Bad train pictures

[egmurphy]

Thanks for the quick reply.

That's an impressive arrangement, and the entire operation must be equally impressive.

Guess I need to use Google more. [:I]

Thanks again,

Ed

[egmurphy]

Thanks for the quick reply.

That's an impressive arrangement, and the entire operation must be equally impressive.

Guess I need to use Google more. [:I]

Thanks again,

Ed

[egmurphy]

QUOTE: Mark H.: Today's 78-foot rail is mostly welded, usually right at the mill, into 1500-foot or so lengths...

How does one handle a 1500 foot length of rail? What type of car (or series of cars) is it transported on? Is there specialized equipment to offload / place / spike a length of rail that long?

(I've actually wondered about this for a long time, but since the subject of the rail just came up this seems a good time to ask the question.)

Thanks

Ed

[egmurphy]

QUOTE: Mark H.: Today's 78-foot rail is mostly welded, usually right at the mill, into 1500-foot or so lengths...

How does one handle a 1500 foot length of rail? What type of car (or series of cars) is it transported on? Is there specialized equipment to offload / place / spike a length of rail that long?

(I've actually wondered about this for a long time, but since the subject of the rail just came up this seems a good time to ask the question.)

Thanks

Ed

[DaveBr]

I thought this was a "stupid Channel">.All these questions are very educational and interesting.Now a question I heard someone talk about so I think it's very interesting
to those of us that don't know and want to learn..When is it they have a flat tire?? Dave Br

[DaveBr]

I thought this was a "stupid Channel">.All these questions are very educational and interesting.Now a question I heard someone talk about so I think it's very interesting
to those of us that don't know and want to learn..When is it they have a flat tire?? Dave Br

[Overmod]

In my opinion, massively and rather obviously so -- IF you can afford the sizable initial investment (including assurance of NDGPS coverage for the mileage involved AND you retain full rulebook procedure for what happens if the PTC stops working right.

Keep in mind that PTC and CTC are pretty synonymous; the principal operational difference being that CTC is arranged to run remotely, while some of the PTC logic and implementation is distributed (right down to locomotive-control level). PTS is something of a boondoggle, as it's simply a fancy modern version of the old 'automatic train stop' that's GUARANTEED (whatever that means in a world where Murphy and Finagle keep rearing their fearsome heads) to stop a train short of something it should stop short of. Following some of the NAJPTC reports can be rather illuminating.

ABS of course only works for things completing track circuits ahead of you. Excellent technology for about 1908, but the world has moved on somewhat since then. As we've had experts repeatedly point out, these don't substitute a bit for dispatching and train-order control, which is one of the things that PTC should be particularly good at arranging and monitoring continuously and near-optimally.

My current opinion is that all enginemen should carry cab signals and use them at all times, that all engines should be equipped with communications terminals, and that illuminated wayside signals are almost entirely a useless expense. Some of the data-fusion systems I'm currently working on can even replace yard signals to an extent (for purposes of operating trains)

Some of the overhead and systems used for CTC are common to advanced PTC (you still need motorized switches, proper track sensors and circuits, etc.) I strongly believe that you can monitor unbonded sidings, etc. with proper technology, so quite a bit of that sort of expense could be dispensed with and still reap most of the ideal benefits of PTC... but without low-resistance track bonding, you have to use other approaches to monitor things like broken rails.

[Overmod]

In my opinion, massively and rather obviously so -- IF you can afford the sizable initial investment (including assurance of NDGPS coverage for the mileage involved AND you retain full rulebook procedure for what happens if the PTC stops working right.

Keep in mind that PTC and CTC are pretty synonymous; the principal operational difference being that CTC is arranged to run remotely, while some of the PTC logic and implementation is distributed (right down to locomotive-control level). PTS is something of a boondoggle, as it's simply a fancy modern version of the old 'automatic train stop' that's GUARANTEED (whatever that means in a world where Murphy and Finagle keep rearing their fearsome heads) to stop a train short of something it should stop short of. Following some of the NAJPTC reports can be rather illuminating.

ABS of course only works for things completing track circuits ahead of you. Excellent technology for about 1908, but the world has moved on somewhat since then. As we've had experts repeatedly point out, these don't substitute a bit for dispatching and train-order control, which is one of the things that PTC should be particularly good at arranging and monitoring continuously and near-optimally.

My current opinion is that all enginemen should carry cab signals and use them at all times, that all engines should be equipped with communications terminals, and that illuminated wayside signals are almost entirely a useless expense. Some of the data-fusion systems I'm currently working on can even replace yard signals to an extent (for purposes of operating trains)

Some of the overhead and systems used for CTC are common to advanced PTC (you still need motorized switches, proper track sensors and circuits, etc.) I strongly believe that you can monitor unbonded sidings, etc. with proper technology, so quite a bit of that sort of expense could be dispensed with and still reap most of the ideal benefits of PTC... but without low-resistance track bonding, you have to use other approaches to monitor things like broken rails.

[Junctionfan]

After checking out what a PTC /PTS, is it cheaper or at least easier to use this than having CTC or ABS signals (maybe CTC)?

[Junctionfan]

After checking out what a PTC /PTS, is it cheaper or at least easier to use this than having CTC or ABS signals (maybe CTC)?

[Willy2]

This is off the topic of what is being talked about now, I hope nobody minds.[:)]

What is the average length of a straight piece of rail?

[Willy2]

This is off the topic of what is being talked about now, I hope nobody minds.[:)]

What is the average length of a straight piece of rail?

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

A piggyback train weighs about 2/3 ton per foot and a stack train weighs just under a ton per foot.

A stack train can get by with 2.5 hp/tt and a pig train 4 hp/tt. Over 5 hp/tt you are just pissing away diesel fuel.

If you are going 7 hrs at 60 mph you are going 420 miles. No freight crew district is that long. Aren't you going to stop to change crews?

Dave H.

Yes 8 hours. It is a UPS hotshot on my railroad. They go between Chicago and Boston. Crew takes the train for 7 hours, in between that, they get a 40 minute break for a meal and during that time there is a quick but thourgh inspection. Fuel, oil and water is checked then off they go.

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

A piggyback train weighs about 2/3 ton per foot and a stack train weighs just under a ton per foot.

A stack train can get by with 2.5 hp/tt and a pig train 4 hp/tt. Over 5 hp/tt you are just pissing away diesel fuel.

If you are going 7 hrs at 60 mph you are going 420 miles. No freight crew district is that long. Aren't you going to stop to change crews?

Dave H.

Yes 8 hours. It is a UPS hotshot on my railroad. They go between Chicago and Boston. Crew takes the train for 7 hours, in between that, they get a 40 minute break for a meal and during that time there is a quick but thourgh inspection. Fuel, oil and water is checked then off they go.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

A piggyback train weighs about 2/3 ton per foot and a stack train weighs just under a ton per foot.

A stack train can get by with 2.5 hp/tt and a pig train 4 hp/tt. Over 5 hp/tt you are just pissing away diesel fuel.

If you are going 7 hrs at 60 mph you are going 420 miles. No freight crew district is that long. Aren't you going to stop to change crews?

Dave H.

No crew changes. They are going to use one of those new crew dorm cars that were discussed in an earlier thread. [:D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

A piggyback train weighs about 2/3 ton per foot and a stack train weighs just under a ton per foot.

A stack train can get by with 2.5 hp/tt and a pig train 4 hp/tt. Over 5 hp/tt you are just pissing away diesel fuel.

If you are going 7 hrs at 60 mph you are going 420 miles. No freight crew district is that long. Aren't you going to stop to change crews?

Dave H.

No crew changes. They are going to use one of those new crew dorm cars that were discussed in an earlier thread. [:D]

[dehusman]

A piggyback train weighs about 2/3 ton per foot and a stack train weighs just under a ton per foot.

A stack train can get by with 2.5 hp/tt and a pig train 4 hp/tt. Over 5 hp/tt you are just pissing away diesel fuel.

If you are going 7 hrs at 60 mph you are going 420 miles. No freight crew district is that long. Aren't you going to stop to change crews?

Dave H.

[dehusman]

A piggyback train weighs about 2/3 ton per foot and a stack train weighs just under a ton per foot.

A stack train can get by with 2.5 hp/tt and a pig train 4 hp/tt. Over 5 hp/tt you are just pissing away diesel fuel.

If you are going 7 hrs at 60 mph you are going 420 miles. No freight crew district is that long. Aren't you going to stop to change crews?

Dave H.

[Overmod]

Junctionfan, be sure to read all the way to the bottom, because your answers to acceleration and curve resistance are down there.

After reading this you will understand why the concept of 'compensated grades' is so important, and why it can be valuable to know 'car numbers' or factors for different types of traffic when trying to determine quickly what the 'right' HP and locomotive characteristics for a given train might be.

I didn't see him discuss 'momentum grades' (although I might have missed it on first reading) -- there is sometimes an assumption that a train can maintain speed on short grades by using the energy of its momentum going into the grade, and realizing that only the part of the train that is actually on the momentum grade contributes to the increased resistance -- not the whole train.

Part of the fun involved in working long trains on railroads with changing grade profiles is that part of the train may be going 'uphill' and part 'downhill' at a given moment, and curve as well as grade resistance may be locally affecting parts of the train. You can imagine what this does to braking and throttle control required for effective train control! Note also that when going over a crest, the train resistance will rise until the locomotives reach the summit, and then begin to decrease. Reducing locomotive power in this situation may cause unusual slack action or surging in the first few cars of the train (especially under certain conditions not unthinkable with stack trains). Likewise, when running through a sag, the slack may be bunched at the bottom and too much acceleration can result in weird but nonetheless remarkably forceful slack action as the momentum of the head end 'runs out' and the engineman opens the throttle up.

Experienced crews know, or learn, how to run under these conditions -- the thing to remember is that many of the techniques used directly affect the time it will take a given train to get 'over the road' on a particular division, and in some respects what type of power is required for a given schedule or other operating requirements.

Your question related to intermodal trains, so I will presume that you don't intend to do any intermediate 'doubling' of grades, all sidings are appropriate length to take the train, and there are no pushers, midtrain helper districts, etc. etc. Likewise you don't need to optimize power of certain types (e.g. AC units) or worry about nonrevenue power balancing. You'll want to keep things like that in mind, though, when adapting the theory of train operation to real railroad train-running.

[Overmod]

Junctionfan, be sure to read all the way to the bottom, because your answers to acceleration and curve resistance are down there.

After reading this you will understand why the concept of 'compensated grades' is so important, and why it can be valuable to know 'car numbers' or factors for different types of traffic when trying to determine quickly what the 'right' HP and locomotive characteristics for a given train might be.

I didn't see him discuss 'momentum grades' (although I might have missed it on first reading) -- there is sometimes an assumption that a train can maintain speed on short grades by using the energy of its momentum going into the grade, and realizing that only the part of the train that is actually on the momentum grade contributes to the increased resistance -- not the whole train.

Part of the fun involved in working long trains on railroads with changing grade profiles is that part of the train may be going 'uphill' and part 'downhill' at a given moment, and curve as well as grade resistance may be locally affecting parts of the train. You can imagine what this does to braking and throttle control required for effective train control! Note also that when going over a crest, the train resistance will rise until the locomotives reach the summit, and then begin to decrease. Reducing locomotive power in this situation may cause unusual slack action or surging in the first few cars of the train (especially under certain conditions not unthinkable with stack trains). Likewise, when running through a sag, the slack may be bunched at the bottom and too much acceleration can result in weird but nonetheless remarkably forceful slack action as the momentum of the head end 'runs out' and the engineman opens the throttle up.

Experienced crews know, or learn, how to run under these conditions -- the thing to remember is that many of the techniques used directly affect the time it will take a given train to get 'over the road' on a particular division, and in some respects what type of power is required for a given schedule or other operating requirements.

Your question related to intermodal trains, so I will presume that you don't intend to do any intermediate 'doubling' of grades, all sidings are appropriate length to take the train, and there are no pushers, midtrain helper districts, etc. etc. Likewise you don't need to optimize power of certain types (e.g. AC units) or worry about nonrevenue power balancing. You'll want to keep things like that in mind, though, when adapting the theory of train operation to real railroad train-running.

[Junctionfan]

Thankyou.

[Junctionfan]

Thankyou.

[Anonymous]

http://www.vcn.com/~alkrug/rrfacts/hp_te.htm

[Anonymous]

http://www.vcn.com/~alkrug/rrfacts/hp_te.htm

[Junctionfan]

1,970 tons

[Junctionfan]

1,970 tons

[Anonymous]

You have to know the weight. Average won't do. Somewhere there is a formula for hp per ton per % grade to maintain a desired mph up the hill. If you are too heavy/under powered your train stalls, if too light/over powered you are wasting power. Of course if you own the road outright you can just power to maintain track speed up the ruling grade and let er rip!

[Anonymous]

You have to know the weight. Average won't do. Somewhere there is a formula for hp per ton per % grade to maintain a desired mph up the hill. If you are too heavy/under powered your train stalls, if too light/over powered you are wasting power. Of course if you own the road outright you can just power to maintain track speed up the ruling grade and let er rip!

[Junctionfan]

I don't know. What is the average weight of a 131 car intermodal? It has 22 28 foot trailers, 30 45 foot trailers, 3 45 foot containers on chassis, 1 48 foot container on chassis, 1 48 foot trailer, 15 53 foot containers on chassis and 85 53 foot trailers. They are LTL. For consist, the train is using 16 all purpose spine cars, 22 single 89 foot Tofc flats, 8 double 89 foot Tofc flats, 1 3 unit all purpose well car, 1 4 unit all purpose well car and 1 single unit all purpose well car.

[Junctionfan]

I don't know. What is the average weight of a 131 car intermodal? It has 22 28 foot trailers, 30 45 foot trailers, 3 45 foot containers on chassis, 1 48 foot container on chassis, 1 48 foot trailer, 15 53 foot containers on chassis and 85 53 foot trailers. They are LTL. For consist, the train is using 16 all purpose spine cars, 22 single 89 foot Tofc flats, 8 double 89 foot Tofc flats, 1 3 unit all purpose well car, 1 4 unit all purpose well car and 1 single unit all purpose well car.