Can someone please explain to me what the difference between a train order vs a track warrant is? I thought I understood them, at least somewhat, but, since I read a bit more, now I’m confused. Thanks.
Track Warrant Control and Timetable & Train Order are both a Method of Operation for trains on a main track, but they function in a fundamentally different manner. Without going into all the exceptions (which fill the rulebook):
- When a main track has Track Warrant Control as its Method of Operation, a train has no authority to operate on the main track unless it holds a valid track warrant, which authorizes the train to operate between two fixed geographic points. No warrant, no authority, no movement, no anything.
- When a main track has Timetable & Train Order as its Method of Operation, it is the Timetable that provides the authority to occupy the main track. Only when the train dispatcher wishes to vary from the sequence and location of meets, passes, and times published in the timetable, or create trains that have no times published in the timetable (extra trains), does he issue a train order. Thus under normal operation, no train orders are needed at all. The train crew leaves their initial station not before the departure time published in the timetable, clears the main track before the time when superior trains are to arrive, and no input or conversation is required with the dispatcher. Typically, though a clearance card is required to leave the initial station, so that the dispatcher is aware that a train shown in the timetable in fact does exist that day, and to communicate information such as engine number, crew names, length, and tonnage to the dispatcher.
One way to think about this is that under T&TO, the timetable is in effect a sort of giant permanent track warrant that sets up all the meets and passes for most of the trains all of the time, and the train orders are issued to address exceptions that the dispatcher wishes to make. Under T&TO, the assumption is that operations are going to be highly uniform every day, with the same trains running at the same times and doing the same things.&nb
RWM, as the son of a Station Agent and Train Dispatcher, I have only one word for the above post; BRAVO![bow][wow]
Thank you.
Bruce
One factor of T&TO operation that RWM didn’t mention was the train order offices, usually located in stations and other such facilities, but occasionally a site in and of itself.
Train order offices were used to issue train orders when they were needed. But possibly more importantly the operator there (such as AK’s dad) reported when scheduled trains went past to the DS, who could now track a train’s progress and make plans if a train was running late. That might include changing a meet point.
And, we can add to Larry’s comment, for maximum efficiency when a large number of trains are operated, all train order offices should be open continuously, so that new orders can be issued to engine and train crews when necessary. However, the practice on less heavily-traveled lines was that only offices in major towns and cities were open 24 hours a day, and most offices were open only during daylight hours, though some had what may have seemed to the non-railroader odd hours of operation. Of course, all orders were issued by a dispatcher, often over the chief dispatcher’s signature, and sent to the applicable TO office(s) to be delivered to the affected train(s).
What a difference reliable radio communication has made!
By the way, I wonder just how an order directing a southbound manifest freight to back over onto the wrong main at Wesson, Miss., to allow #1 (the City of New Orleans) to overtake and pass the freight would have been written. I saw this operation, trackside, one night in 1965, and did not think to ask the conductor of the freight how the order was written.
During my school tours at Chanute AFB, I hung around at the ICG station in Rantoul a lot. Occasionally the station agent would hoop up orders to the northbounds to cross over just north of town and run on the wrong main, usually due to track maintenance.
It never occured to me to ask to see a copy of one of the orders.
Possibly the reverse movement was within yard limits, if this option existed in the rules for that railroad. That might have simplified things. Using Canadian rules, within yard limits the main track could be occupied by local movements, but they had to clear the schedule times of 1st and 2nd Class trains, and first check the register to be certain there were no overdue trains or additional sections.
It might also depend on what, if any, type of signaling system was in place. In CTC territory, movement is governed by signal indication so no train orders would be required.
Interesting question, anyway, and I’ll hope for more information.
John
ABS, with the crossover switches tied into the signal system. I do not think that there were yard limits in the town (there was very little switching activity, which usually could be handled by the local without interfering with the four each way passenger and three each way manifest freight trains). I can dig an ETT out to check if you want me to.
I was standing on the east side of the track, so I did not see just when #1 arrived at the south main switch, but by the time the freight engine cleared the fouling point and the switches were lined back, #1 was right at the south main
See also the article on “Railroad’s Traffic Control Systems” by Frank W. Bryan in the “Railroad Reference - ABC’s of Railroading” section here, at:
A couple of further questions:
-
How does the amount and detail of information needed vary for a Track Warrant or Form D as compared to an old Form 19 or 31 Train Order ?
-
[Hang on, now] In an age when most rail lines and DiSpatchers are very busy, would it be more efficient to reinstate TT&TO authority for certain regular and repetitive train movements, rather than have to treat each on as a special project ? For routes that have a number of Amtrak and intermodal trains that pretty much have to run on set schedules and have priority over most other trains, their authority would then exist by ‘default’ and wouldn’t need to be re-created anew each day, nor their meets and passes, etc. More importantly, it would reduce the workload on the dispatcher desks and redirect it to the out-of-the-ordinary and truly unusual train movements, and maybe making shorter the waits by train crews and MOW and C&S folks in the field for attention from the DS. And most importantly, it would free up the radio system from messages that the Timetable could handle, thereby relieving some of the crowded airtime problems without having to add additional channels and install additional base stations and repeaters, etc.
- Paul North.
When trains in a TT&TO operation are off their scheduled times the Dispatchers work load grows exponentially…been there, done that. While there is a lot of communications between field personnel and the Dispatcher under TWC or DTC, it is nowhere near as much as would be involved in a TT&TO operation with today’s railroad operations, especially when in the heyday of TT&TO operation MofW personnel never had exclusive track occupancy to perform their duties, they operated on the ambiguities of a ‘Track Car Lineup’ which basically stated what trains were on the territory and their last known OS. For daylight Train Dispatchers, working with MofW’s needs is almost their primary concern.
[quote user=“Paul_D_North_Jr”]
See also the article on “Railroad’s Traffic Control Systems” by Frank W. Bryan in the “Railroad Reference - ABC’s of Railroading” section here, at:
A couple of further questions:
-
How does the amount and detail of information needed vary for a Track Warrant or Form D as compared to an old Form 19 or 31 Train Order ?
-
[Hang on, now] In an age when most rail lines and DiSpatchers are very busy, would it be more efficient to reinstate TT&TO authority for certain regular and repetitive train movements, rather than have to treat each on as a special project ? For routes that have a number of Amtrak and intermodal trains that pretty much have to run on set schedules and have priority over most other trains, their authority would then exist by ‘default’ and wouldn’t need to be re-created anew each day, nor
Always good to get a more informed insight - thanks !
- PDN.
Just to add to the information (maybe). The US. Operating Rules, used by CN and others, now has Track Authorities. They are basically the same as a Track Warrant but add the ability to have multiple trains and MOW groups share the same track. The Track Authority creates a hierarchy of groups in the same limits and requires all of them to communicate when sharing the track. It essentially makes the trains/MOW groups on the track their own dispatchers. This has the effect to somewhat reduce the load on the dispatcher, but often the dispatcher ends up being the communication go-between among the various groups. The effect is also similar to a Form B where trains entering certain limits must get permissions from other MOW/trains already there. If more details are desired, read Rule 1004 of the USOR.
We will often take track “out of service” via a Line 4 on the NORAC Form D for cases where close coordination makes going to the dispatcher problematic.
We’re also in the Adirondacks, where cell phone connectivity is sometimes sketchy and radio communications with the dispatcher (GVT in Scranton) can be inadequate at times.
The employee holding the OOS becomes the “dispatcher,” as petitnj points out.
I just checked a 1964 Louisiana Division ETT, and there was no yard in Wesson; the first one south of Jackson was in Brookhaven, about 8 miles south of Wesson; there was no way the freight could have made it to Brook in time to clear #1.
A train order might tell you of a spped restriction over a certain part of track or other details on your subdivision.
A Track Warrant gives you permsiion to move your train over a specific portion of track - say between MP 23.5 to MP 87.0 on the Main track.
Basically there are 3 types of authority(i.e. permission) for using the Main Track: Track Warrant, Automatic Block System, and Centralized Traffic Control.
Today, Train Orders have been replaced by General Track Bulletins(GTB’s) - which list all the speed restrictions, out-of-service track, and other important info you will need to work your run or shift.
Paul, TWC rules compared to TT&TO rules are a lot (A LOT) easier to learn and apply. If they still used TT&TO, they couldn’t take someone off the street and make them a conductor in 6 months (sometimes less). I sometimes have an old ETT and/or rule book to pass the time in the motel. I’ve shown these to some of the younger conductors (and engineers). Some have a hard time grasping how it worked.
Bottom line, from spending time in my youth at a RI train order office and running my model railroad by TT&TO, I wouldn’t mind working with it. It would be a challenge to say the least. Then I think of some of the others who’ld be out there. Don’t get me wrong, they’re good guys, but maybe we had better stick with TWC.
Deggesty, I saw the CNW do the same thing a few times, only for freight trains. I don’t think train orders were involved. It seems like it was done either verbally or by message handed up to them from the dispatcher. By backing over, they’re aren’t running against the current of traffic. The rear brakeman would line the crossover, wait 5 minutes, then back onto the other track. They would be protected by any traffic coming at them by block signals. In your case, they’ld have the time table that would tell them of any superior traffic coming at them. There would usually be a dispatcher’s phone box or booth fairly close to a crossover, so they could contact him by phone for permission to do this if they had not already been instructed by message or radio to do so.
There is one section of current of traffic, double track that I work. A local has to use a crossover and run wrong main for about 1/4 to 1/3 mile (no yard limits either) to clear on a branchline. It’s done verbally. The dispatcher makes sure there is no opposing move, gives them permission to crossover and occupy the oth
Thanks, Jeff. There was no open TO station between North Jackson (46 miles north of Wesson) and Brookhaven (8 miles south of Wesson); I do not recall seeing anything in the way of a telephone box at the crossover switches–and there was no time to call the dispatcher had there been one. The crews of the freight knew, several miles up the road that they had to get the south main cleared, and they had been unable to do so at the station (Hazlehurst) just north of Wesson because the local already had to get out of the way there. Perhaps they were given a message at North Jackson telling them to clear the track for #1. Incidentally, the freight crew did not wait five minutes after lining the switches for the backup move. As soon as the train stopped, the engineer began backing over, knowing that the rearend crew would have the switches lined for the move (one of them threw a lit fusee into the air as soon as the sb switch was cleared, and both men unloaded). I lived across the street from the track, and bec
I would think that, if the traffic on a particular rail line is overwhelming the capabilities of a TWC system it’s time for the railroad to seriously consider CTC.
A Track Warrant, Form D, or DTC authority is a pretty simple document. It was very unusual for me to issue a warrant or DTC authority with more than 3 boxes checked. A Train Order in contrast can be phenomenally complex.
Interesting idea but … absolutely no. Reasons:
- Every time a train falls down on its schedule, either a train order will need to be issued to advance the opposing trains against the late train’s schedule (or make them late too), which defeats the purpose of dispatcher workload reduction.
- Addition of another verbal Method of Operation that is so di
Emphasis added; It should also be noted that TWC very much relies on modern, high capacity, high speed computer equipment and software to keep track of all the trains and movements, that simply was not around in the days when dispatching was primarily Time Table & Train Order.