Any of us who have driven cars in heavy fog know how that can change a short travel time to a longer one, as it did for me the other night returning home from an Amtrak trip.
So the thought occurred to me: What were the rules, especially in pre-radio days, about operating trains, especially the Extra Fare or Limited trains, in conditions of heavy fog? Was it simply left to the hogger’s judgment about how fast to proceed? What about keeping to the schedule? With no radio to connect him to either the dispatcher or other trains on the tracks, how could an engineer have any faith that he wouldn’t run into another train? How important were (are) trackside signals in such conditions?
By the same token, what rules today govern operations in foggy conditions? How fast can trains go? Are trains ever “grounded” by fog and simply prohibited from operating for a while? Lastly, does each road make up its own rules for this or is there an industry-wide standard that governs such operations?
The only things the engineer has to know are his movement authority and where he is at the moment. The type of movement authority, whether it’s from a train order, fixed signal, cab signal, or track warrant doesn’t really matter. The only time line of sight is important is when the you are operating at restricted speed which requires you to be able to stop in half the distance you can see.
Oltmannd, I believe you are an engineer or something, so I will not directly disagree with you. However in our GCOR we are taught that in conditions such as fog, snow etc, we must only operate at a speed at which we are able to stop in half our line of sight.
Before radios how in the world did any switching get done in heavy fog? Maybe conductor or other crewman dump the air? (dangerous). Would a back up hose be helpful?
Guys- Come on now. I realize that this subject, and the way it was approached last time got everybody in an uprising. Rather than spin this thread out of control from the start, why not view it as a legitimate question from the original poster, who is just wondering how things are done. Curiosity, even though it’s killed some cats, isn’t a bad thing.
Let’s not let this thread turn into a mess. Thank you.
Maybe you guys need to start a dedicated Elenor Roosevelt thread to get it out of your system?
To continue Don’s comment a wee bit - if the engineer has unconditional authority to occupy the track, the engineer is generally authorized to proceed at the maximum authorized track speed, regardless of weather/ environmental conditions (fog - and volcano ash ?), subject of course to any ‘slow orders’, timetable or other restrictions, etc. The engineer is entitled to assume that he/she ‘has the railroad’ - that nothing else will be on it or obstruct it, neither another train on the track nor a vehicle at a grade crossing, etc. - absent a signal or notification to the contrary.
That normally works fine, with the exception of heavy fog condtions. The train and track authorization system still works - but the chief problem is with unprotected grade crossings, where a fast-moving train simply can’t be seen until it is just a few seconds from the crossing. Evey couple of years it seems that this is sadly demonstrate
This is a valid point. Take a look at the neat photos from coborn35 above - thanks ! they’re nice ones, too - and imagine trying to pass or read hand signals the length of a 100-car train, when visibility just isn’t there more than 50 or 75 yards away, esp. in daylight when a lantern isn’t going to stand out/ burn through the fog at all. Even a 5 or 6-man ‘full crew’ wouldn’t be enough - someone would have to do considerable walking.
Or, when running on block signal indications - if properly set up, there’d always got at least 1 block’s advance notification of what the next signal’s most restrictive indication would be - but that might not be visible until the train is right there. Which is why the yellow indication is usually interpreted - simply stated here - as ‘‘Approach next signal prepared to stop short of it’’ [emphasis added - PDN]. So after encountering a yellow, the train might very well be creeping up to the next signal, so that it could stop on a dime if it is red when it finally becomes visible from only a short distance away.
Paul you are so correct: The FAA and ICAO recognize this difference. When approaching an airport near dawn if the visibility to see runway and approach lights is say 600 ft when the day night sensor goes to days the visibility may then be only 200ft. We had fog here this morning and I could see abut 1200 ft but at dawn vis rapidly decreased to 300 ft.
Theoretically in automatic signal territory, automatic train control, cab signal territory, and the like, there should be no restrictions in fog. Elsewhere, it might be a different story. It would be up to the engineer…his knowledge of the territory (which should be extensive), his knowledge of his train (which is probably different everyday), his knowledge of his locomotive (which is defferent from locomotive to locomotive), his knowledge of himself…all taken into consideration on how to proceed. When it came to switching, etc., while normal lanterns were not of much use during the day, fusees were a little…onlly a little…better. Communication and trust through the crew: understanding the job at hand, the way it was to be done, who was to be where to do what, all played a hand in how and how well a switching job would be done. In this day of computers, GPS, micorporcessers, radio, et al., it is sometimes difficult for us to understand really how well a man or a group of men could function with effeciency and expertise, relying on each indiviual’s wits and the groups wits as a whole. It is like we have deferred our own abilities in favor of machines and computers when in the past, we found it inside ourselves to do it.
Only places I’ve ever seen the “<—LOOK—>” sign is with private crossings. NS in these parts seems to like to place a standard stop sign with a “Private RXR Crossing” sign under that, and then the “LOOK” sign under that. Probably because trains don’t usually sound their whistles at private crossings.
You used lanterns and hand signals. Maybe you used a fusee or kept cuts of cars at a minimum so that a full crew could space themselves out to give hand signals. Some places in yards had switching signals mounted on poles to relay signals. Obviously, we are here today, so it eventually got done.
If you travel along the Ingersoll Rd between Woodstock and Ingersoll ON there ar a few private crossings that CN and CP have to conrend with. The “LOOK” sign is used a bit up here but the ones I’'ve seen seem to be more developed by the people who own the properties
Contemporary U.S. military vehicles such as the M1 Abrams main battle tanks and the M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles have advanced thermal imaging systems that enable the crews to see pretty well in dark, foggy, rainy, and smoky conditions on the battelfield - ‘‘The tank also included a new Commanders Independant Thermal Viewer(CITV). This allows for the commander to see in Day/Night and foggy conditions with the use of Infrared and Night vision.’’ from http://military.wikia.com/wiki/M1_Abrams
So I wonder if such a system would be useful - or has even been tried - for those few and far between instances when locomotive crews are on lines where fog is a common problem, or where fog really disrupts operations that are highly dependent on personnel being able to see clearly for a long distance. Now that there are forward-looking locomotive cameras, this would just be one more such appliance or electronic instrument/ gadget. For the conductor or switchmen on the ground, perhaps a ‘night-vision’ goggles kind of gadget would be appropriate - at least until someone with that restricted range of vision trips over a switchstand or similar . . . [:-^] Then again, maybe this is a solution in search of a problem . . . [%-)]
There are those who would say that the crews are more likely to be in a fog more often than a locomotive. All kidding aside, I don’t think any given locomotive would be working through a dense enough fog often enough to warrent such an investment. The former Erie, EL, CR Delware Division from Deposit, NY to Port Jervis is a location where there is often pre dawn and morning fog where I often wondered if such technology would be useful. But there are a enough stories of crews falling asleep rolling down the line overnight that one could say that fog is not the most important problem on the line and the only technology would be some kind of induction system to trip loud, alarming noises into the cab would be worth considering.!
coborn35, those are neat photos - they came out much better than I would have expected for a ‘‘trains in the mist’’ [swg] kind of photo. Thanks for sharing ! [tup]
And thanks, James, for fixing/ setting up the ‘clickable’ links.