Why Remote Controlled Locomotives Should be Banned

[andyhjn]

if for no other reason the loss of jobs.

[wabash1]

QUOTE: Originally posted by andrewn

if for no other reason the loss of jobs.

What jobs? only thing you lost was a man on the engine. instead of 3 men you have 2. all thru freight most locals and a majority of yard jobs are 2 men jobs anyways. so to put the man that was in the engine on the ground didnt cost a job. ( just a low senority guy) the engineer goes to the ground and a new hire goes to the street. the job still works just differant person doing it. The last i heard was the utu was trying to get the remote to pay union dues.

[Anonymous]

I just found this website and wanted more info from "french68" about the deaths of the roadmaster and switchmen at his terminal. Were the jobs involved RCL jobs? I'm an engineer out of San Antonio and we're trying to get enough data together about the dangers of RCL's and to get a resolution passed here by the city to force the FRA to do something. The same type resolution that has been passed in almost 50 cities and counties across the U.S..
I'm sure the word has been passed about the tragic death of a switchman here in San Antonio. Jody was a good conductor and switchman. Because of a manpower shortage here,Jody was forced to work by himself on an RCL job and several hours later he was dead. The U.P. has put safety aside and the bottom line is money.
Any info that you could post will be greatly appreciated.

[Anonymous]

Engineerkat, those deaths happened before the RCO. I do not remember when I related that bit of history. I was probably trying to illustrate that when someone is in the bowl of a large classification yard they need all of there attention on what is moving around them and operating the box detracts from that attention. The roadmaster was killed because the yardmaster did not block the unit where he was working. Both switchman got hit on hot tracks by cars set in motion by the hump.

Go to therailforum http://www.therailforum.com/yabbse/index.php and contact me or give me an e-mail address. I am pfrench there.

The information I have is to large to post here.

[Anonymous]

Remotes are not going to go away.Good luck to the unoins
that are going to try.It's never going to happen.This is one of
the times where you have to accept change,learn the job and
move on.One man crews are not to far away.One thing I learned
in my 30 years with the RR you have to accept change.

[greyhounds]

"2001 - Number of Yard Accidents: 501 - 55.92% of all train accidents.
2002 - Number of Yard Accidents: 468 - 56.80% of all train accidents
2003 (available only through September) Number of Yard Accidents: 349 - 58.36% of all train accidents

UP is "right on track" statistically to incur another 116-120 yard incidents by the end of 2003. That would meet or exceed the statistics for 2002 and 2001. And as we all know...these are only "reported" accidents. So by your own statistics the overall percentage of accidents occurring in the train yard is OBVIOUSLY on the rise. How do you explain this? Where is this 40% reduction in yard incidents due to the implementation of Remote Control?"

It's right there. You're looking at it. 501 accidents down to 468. That's a good thing. They made the rest of the railroad safer too. That's also a good thing and why the percentage stayed the same. But the number of yard accidents were reduced.

You can't fight progress. You can't stop progress. The railroads are not earning their cost of capital. They've got a terminal illness. They're going to expire at this rate. They can't charge more for their services so they've got to become ever more efficient. They can't pay a person to do a job that a computer can do.

That's reality.

KS

[zardoz]

From the AAR website
http://www.aar.org/ViewContent.asp?Content_ID=1850

Data, experience
prove remote control locomotive (RCL) technology
keeps workers, rail yards safer

WASHINGTON, November 28, 2003 — Digital technology is helping railroads throughout the United States change the way trains are operated in freight yards, making them safer in the process. Used in Canada for 10 years, U.S. railroads are now in the first year of implementing the technology in yards across the country.

AAR President and CEO Edward R. Hamberger said that use of the remote control technology should sharply reduce the number of train accidents in rail yards, which is where more than half of all train accidents occur.

Remote control technology allows an operator on the ground to use a handheld device to send digital signals directly to a computer onboard a locomotive. These signals select the locomotive’s speed and direction.

With conventional technology, train service employees in the yard direct locomotive operations either through hand signals or radio communications with the locomotive engineer. “The technology improves safety in yard operations by reducing the possibility of miscommunication,” Hamberger said.

“Experience shows that remote control sharply improves safety,” Hamberger said. It has been credited with sharply reducing the number of yard accidents in Canada. Recent statistics from both of Canada’s major railroads and preliminary data from U.S. railroads show just how much remote control improves yard safety.

Between 1998 and 2000, Canadian Pacific Railway reported that the accident rate in operations where remote control was used was only one third of that in operations using conventional methods. Canadian National Railway reported that between 1997 and 2001, accident rates attributed to human factors were 44 percent lower where remote control was in use than in operations using conventional technology. Preliminary data indicate that, during the first year and a half of implementation, the major U.S. railroads have experienced a 40 to 50 percent decline in accident rates using remote control compared to conventional rail yard operations.

The Federal Railroad Administration studied the technology for nearly a decade, holding a series of public meetings to examine remote control safety. The FRA, which has responsibility for rail safety, issued guidelines for its use in 2001. Before beginning remote control operations, railroads file a certification training program with the FRA. Operating rules are also filed with the FRA.

Major U.S. railroads began using remote control in some yards in 2002, after first reaching agreement with the United Transportation Union (UTU) over implementing the technology. That agreement provides for thorough training of employees who will operate the remote control units.

The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (BLE) challenged that agreement because it wanted control over those jobs for its members. But earlier this year, an arbitrator upheld the railroads’ right to operate under the agreement between the railroad industry and UTU. The BLE has responded by claiming that remote control operations aren’t safe and getting local governments to pass resolutions opposing remote control operations. However, the BLE has signed agreements giving it control over remote control on at least two regional railroads. On those railroads, it has not challenged the safety of remote control operations and has not sought local government action against remote control.

The safety benefits of remote control have, in fact, led to resolutions endorsing the technology from state legislatures in three states: South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama. In addition, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), made up of state legislators from all over the country, has also passed a resolution endorsing its use.
===================================================================
They also have a section on RCL "Facts" and "Myths" on the sidebar menu of the AAR site. Check out the propaganda they are feeding the public.

[Anonymous]

I hear they're gonna put artificial Intelligence in the locomotives, and do away with remote operators....hehehe.......no crews at all I guess.....Laterz

[Anonymous]

Hey guys, If the railroads purchase the next generation of steam locomotives, the railroads wouldn't have this problem. Right now there is a group of mechanical engineers in England developing this new generation of steam engines. Check out www.5ATproject.com