Sorry,
Put this in the wrong place.
Thank You.
The theory sounds fine until one comes against the real world. What about weather? How does a utility condr. access a disabled train if the roads are impassable or weather warnings preclude travel, much less the aforementioned difficulty in accessing remote locations? Multiple events that staffing will most surely not accommodate may quickly snarl a railroad. I suspect trains will just have to be tied down until there are adequate dogctach crews and dogcatch utility persons or available vehicles. After all, that seems to be the modus operandi nowadays - tie trains down and complain about “congestion”. On a good day the remote conductor theory works. There are good days but enough that aren’t so good. Management discloses its naivety and insulation from the ebb and flow of its operation to an extent that it is staggering. It is tempting to suggest letting the carriers economize themselves into oblivion, but that would be wrong.
Also wanted to ad the obvious safety factor. There is no equivalent between an OTR truck with one or two trailers and a tonnage consist of a hundred or more trailers or cars. Moreover, who ties a train down if the engr. runs out of time but there’s no utility man nearby? PTC sounds great, but my impression is that the majority of events since the advent of PTC have been circumstances where restricted speed was called for and PTC of little use - but a second crew member arguably essential. The accessibility problem for reaching a train in remote locations might be addressed by adding a small car at the rear of a train in which a utility condr. could travel as sort of an occupied rear-end device.
There’s probably still a few cabeese around…
Well played sir…
Could access to a remote rail location be handled by a ground based conductor in a high-rail vehicle gaining rail access at a nearby road crossing?
Getting hi-rail vehicles in the same track segment with trains becomes a very ticklish from a rules and Dispatching standpoint, at this point in time Utility Trainmen ARE NOT trained to be able operate under Track Car Authorities. Yes the can be trained, however, you will be dealing, most likely, with the youngest most inexperienced on the roster. I can see nothing but safety issues, for all concerned.
What follows is a video that is representative of the kind of locations where access is gained to the track. Imagine this location on a dark rainy night.
And now add just a few inches of snow, especially with wind blowing.
In fact I have seen some actual public roads that are similar to this farm track, where the farmer is farming a substantial part of the road allowance width.
On multiple tracked segments it would save time, if they want to give the track away adjacent to the train that is stopped. On single track lines the utility will be able to reach either the front or back, and still have to walk the train. (Best to approach from the back in this case. Can’t pull the train ahead to pick up the knuckle if the hi-rail truck is in front of the engine.)
Often on multiple tracked lines other trains can give a ride and/or drop off tools or knuckles. It’s also possible under specific conditions to back up to get the conductor on the head end.
I noticed the track side access road they put in when they restored the second main in western Iowa years ago was snowed in. Some spots looked like it might be hard for a 4WD vehicle to transit.
As to the person riding on the rear end. I’m not sure anyone would want to ride the end of a 3 mile long whip. We’re not allowed to deadhead on distributed power units because of the potential slack action.
Jeff
As an outsider looking in, I wonder if the railroads’ immediate plans are to replace two higher trained (and higher paid) people in the cab with one higher trained & paid and one lesser trained & paid? You’d still have those two sets of eyes in the cab. You’d still have somebody to walk the train. It would probably be easier to find someone for the position. Those that showed promise could still become engineers, they just wouldn’t have to be forced to. You coul give the position a new name. Maybe fireman?
The railroads immediate plans - if they got their ‘dreams’ is one minimaly paid pair of eyes in the cab - training; who you trying to kid. And if they are forced into it, one minimally paid ‘utility man’ per thousand square miles.
I like how they have a truck full of tools on that video. Like most conductors are going to be changing out traction motors on the main.
The video was of a MofW group of employees - don’t know what their railroad purpose was that had brought them to the location where they got stuck. There are myriad of railroad locations that are not routinely accessable by other than rail access. The ‘flying utiltity man’ is a figment of cost cutters brain damaged minds.
I was referring to the road conductor video and his dod…err…RAM pickup.
Not Ron’s video.
UP’s Pecos River Bridge at Santa Rosa, NM is currently out.
https://www.up.com/customers/announcements/customernews/allcustomernews/CN2023-4.html
So there’s no service west of the Pecos. Take your complaints to Judge Roy Bean.
The pilot plan was put on hold…for the time being.
The ‘bean counter’ element that come up with such ideas have no idea what world the real world of railroad actually exists in, with probably 30% of the Class 1 properties being UNACCESSABLE except by rail.
The accountants would not have any input into the decision-making, their function is to ensure that the data used is accurate.