I was wondering if you guys enjoy the new cab style, SD70ACe, ES44AC? They look a little diferent without the desktop, huh?
Anything without desktop controls is an improvement.
I HATE DESKTOPS!!!
Unfortunately the new SD70M-2s, even though they have the AAR control stand, EMD somehow was able to screw things up again.
First, they put the headlight switches ahead of the throttle and D/B handles necessitating the handles having to be moved rearward. Now the D/B handle is so far back that the bell handle mounting gets in the way when you want to grab the D/B handle.
Second, they went and put a desktop right in front of the engineer,right where it gets in the way of his legs. Tall guys can forget about stretching out their legs.
All in all, everything EMD made right, they made something else wrong to balance things out. Very very frustrating to say the least.
Big Jim, one of the saddest things I’ve seen is the way that EMD lost their way from the superb locomotives they used to build. Yes, sad!
I just don’t understand EMD. It doesn’t seem as though they are doing any field work at all asking the people that actually use their products about what works and what doesn’t.
The really really sad part is that EMD is being cussed by EVERY engineer that has blown the horn on the new units and then they can’t turn the automatic bell off. I just don’t know what was going through their minds on that one!
How anyone could have thought that bell ringing like that was a good idea is beyond me. We’re required to whistle until we occupy the crossing, what is the point in having that bell ring for another 20 odd seconds? You have to sometimes think that someone thinks, “Hey, I know what will irritate everyone”.
Why the dislike for the “desktop” controls? I am curious about this, what is it that makes the control stand more preferable?
Good questions that I’ll second, and let me add: Do the ordering railroads have certain options available to them when ordering new locomotives – like we have when ordering a new car? Maybe part of what you dislike is something your employers have ordered rather than EMD?
The dislike, at least as far as I am concerned, comes from a combination of having to be hunched over the desk top to operate the controls and not being able to stretch out.
With a standard control stand, the engineer is able to change positions throughout the trip, that may last up to 12 hrs. It also makes for better vision and control in switching operations.
Engineers in their careers spend much more time involved in switching movments than they do in straight away line of road forward movement. Whenever movements other than straight away line of road movements are necessary…the engineer is looking out the side cab window for the conductor or brakeman that is on the ground being the ‘seeing eye dog’ for the movement…coupling the engines to the train…setting cars off or picking cars up at industry and any of the 101 things that have to be done in the normal days operation.
Desktop controls feature that all the Engineers time is spent in forward line of road operations and nothing could be further from the truth. Desktop controls don’t facilitate all the time the the engineer must spend with his head out the side window observing and reacting to the signals from his ground crew.
The standard AAR control stand can be operated with the engineers back toward it and have his visual attention directed either fore or aft out the side window as is necessary for safe switching operations.
If you’re very tall at all, there’s no legroom under the desktop. I usually end up sitting sideways for most of the trip, which gets miserable. I don’t like the layout of the desktop, I don’t like the little button for the horn, numerous desktops have no place to put dispatcher bulletins because either the clipboard clip is missing or was never installed in the first place, so it’s hard to keep the dispatcher bulletins displayed where I can refer to them at a glance. Then, as the others have said, they’ve very inconvenient to operate when doing anything other than going ahead.
I am surprised to learn of how many engineers don’t like the desktop controls. When they were first introducted they were suposed to be so much “better” than the conventonal AAR type control stands. I guess this proves them wrong. I would think that both EMD and GE would take into consideration certain situations, and conditions the operator would be subjected to, with the model of the desktop controls. I guess they figure that the high horsepower diesels equiped with the desktop controls are mainly going to be used for forward movements on mainlines.
Of course if you guys could accept electronic remote loco control units this would not be a problem as you could do it without turning your back to the controls or even control the loco while standing on the ground to better see what is going on.
Railroads have usually ordered per their own desires which amazingly vary even in this day and age. I have placed orders for units since 1982 and have been part of several ‘industry wide’ efforts to standardize. This would seem to make sense with the degree of run through activity these days however individual roads built in infrastucture such as cab signalling or automatic train stop for example can vary a new unit’s price by several hundred thousand dollars. A major break here is between the east and the west roads.
I echo the concerns in some other replies about EMD’s change from the past and hope that being independent from GM will enable a fesh look. Both builders are adding standard features with each model that cost to change but again individual roads infrastructures will still require various options.
While you are in the process of ordering, do your fellow employees a big fat favor and tell EMD…“We don’t want your stinkin’ auto bells (that can’t be turned off)!”.
As an ex-rail manager, train driver and enthusiast(!), I’d also like to know why there is this oposition to remote operation of shunting/switching moves. We had similar in UK when EWS (Wisc Cent) tried to introduce it.
Surely, it is often much safer and gives better vision if the loco operator is on the ground, so why not have that option and use it?
Can a freight driver/engineer explain the oposition, please?
Thx.
Eric Stuart ex-UK, now in France.
Could the automatic bell be a customer option? The UP’s latest SD70ace engines I’ve had you could turn the bell off after blowing the horn.
What I’d like is for EMD to allow us to manually use sand in power above 12 to 15 MPH. There are times it seems to take the computer a long time to realize that conditions require a little sand on the rail.
Jeff
The main reasons for opposition to remote control in the US stems from a number of factors.
-
The locomotive is operated not by an “engineer”, but a conductor. The engineer lost his job. Also, the conductor performs the same work under the same guidelines as a “government” licensed engineer, without being required to have a license. A conductor using remote control, can destroy lots of equipment and still have his job tomorrow, while the engineer will be “in the street” for a least a month or forever. The conductor just goes back to a regular job that doesn’t utilize remote control.
-
The railroads and the “FRA” have permitted conductors (without a government license) to have a shoving platform, where they can use the remote control to shove themselves (on board) over many miles of railroad and over “public road crossings.” There is a safety issue here as well as a licensing issue.
Also, there have been other problems with them, but these are a few from the workers standpoint. Basically, if a conductor can do all the work without a license, why are locomotive engineers required to be licensed and subject to penalties and federal certification. All which the railroads and the government happily ignore.
Regarding desktop control stands. I prefer them for over the road, but I agree they are difficult and a menace for switching.
Oversearailway
The engineers do not lose their jobs. Senority still has a place over here.
You spend years hoping that you can hold a yard job and then the job is remoted out of existence. Maybe you didn’t lose your job, you’ve still got a job but when you were hoping to get off the road, it makes a difference. Less engineer jobs equal less trainmen jobs, too, because in today’s railroad world, it all filters down to the junior men.
The remotes I’ve seen have convinced me that they’re far less effective than a good engineer coupled up with a couple of good switchmen but that doesn’t seem to matter.