We don’t need to. All we do is deliver in interchange per the Marketing group.
That said, UP has no trouble at all delivering to west coast facilities. Over mountains no less. Of course, they use DPU and AC motors, something the east coast carriers were very late conceptualizing. From what I was told, we are not allowed to deliver DPU trains to eastern carriers because they have not yet trained their crews in modern technology. This causes a lot of delays and cost in terminals having to conventionalize trains for them.
Now, who does not understand Mountain railroading? Even CP got units that were compatable with UP cab signals and DPU. Wonder why the eastern carriers didn’t do the same?
The use of buffer cars is required by law, under hazmat rules. Hazmat rules require 5 cars but if not enough are available one is sufficent. On the BNSF, loaded ethanol trains are DP’ed, one buffer car up front between lead locos and train and one in the rear between the cars and trailing power. Running empty, not DP’ed two buffer cars up front, the train has 2, 2 are required between the lead locos, and the trailing train.
Now as to why use loaded hopper cars? On the BNSF, they use loaded hopper cars filled with sand, on other railroads well I cant vouch for what they use. Why hopper cars with sand you ask, well its easy to load and unload sand in hopper cars, thats my guess. Loaded hopper cars are used, they are fairly reliable runners, and dont have long drawbars, high centers of gravity, hoppers regualry run in trains made up of 110 to 115 cars fully loaded meaning 15000+ trailing tons, coal cars do to, but they are open top and subject to mositure and what not. If I showed up to work on a loaded ethanol train with a autorack on the head end as a buffer car, I would laugh then tell the trainmaster sorry but you got anything else. Autoracks have long nasty drawbars, miles of slack, small wheels, top heavy, light and long, if you didnt pop the autorack out of the train when descending a grade in dynamic brakes you would probably be the luckiest man alive.
As far as usuing an autorack as covercar becasue of the length, there really is probably no real need for cover cars anymore with certain shipments, if an ethanol train derails and the first car splits open, it really doesnt matter if you had 0 or 100 cover cars, is gonna be bad.
Sand in a confined container such as a covered hopper is a pretty good energy absorber. That’s what many of the yellow barrels are filled with at the pointy-ends of highway guiderails, ends of bridges, and other similar installations. When impacted they do crumple and the sand flies everywhere, but for the space available and required, and weight and complexity involved, they do a pretty decent job. So sand in a covered hopper or boxcar has that important benefit - it’s not going to stop or even slow down much a heavy train impacting at speed, that’s for for sure, but all that weight/ mass in that closed-cell space is going to attenuate the impact quite a bit, and in essence be the sacrificial element as the cars and locos start jack-knifing across the landscape, and may thereby prevent an actual contact between the impacting train/ cars and the 1st ethanol or haz-mat car. Of course, more cars filled with sand would be even better, particularly at the rear where there are not also the leading locos to absorb an impact.
Plus, the sand is a good primary absorbent for the leaks/ discharges of antifreeze, battery acid, windshield wash, power steering fluid, lube oil, transmission fluid, fuel, etc. that usually follows - and it’s pretty much right there where it’s needed, too. That’s probably not too important in the railroad context, but another benefit if the ethanol would start leaking from the first few cars.
Uhh, not to be too obnoxious about this point - because other posts above have said pretty much the same thing - but I’m wondering about the propriety of putting together that configuration of a train - with only 1 or 2 buffer cars, total - when the FRA inspector shows up. My understanding of the rule is not that it’s ‘‘We’d like you to have 5 buffer cars, but only 1 will do, if you don’t feel like it’’. And since when is a rule written that vaguely or with that much discretion built-in to it ?
Until today my understanding has been instead that 5 buffer cars are always required and to be present at each end, except for an exceptional situation such as when a local switch crew is picking up a haz-mat car and the whole rest of their train is less than 5 cars. But as soon as the train gets to - or leaves from - a yard or terminal where more ‘inert’ cars could be added, that ha to be done.
Must be pretty fortunate - have seen 4 new ethanol plants with curves close to 15 degrees along the Mississippi River, including one on a former military depot with reverse curves (15 degrees into a twelve -thirty, with no in-between tangent) that are butt ugly. I have yet to see a blending facility built right (usually just cobbled onto some other type of transfer facility)
Thankfully, some of the worst trackage is now in facilities that have shut down. From where I’m at, Ag Business (AgriDummies) cutting corners on the budget are a large part of the problem.
Probably both of you guys are right - it’s the story of the 3 blind men touching different parts of the elephant, again.
Also probably has to do with how ‘hard-nosed’ the serving railroad and its engineering review and approval and construction inspection personnel are, esp. with regard to potential safety issues. zug - it’s NS for all of those plants, right ?
MC - good description and analysis - that’s a bad run of experiences. No tangent in the S-curve ? Even model railroaders know better than that ! But if that was their level of judgment and investment in a quality operation - no wonder they’re shut down now. [;)]
You are looking at small plants poorly sited. Look at Charles City, Fairmont, Welcome, Mason City, Hanlontown, Glenville, St. Ansgar, Manly Terminal, Superior, or Iowa Falls. They do not look cobbled to me. Each was planned with their capacity in mind.
I have walked all these plants tracks in the last year or two. They are hardly cobbled or poorly laid out. 115 pound or heavier rail, the Valero plants used 133 pound rail, all brand new. New, not used ties.
I have the plans for several of the sites here, and they call for #10 or larger switches, split rail derails, and ample track centers. As I said before, the poorly laid out plants are the exception, not the rule.
One more thought. If a terminal can unload 80 cars at one time, such as East Oakland, CA; Sewaren and Linden, NJ; Albany, NY; Midland, NC; and Plains, TX, the layout must be conducive to such. I know that Linden, Midland, and East Oakland are new facilities built from clean sheet, not an after thought. In that business, getting the product in, and returning the tanks are imperative. I would hardly think they are something cobbled.
(It’s not poorly sited, it’s generally Ag Industry being cheap to the point of being stupid. Frequently, class 1’s will deliver to a point and then not go beyond that point leaving the agridummies or other industry to switch it themselves. We’ve also seen what happens when certain track contractors do to get business which will be left to a state regulatory board to deal with - One large shortline out here got burned by the ethics of the low bid.)
My response on number of cars wasnt meant to brush off the requirements, but rather, the railroads look at the rule and say we only have to provide one buffer car at the front, and one on the rear if dp’ed. Train length as far as I know has no part, rather the number of buffer cars that are present in the train are the deciding factor. It doesnt matter if my train is 500 ft long or 10,000 feet long, if 5 buffer cars are available then they will be on the head end, if only one is available in the train then one will be used.
I know the railroads are hashing this rule over with the feds, I saw a while back where one of the railroads petioned the FRA to do away with cover cars, as they put it, cover cars were introduced in the days of steam engines and wood cars, and cover cars were meant to keep cinders form igniting hazmat cars. The railroads would much rather not have to deal with the extra time and expense of cover cars. When you turn an ethanol train so it go the other way, the cover cars have to be switched form one end to the other, doesnt sound complicated but it is. You need a track for the train, a track to run around the train, and a track to run around the cover cars. Ive seen this move take 6 hours to accomplish when not enough tracks are available.
If they want us to deliver, then the entire trackage must be inspected and accepted by UP before service begins. What they do inside the plant does not matter, as long as we can pull and deliver units in one or two pieces, and the air must be hung. Or, they do not get the rate. And any company who wants to build a 115 million gallon per year plant, must be able to ship units in order to survive.
Since 2001, I have had close contact with the ethanol industry. I have visited every plant in N. Iowa and S. Minnesota. I have been involved with safety training, not only with my employer, but others in the area. Most all the plant managers understand (that I have spoken with), the importance of having a well planned physical plant. This is why those who develop plants, namely IMC Coldwich, Broin (now POET), and Fagen, help their clients build proper tracks to serve the capacity they are building. These folks have not gotten to where they are today if they did poor planning and design.
this train is all tank cars except for a single white SOO hopper that appears to be in the middle of the train. Now I’m not sure if it’s ethanol or not, but if thats meant to be a buffer car, shouldnt it be on the head end?
It is an ethanol train. The first tankcar is actually a buffer car, notice that it is slightly smaller and has no placard. Perhaps they combined two trains and will split it apart again, so they left the buffer car in.