i was just wondering would a railroad say wheeling &lake erie dead head say 30 miles to pick up or to deliver cars. it would seem to me that it would not be very cost efficient,iam i right or wrong, i have a bet with my son that iam right. thank you.
If you are ONLY looking at the 30-mile move of locomotives without cars, that in itself is a money loser.
BUT!!!
The railroad looks at revenue generated for the ENTIRE movement - which might involve moving 150 loaded cars 150 miles, plus 30 miles of light locomotive movement. If, after subtracting ALL costs (including that 30 mile light move) the total exceeds zero, then it makes excellent economic sense.
No railroad has ever moved a locomotive or an empty car just to watch the wheels turn. Just as a moving company might drive an empty van 30 miles from their parking lot to the place where it will load up with all of somebody’s worldly possessions, the railroad will move light locomotives (and/or empty cars) from where they are to where they’re needed because they are needed there to produce revenue mileage.
A few years back I posted about a westbound train I had seen west of Barstow on the BNSF - six 6-axle diesel units pulling 7 (possibly empty) gondolas. Money loser? Not really. Those 6 units were on their way to Bakersfield, where they would be available as helpers for the next train(s) heading east up the long grade on the steep side of Tehachapi. Taking those gons west was simply gravy on a move that was necessary to keep the eastbound trains rolling - and the money coming in.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - running helpers downgrade light)
Railroads deadhead all the time. Equipment is needed everywhere on a system for different things. To be honest, 30 miles is not a very long distance at all. CSX sends strings of locomotives over 100 miles in this area to balance power at yards
Hi,
While not very efficient or cost effective, railroads have been known to do strange things from time to time. Take the nighty CN Rail train Z437 that departs from Thunder Bay and heads to Winnipeg via Fort Frances. If there is no revenue traffic heading to Winnipeg from Thunder Bay, it has been known to run light with two or three locomotives making up the entire train. That is one long haul with no cars for revenue.
Well it hasn’t happened in 2012 yet. It happened 11 times in 2011. I guess they needed that power set in Winnipeg.
One of my easiest runs on the Chessie( C&O) was a 12 caboose consist with 8 locomotives(all GP9s heading for dead line storage at Russell 3 was working 5 was DIT) from Queensgate to Russell.
Why was there that many extra cabooses at Queensgate? There was more Westbound trains then Eastbound and Russell was getting short on cabooses.
Another reason a crew would deadhead 30 miles to pick up cars is because that may be a regular “job” with a assigned crew and today all the work the crew has to do is pick up those cars.
We (UP in Iowa) do that all the time. Although it could be considered deadheading equipment, when taking light power to or from intermediate points, for us mostly grain elevators or ethanol plants, we refer to it as an engine or light power move. When spotting these places, the power many times goes on to the crew’s tie up point. Sometimes if the power doesn’t need fuel or other attention, it may stay where the train was set out. This also depends if there is a place to leave the engine out of the way of everyone.
Some light power moves that are closer to a deadhead would be when a handfull of engines run over one or more complete crew districts. Sometimes it’s because the engines may be going for maintenance work at a larger facility. Once in a while we have moved larger numbers of engines that are being sold or stored elsewhere. Usually it’s just to reposition power for other trains at other terminals. (Why some of these longer reposition moves aren’t just combined with trains that are already going to the same place is beyond me. They always want to cut and reduce crew starts, but I shouldn’t complain. It’s still a paying job and usually a pretty easy one at that.)
While it might seem like a money loser to move engines between where the train is and the terminal, consider that engines just sitting aren’t making money either. A set of power off an empty grain train in the morning could power a different loaded grain train in the afternoon.
Jeff
Here is a little story of some cars that the RR wanted moved back and forth between for a few extra days almost for the reason just to watch the wheels turn
http://www.ogdenbrotherstrains.com/prototypeinfo/freight/02012012.htm
In roughly that same part of the world, B&LE and AVR (seemingly) routinely move light power in excess of 50 miles.
The other day, I saw a light AMTK locomotive heading south through Alexandria VA. That’s already a good 15 miles from Ivy City. If it was heading to Lorton to swap in on the Auto Train, that’s pushing 30 miles. And it now occurs to me that the power for the Auto Train has to see maintenance eventually. Lorton isn’t a stop on any other Amtrak train, so I’d have to guess they run up to Ivy City light and back every once in a while. That’s a good 55+ miles roundtrip without a single pound hauled.
i saw a rather heartwarming deadhead today. A NS engine was deadheading an old Alco S4 on the old Wabash tracks heading for Waterville, OH. The deadheaded engine belongs to the Toledo, Lake Erie & Western museum railroad and it looked like it was being returned to their headquarters after being refurbished somewhere. The S4 cab was all boarded up and the engine had a new coat of paint and lettering on it. I wonder if it was done in the same shops as the NS’s Heritage engines are being done? It was also pointing the opposite direction that it usually ran prior to being redone. Not that it matters, operationally.
When I originally read the title I thought that this was going to be a topic on some of my NCOICs in the Air Force!
About twenty years ago I was trainwatching at a place designated as Shawmut on the old SP main across Southern Arizona. An eastbound intermodal of about 100 cars came throuhg with seven units on the head end but when it roared past me only three of these units were working. We had a guy in our club who told us one time that he had sometimes been involved in balancing power moves with six or seven dead-in-transit units at the head end.
This response, I know, doesn’t directly address your question but it does address that the railroad is going to do what it has to do to git-r-dun!
Dead heading in Railroad parlance traditionally means the free transport of railway employees, be they engineers, conductor, or crews from one place to another on the system. This can be work related, (transporting to another place for work) or simply for pleasure, vacation, etc. Regardless, during transport they are not at work on the train on which they ride. I am not saying that the above is the sole definition, but it is the one most often returned in a search referencing railroading parlance “dead heading”.
The term “traveling light” traditionally means an engine or engines are moving alone or with a caboose to another location over the system. Much in the way of a pusher helper once it has done its duty over a stretch of line requiring it and is then released to return to its point of origin as the train can now continue on fine with its head engine. It returns “light”
In the steam era “running for water” meant that a train’s engine had become so low on water that it had to leave its train, usually on a siding, and race to the nearest water tower. It would then return to its train and continue on. Rare, but it was done, especially on short lines with small motive power where train lengths were not immediately known as trains were lengthened on a run by pickups, loaded or empty, unforeseen delays, minor derailments that took time, etc.
Not nit-picking just noting the term dead heading traditionally means railroad personnel transported that are not working on the train they are riding on. My dad and mom both worked for the C&O and dead headed to and from work and on vacations. The term is also used in the commercial airline business for pilots, naivgators and crew in simple riding mode.
Richard
Back in the 1990’s it wasn’t uncommon for the UP to balance power by running one or more 25 unit power moves (no cars) from LA to N Platte a week.
Not nit-picking just noting the term dead heading traditionally means railroad personnel transported that are not working on the train they are riding on. My dad and mom both worked for the C&O and dead headed to and from work and on vacations. The term is also used in the commercial airline business for pilots, naivgators and crew in simple riding mode.
Richard
Actually you can deadhead locomotives,cabooses and even passenger equipment as a extra move…When I was called for that locomotive/caboose extra out of Queensgate I was told I was being called for a equipment deadhead extra to Russell(my home terminal).
Most railroaders didn’t like to “deadhead” back to their home terminal on another train because you lost money-you got deadhead pay and not regular train pay.I did that several times during my last few weeks on the railroad thanks to the coming of FRED.