Your chance to be a lawyer.....

[Mookie]

Kevin and all - If you are running by remote, rather than human - if the tower fell over, the trains would stop. If there was no crew, there would be no reason for a crew alerter.

I know it may be not in my lifetime, but just like a man on the moon - it did happen.
So I am sure it probably will.

In that case, we have come up with the engineer/train person at that time would use his human instincts to possibly see a problem. Could a remote do that?

Can they build a remote to ever completely take the place of the human in running an engine and taking a train across country? Flying a plane load of people? Are there too many human factors involved to make it impossible, or will it because the next rocket to Mars?

Jen

[Anonymous]

WR-

The device is called a crew alertor. It can take several forms including the one you mentioned. Others can be a flashing light or a loud whistle.

LC

[Anonymous]

WR-

The device is called a crew alertor. It can take several forms including the one you mentioned. Others can be a flashing light or a loud whistle.

LC

[Anonymous]

First of all LC or limited clear is right, I believe Remote locomotives are a long way off...

Take that number of years and multiply by 2, Canada is even further away from having un manned trains riding along the track.

If i read the comments above right, someone was concerened about one of the towers that controls these trains blowing over... I imagine the trains would immediately apply brakes if they would have lost signal from the main tower.. or i could be Toatly wrong

What would happen to that device... now i cna't rememebr what the heck it's called in english.. okay this is what it does.. It replaced the deads man pedal.. the display is 4 squares.. if you havn't touched a control or applied brakes within a resonable amount of time the squares will start moving back and forth.. fatser until a loud BEEEEEP noice kicks in, getting higher pitched as it goes a long..
what woyuld happen to that device? it would be eliminated obviously.. but wouldn't that cause havoc?

[Anonymous]

First of all LC or limited clear is right, I believe Remote locomotives are a long way off...

Take that number of years and multiply by 2, Canada is even further away from having un manned trains riding along the track.

If i read the comments above right, someone was concerened about one of the towers that controls these trains blowing over... I imagine the trains would immediately apply brakes if they would have lost signal from the main tower.. or i could be Toatly wrong

What would happen to that device... now i cna't rememebr what the heck it's called in english.. okay this is what it does.. It replaced the deads man pedal.. the display is 4 squares.. if you havn't touched a control or applied brakes within a resonable amount of time the squares will start moving back and forth.. fatser until a loud BEEEEEP noice kicks in, getting higher pitched as it goes a long..
what woyuld happen to that device? it would be eliminated obviously.. but wouldn't that cause havoc?

[Anonymous]

Didn't the Wisconsin Central get permission to run with just an engineer for a maximum time of 2hrs.??

[Anonymous]

Didn't the Wisconsin Central get permission to run with just an engineer for a maximum time of 2hrs.??

[Anonymous]

Mookie-

First off, I think we are a LONG ways from unmanned trains over the road. Even if you have a RCL train over the road, there would be an Engineer or RCO in the cab except when the train is performing local switching. The FRA won't stand for anything else.

I can foresee a time when a single person runs a road train, probably with some assistance from others in some shape or form. This would mean there would be an employee at the controls. I can't say what kind of employee the way things are going right now.

If you haven't already, take a look at what has started to happen at some short lines. The Indiana Railroad now runs some road trains and local switch jobs with remotes and a single Engineer, no conductor or trainman onboard. IRR has put in a new "state of the art" Dispatching system that allows the dispatcher to know where the locomotive is at all times within a couple of feet through GPS technology. The DS also can control certain locomotive functions (horn, bell, lights) while the Engineer is not in the cab. This in threory allows the DS to cover backup moves even across public crossings. Am I comfortable with this, heck no, but it may well be the wave of the future.

Because trains are large and unable to stop in a short distance any means of control has inherent risk whether it be the reaction time of a human Engineer or the response of an RCO. The difference is the RCO may not be able to see as much as the Engineer in the cab. Of course, I can envision circumstances where it could also go the other way as well.

There is no easy answer to this issue. I enjoy my right hand seat and hope to keep it for the length of my career, but who knows about the next generation.

LC

[Anonymous]

Mookie-

First off, I think we are a LONG ways from unmanned trains over the road. Even if you have a RCL train over the road, there would be an Engineer or RCO in the cab except when the train is performing local switching. The FRA won't stand for anything else.

I can foresee a time when a single person runs a road train, probably with some assistance from others in some shape or form. This would mean there would be an employee at the controls. I can't say what kind of employee the way things are going right now.

If you haven't already, take a look at what has started to happen at some short lines. The Indiana Railroad now runs some road trains and local switch jobs with remotes and a single Engineer, no conductor or trainman onboard. IRR has put in a new "state of the art" Dispatching system that allows the dispatcher to know where the locomotive is at all times within a couple of feet through GPS technology. The DS also can control certain locomotive functions (horn, bell, lights) while the Engineer is not in the cab. This in threory allows the DS to cover backup moves even across public crossings. Am I comfortable with this, heck no, but it may well be the wave of the future.

Because trains are large and unable to stop in a short distance any means of control has inherent risk whether it be the reaction time of a human Engineer or the response of an RCO. The difference is the RCO may not be able to see as much as the Engineer in the cab. Of course, I can envision circumstances where it could also go the other way as well.

There is no easy answer to this issue. I enjoy my right hand seat and hope to keep it for the length of my career, but who knows about the next generation.

LC

[wabash1]

The engineer would be able to handle the train thru the rough area of track through proper braking and nowing where his train is. the make up of the train. in other words if a engineer sees a bad spot he can slow it down and he knows his make up of his train so that when the heaviest cars cross over this section of track the tran speed is down. a remote would only know track speed and unless a signal was restricting its move it would do everything to stay at track speed.

[wabash1]

The engineer would be able to handle the train thru the rough area of track through proper braking and nowing where his train is. the make up of the train. in other words if a engineer sees a bad spot he can slow it down and he knows his make up of his train so that when the heaviest cars cross over this section of track the tran speed is down. a remote would only know track speed and unless a signal was restricting its move it would do everything to stay at track speed.

[Anonymous]

Who would want to see remotes on OTR trains eliminating more good jobs?I love technology myself but you must admit it is a paycheck eater in all industries today.

[Anonymous]

Who would want to see remotes on OTR trains eliminating more good jobs?I love technology myself but you must admit it is a paycheck eater in all industries today.

[JoeKoh]

Over the road? No mookie sorry.There are to many what ifs out there.What if a storm for example fries a relay signal tower.You add hazmat to the train and your just asking for trouble.
stay safe
joe

[JoeKoh]

Over the road? No mookie sorry.There are to many what ifs out there.What if a storm for example fries a relay signal tower.You add hazmat to the train and your just asking for trouble.
stay safe
joe

[Mookie]

[}:)] We have had much talk about remotes. Ok - worse case scenerio for some of us - they do come to pass on OTR trains. Houston, we have a problem - maybe with a broken rail or sun kink. We have a derailment.

Scenario: I am the final person you need to convince there was a difference between an actual person and a remote running this train. What would an engineer see/do/feel/think as opposed to a remote that would make it a better deal to have a person running the engine instead of a signal.

Just give me your reasons and thinking behind them, to convince me one way or the other. I love technology, but as Mookie Q Citizen, I am a little wary of rushing in where angels fear to tread.

I am looking for sound reasoning and would expect no less from this group.

Jen

[Mookie]

[}:)] We have had much talk about remotes. Ok - worse case scenerio for some of us - they do come to pass on OTR trains. Houston, we have a problem - maybe with a broken rail or sun kink. We have a derailment.

Scenario: I am the final person you need to convince there was a difference between an actual person and a remote running this train. What would an engineer see/do/feel/think as opposed to a remote that would make it a better deal to have a person running the engine instead of a signal.

Just give me your reasons and thinking behind them, to convince me one way or the other. I love technology, but as Mookie Q Citizen, I am a little wary of rushing in where angels fear to tread.

I am looking for sound reasoning and would expect no less from this group.

Jen