And devise a plan to meet opposing 15K foot trains with existing 10K foot sidings.
What company could be so cruel to put the coffe maker nine feet away?
Corner of the desk is more humane.
[quote user=“BaltACD”]
zugmann
BaltACD
If Passenger Conductors feel that double deck cars are too much work, they can go back and be a freight conductor - they will only climb on and off the locomotive when they walk their 9000 to 15000 foot trains (each way) when trouble happens. The will only have to set 10% or more hand brakes (depending on territory) when securing their train for a pick up or set off, of course to leave they will have to release the hand brakes they set.
Or they could get a job in the dispatch office. Walk 9 feet to the coffee machine and back.
And devise a plan to meet opposing 15K foot trains with existing 10K foot sidings.
[/quote above]
Can be done. takes lots of time heard it called “saw-by.”
Trqain A drops is rear half more than a train length before entering siding wiht front half.
Train B runs through siding until locomotive is just before rear half of train A
Front half of train A now leaves siding in its forward direction until rear of front half is more than a train length beyond siding.
Train B now backs back through the enitre siding or main to beond the siding.
While a saw-by or a double saw-by may be possible, I’m sure that executing such a move would tie up the main line for a long time. It’s also the maneuver that got Casey Jones killed.
[quote user=“daveklepper”]
Can be done. takes lots of time heard it called “saw-by.”
Trqain A drops is rear half more than a train length before entering siding wiht front half.
Train B runs through siding until locomotive is just before rear half of train A
Front half of train A now leaves siding in its forward direction until rear of front half is more than a train length beyond siding.
Train B now backs back through the enitre siding or main to beond the siding.
Locomotive B now fetches
VERY TRUE. It can still be accomplished with a two-man crew, just takes a bit longer. With one-man crews it would take all day and tire people out very greatly. Assuming a man can ride a rear car on a back-up move, here is how to do it with two-man crews, assuming perfect radio contact, all systems go, etc.
Train A stops at the point where thre rear half is to be uncoupled, more than half a train-length from the approaching switch to the siding. The second man uloads at that p;oint and is responsbile for the uncoupling, closing the rear of the air of the forward half of A, and setting the necessary hand brakes on forward cars of the rear half. He is the one doing most of the owrk. The engineer of A will have to operate the switch to the siding if it is a hand-throw. But must must be understood that all swtiches must be checked for position and no assumptions made aqbout switches returned to main from siding position.
When B pulls through the siding the first time, a stop is made at its arrival switch (A’s departure switch) to drop B’s second man so he can ride the rear end. When B has pulled throiugh the siding with the rear end in the cleer for the front half of A to pull a whole trainlength and a bit more ahead, B boards the rear of B, so he can control the backup more after the front half of A proceeds. And at that time, after releasing the handbrakes on the rear half of A, A’s second man boards B’s power to ride as it pulls the rear half of A intio the siding. And he stays at the front of the rear-half of A, again setting the handbrakes, when B’s power goes to rejoin its train. After Bs pull through the siding a second time (with B’s second man still on the rear end, more later), A backs up blind, but with A’s second man at the switch and able to communicate with the engineer. After the recoupling of the two halves of A, and releasing the handbrakes, A’s second man must walk forward
What I want to see is how this is done without bottling the air at some point, or avoiding some or all the provisions of a legal brake test when any train is ‘remade’ with a large additional cut of cars added to its consist (either ‘temporarily’ or permanently.
Seems to my eyes that any temporary movement of this length of cuts without active air braking is a major violation of the spirit and principle of, and indeed the common sense behind, the Power Brake Law and its successors. And just as cavalier connection and disconnection of one-pipe-braked cuts is often ultimately ‘enforced in blood’, so might this be… unless an exacting procedure is followed each time to assure as much safety as prescribed for general operation.
A couple of potentially interesting discussion questions:
Could this be done with ECP, and if so, with what technical provisions (and should those provisions, if not included in Sarah’s Concern, be provided in that mandate?)
What changes to the laws and regulations would be needed to implement this procedure, or one like it, assuming a suitable ECP installation that did permit it safely (in an objective sense)?
I was not proposing anything illegal except the blind backup of A in reassembling the train. But ini many cases A’s second man stationed at the A departure switch would have line-of-sight to the front half as it is backing up, or at least when it came close. Otherwise, yes, the necessary handbrakes would be set on the rear half both when standing on the main at the start of the sawboy9 and standing in the siding near the end of the sawby. Time would be requried to apply and release in both cases, and pump up air, etc. That is all time consouming, and three or foiur hours for the total operation is ressonable. Less, of course, if help is provided. And I do not see it possible on a heavy grade, where too many handbrakes would be required.
And B’s sec ond man need noat stay with the B rear. Just a short walk to the rear of A-front-half, and then on that rear as it backs to pick up the rear hald where a-second-man is waiting. B will then wait with its rear even with the front of A-secon-half, until B reboards. No vilation of rules at all with this addition.
I’m still thinking you will have to perform an air test … which involves inspecting the full length of the consist, supposedly on both sides, twice (once to verify the brakes go on, and once to verify they release properly) – every time one of your cuts is attached. And these consists are how long, with what kind of access back along the train?
I don’t know if you can do part of a brake test while riding on a parallel train, but I’m not sure I’d risk any brownies finding out by trying. Railroaders here will know if that’s legal or advisable.
Half a crew’s full legal hours on one saw-by – with the very likely probability that one or both crews might go on the law in the middle of the procedure – is not exactly an advisable time for what is supposed to become a SOP with longer trains. And this says nothing about what happens to all the rest of the traffic on the railroad while this is going on. Or if one or more of a great many things happens and causes increased delay…
Yes, you might get around some of the responsibility with ‘modern methods’ and it might be interesting to discuss some.
Picking up a a solid block of cars previously tested and not off air for longer than 4 hours? Should need only a class III continuity test.
It’s the handbrake rules, charging rules, and shoving rules that are going to eat all your time.
Just out of curiosity, what about 2 MU’d DMUs or EMUs (such as 2 RDCs or Acelas)? Each has its own power and air. Do the MU connections require an airhose connection? If not, does connecting/disconnecting them require an air test?
In my opinion, even for regular locomotives, as long as there is at least one active air compressor in the consist already tied to the train, keeping trainline pressure up, if you add more locomotives to the consist and MU connect them, doing the ‘lashing up’ won’t interfere with the standing condition of the automatic brake – trainline not interfered with, and therefore no legal need for an air test.
The interlocomotive “MU” air hoses are for the independent brake and reservoir equalization. Connecting or disengaging those shouldn’t affect the automatic directly (and the automatic ‘Westinghouse’ is the subject of Power Brake Law issues)
RDCs have a different MU system, and if I recall correctly their ‘native’ brake system is different. Some were used in ‘trailer’ operation behind passenger consists, but I don’t remember what was done to make them suitable; I also do not remember them being able to ‘control’ the brakes of such a train from the control cab directly a la monkeytail. But it would be interesting to find out whether that could be done.
EMUs might have something like Tomlinson or Scharfenberg couplers, where the air connections are made automatically when coupled or uncoupled and each part keeps its air pumped up. But the idea you might have a 15,000’ train of EMUs is a little peculiar … who has ADA-compliant platforms that long?
[quote user=“daveklepper”]
[quote user=“BaltACD”]
Um I loved Model Railroaders “Switching Puzzels” in the 1980s…anybody have dates of when that ran?
zugmann
BaltACD
If Passenger Conductors feel that double deck cars are too much work, they can go back and be a freight conductor - they will only climb on and off the locomotive when they walk their 9000 to 15000 foot trains (each way) when trouble happens. The will only have to set 10% or more hand brakes (depending on territory) when securing their train for a pick up or set off, of course to leave they will have to release the hand brakes they set.
Or they could get a job in the dispatch office. Walk 9 feet to the coffee machine and back.
And devise a plan to meet opposing 15K foot trains with existing 10K foot sidings.
[/quote above]
Can be done. takes lots of time heard it called “saw-by.”
Trqain A drops is rear half more than a train length before entering siding wiht front half.
Train B runs through siding until locomotive is just before rear half of train A
Front half of train A now leaves siding in its forward direction until rear of front half is more than a train length beyond siding.
Remember you are talking about 15,000 ft trains. And not a sidewalk to walk on. It takes a long time to walk three miles on gravel. And this meet is how far from the crews starting point? The hog law will end this stupidty I expect. As stated earlier, the 1950’s shorter trains had four (or five) crewmen plus the men were on each end. The HOS limit was much greater than today. I wonder how much money the CSX saved by running the extended length train that stringlined at Fostoria and then lost on the derailment. The expression "Penny wise, pound foolish" comes to mind.
Note that with the last addition, there would be no need to walk the length, even the half length, of the trains. The trains themselves, usually the B train locomotive, would do the job of ferrying the crewmen. Still would take three or four hours because of the walks necessary to set and release handbrakes, time to set and release handbrakes, times to pump up air. No-one today would recommend this as rebular operating pracitce, and you are entirely correct in this matter. The sawby with long trains is probably in use very seldom, oly in emergencies that resulted from some errors.
In my 1952-1953 Boston and Maine days, the saw-by usually occured with short transfer and peddler runs, sometimes as short as ten cars, with sidings that were not meant for passing tracks but for local delivaryand pick-up, often stub-end sidings. Yes, a saw-by is even possible with a stub-end siding, but I wil let someone else have the spleasure of explaining how.
I had neglected to note all the stops, mostly made by train B, to pick-up and drop off its and train A’s second man to position them for couplinig, uncoupling, and hand-brake tie-down, so they do not need to walk the length or half-lenth of the train. Also, both trains at some point need to back up to restore the seonc crewman to the enginer from a position half-way back, done after both trains have cleared the siding.
Iam going to start a new thread on General Discussion on long trains with short sidings.
I think the real question is why conductors and trainmen are still lifting tickets on commuter trains. Lots of places in the world use automated fare collection systems. …even South Africa.
But even 22yeaars ago on a typ;icak gallery-car Chicago commuter train, a conductor or trainman could go through several cars withoiut lifting any tickets, just noting the monthly tickets clipped for him or her to view as proceeding down the ailse, because all the pssengers in these cars had monthlies and not individujal tickets. So it is not quite as obsolete a system as you might think.