and fitted before proceeding. I thought that was a common expression on all roads. Don't you do that? I hope you have a safe day! gdc

[Anonymous]

Sir,Just the kind of resonse I'd expect from managment.Increased productivity is just a euphemism for the elinination of jobs.How do you call it increased productivity when trains are delayed getting in and out of terminals account RCO's are in use.How is it increased productivity when it takes twice as long to switch a cut of cars?How is it increased productivity when a utility man is taken away from his job to help out a crew using a RCO?How is it increased productivity when extra engine yard jobs are called account the work not getting done because of RCO's?Increased productivity at the expense of safety happens on a daily basis throughout this industry.Exrta baords cut to bare minimums so that the ones on them are working every eight hours.Crews that have brought a train 250 miles and been on duty 10 plus hours then asked to do work that was traditionally set aside for the yard account RCO's being used.Men and women on one extra board being called to protect another because its out of people.No wonder the new hire turnover rate is greater than 50%.
I respect differances of opinion that make a valid point,but when their missleading I'll continue to speak out.
Whats the next step?A one man road frieght crew?
its coming the hand writting is already on the wall.Increased productivity can only go so far,it then crosses the line and becomes a safety issue.But its the bottom line that counts,right?Their is no substitute for a real pair of eyes and ears no matter what spin you care to put on this matter.And change just for the sake of change isn't always good.
We call what you call blades, points and don't need some managment type telling me to double check them.

[wabash1]

who is this managment person trying to fool. first around here they still do operate pusher service with conductors. someone has to lace up the hoses and check the brakes and rehang the eot. second for the first week of rco here they have called in yard job to get the work done that the rco should have been doing. after 1 month of operation it isnt any better. its to the point that the railroad is slowing down on training people on the rco . some terminals are letting the rco sit. ive seen rco operations in industry that works... but its small scale work very few cars at a time. in a major yard it wont work to time consuming.

[Saxman]

It seems the last couple of threads have hit a nerve. It appears through reading the responeses, that remote control is being applied with no thought to operations. If this is the case, I feel for the individuals who must operate in this enviorment. Adopting any practice without thought to impact is never a good idea.

I also find it a bit odd that, at present, there is no use of remote control on the U.S. properties of the Canadian National. It is talked about during contract talks but that is all for now. Why is one of the pioneers of remote control not jumping on the band wagon in the U.S. like the other railroads? You just have to ask that question.

TLH

[Anonymous]

It's too bad we didn't have the opportunity to work together and learn from each other. I would urge you not to think of management as the enemy...we are not. I hope your line supervision listens and that you use that opportunity to express your issues with concern rather than bitterness. Safety slogans repeated are never out of style. Have a safe day!

[Anonymous]

Give me a break. I work for the BNSF and when it comes to RCO operations Fort Worth has made it clear they want incedents covered up. To be honest the BNSF does not have as much at stake as the CN because the CN owns CANAC. So don't tell me about their safety record. There are three kinds of lies, lies, darn lies and statistics.

[Anonymous]

The people in favor of remotes always say they are safe that the accidents are caused by human error because the RCO did not malfunction. The truth is there are some things that are inherently unsafe about them. If you are riding on the end of a long cut of cars especially with air in the cars hang on tight because if yours or the other belt pack loses radio contact the locomotive will go in emergency, that is what it is designed to do. We had the incedent happen where I work and it snapped a knuckle and kicked the operator out on the lead. Lucky him nothing else was on the lead. Even with repeaters installed in the yard loss of radio contact is still routine. I watched a guy try to take slake to pull a pin on one car, the locomotive kicked that car five car lengths.

[Anonymous]

I beg to differ, management is the problem not the solution. Management in the old days knew what was going on because they went out into the field. Today they sit in their office and read reams of stats supplied by computers till they think they know what is going on. Litle do they know that the people entering in the data often put in lies to make themselves look better. Check the switch BLADES

[BRAKIE]

Speaking as a former brakeman,the very thought of R/C locomotives scares the living daylights out of me.I have looked into this and fail to see how it can be safe to work a yard with.Thank God I don't have to work with that accident waiting to happen.How many bloody ties will it take before this thing is done away with?
Gentleman,Railroading has always be a dangerous job,we all know that to be true.Back in the early days a brakeman's life expectancy was 6 months before he meet his death or injury of losing a arm or leg.Are we returning to those days for the almighty bottom line? God forbid.

[Jackflash]

Believe me, not everyone in management is
FOR remote control locomotives!!!

[Anonymous]

Sir,During my 26yrs of RRing have only had one P.I.Piece of brake shoe flake lodged in my eye.Safety is very important during the execution of railroad work.Safety isn't about catch all phrases and safety slogans.Its about living and doing.I don't think of managment as my enemy, their just doing the job their paid to do like myself.Use to be that supervisors came up from the ranks hopefully gaining experience and knowledge along the way.But alas not that way anymore.I do take offense when some twenty something college educated neophyte tells me how to do my job especially when he's way off base.Now I'm not saying your one of those types,but good front line supervisors are few and far between anymore.When something is repeated over and over again one becomes numb to what is being said.Have a nice day.

[Anonymous]

I'm new to this webforum stuff, But I do have a thought on remote operations. We here all sorts of figures on reduced accident rates, I wonder what the productivity rates are? I mean, if you go from switching tw0 hundred cars per shift and one accident per week to two cars per shift and one accident per quarter, something just doesn't seem right. But what do I know, I've only been switching for 30 years?

[Anonymous]

You don't think a hog ever ran anyone over when they were checking switches? The vast majority of railway accidents are human error. The remotes are a pain in the ***, but they work. We have used them for 10 years now and somedays I am wish I had a beltpak instead of a hog, depending on the hog. The older guys don't repeat instructions,or car lenghts. When I have the beltpak the engine doesn't move unless I make it!The remote isn't perfect but the ones you are getting in the US now are far better than the ones we started with, they are lighter and have more functions and respond better. Give them timeand you will like them unless you are a hog.

[Anonymous]

You are so correct about our 'exempt's' being bogged down with rediculous paper work review. Our road-conductors now fill out 'signal-awareness forms' for each signal, what time by each signal, speed by signal, any and all track notices encountered etc. etc.. Then there are the piles of 'delay reports'. What a joke! If a yard like ours in Seattle has only R.C. operations and a road-crew on 'short-time' goes 'dead', things really get out of control. There is no 'dog-catching' with R.C.. So everyone waits 2-3 hrs. for a engineer to show up for 1 hr. of work. Wow, I love this place...Hommie

[Anonymous]

Accidents happening in this country are almost a daily event and are being attributed to human error.But wait that can't be as you state the only kind of human error is the result of a "hogs" mistake.

[Anonymous]

Been union,been management and "union" has been much more fun.If they only knew how deep and hard we insert.Sure,they laugh and make deraggatory remarks about a perceived lack of education or questionable origins,but we laugh too...and with great frequency.If you stopped treating people so poorly and treated them more like friends and neighboors,the productivity increases would make their heads spin.But that makes too much sense.And sense has no place in the business environment.Never wonder why equipment fails,quotas/schedules are not met,things disappear,people don't show for work etc..it's us,and we are speaking..I believe someone need their ears examined.And yes,you'll have the last laugh(just keep repeating that mantra to yourself...real slow)

[Anonymous]

After reading through all these postings, I can't help but throw a can of kerosene on the fire. With management-employee relations like these, why do any of you need enemies? C'mon guys, the other side isn't the Taliban fer crying out loud. I don't work for a railroad, so I have no firsthand experience, but isn't there any middle ground here somewhere. One side claims that RC is the greatest thing since sliced bread and the other side is convinced that it is the work of the devil. What is the difference between the experience of the CN and the experiences so far on US Class 1's? Is it insufficient training, insufficient experience, old junk, unreliability or what? Here's a novel approach: why not work to solve the problem(s) instead of adopting such an adversarial and confrontational relationship. Wait, that's just naive. Silly idea, never mind. You guys just keep doing what you're doing and just keep watching that freight move from what is perceived as slow, unreliable rail "service" to trucks. Labor, just keep on with that good reactionary approach to technology and change. Management, just keep on worrying about counting your beans and don't worry that you're treating your employees like crap. And yep, one of you will have the last laugh all right.

[BRAKIE]

You know you have to watch those careless "hogs",they just "Root" with out watching where they are going.

[Anonymous]

You have to wonder about the number of crashes that happened in the last you months with RCOs, especially considering the low number of these locomotives actually in operation. Management always says, well it could have happened with an engineer on board. The truth is switching procedures have changed with the use of RCOs. When an engineer was running the locomotive a switchman would often stay at a switch and let the movenent pass him to set a cut of cars over and send them back to the other switchman. This was fine the engineer protected the movement. Now with managements blessing switchmen still set 10 or 15 cars over in this manner with no one out in front. I'm not talking about into a RCO no protect zone or down a clear track, I am talking about pulling up a lead filled with switches. Is it any wonder that when they look one or two football field lengths up the lead that a misaligned switch is missed and a crash occurs. Why do they have managements blessing? It is not hard to see that getting as much work done with no engineer is extremely hard at best, so any shortcuts are condoned in the name of productivity.

[Anonymous]

You do realize that the CN owns Canac the leading manufacturer of RCO equipment. It is the CNs vested interest to put the best light on the RCOs as they can, if that means cover up than so be it. This link is to a accident report for an accident in Winnipeg on the CN in 1995 that was too big to coverup.

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/reports/rail/1995/er95w0291.html

This accident involved not one but two RCOs. Also the IC and the Soo Line are owned by the CN. Guess what, there are no RCOs on these railroads. Maybe the CN has learned something.