600-million-herd-iron-horses-pasture-salt-lake-city-union-pacific-locomotives-ra

[pedro]

Not sure when that BNSF official was quoted, but I can assure you they’re no longer thinking that way.

The technology is advancing more rapidly than you probably realize. The conductor is quickly being made redundant, there’s really no doubt about it. I can now sit in my car in the parking lot and download all of my paperwork to my company-issued iPad, and also tie up my time ticket on it. In theory I don’t have to go inside the building any more. Problems out on the line? We can already call a mechanical department “rapid responder” who shows up in a tuck to assist. The dispatcher can now “push” GTB updates through the PTC system. As soon as I hit “acknowledge” the DS knows we got it, and won’t call on the radio. Soon the foreman in charge of form “B”s will have the same ability to push instructions to go through work zones.

We engineers are endangered too, but that’s going to take a while longer.  Right now any train with active PTC and GE’s “Trip Optimizer” can run any train about 95% of my 300 mile run. In fact, we’re specifically required to let the “T.O” run the train if it’s available, with few exceptions. Not doing so gets you a call from the road foreman and eventual discipline.  The system has no trouble with any scenario. 10,000’ers, Hazmat, distributed power, no big deal. It can even control individual locomotives in the consist(s). I just reset the alerter and blow the horn when T.O. is active. The PTC will blow the horn too, but we’re not allowed to let it. The things that PTC and TO don’t do now I’m sure are just a rules change and software update away from being implemented.

They’re chipping away, with updates seemingly weekly. If you’re a class-1 railroader working someplace that hasn’t implemented this stuff yet, just wait. It’s coming...

[Philip H]

Interesting discussion @pedro - but if the conductor is obsolete who will make and break air and how do you switch? I know for road freights that’s not an issue per se and I am in no way trying to be flip. But it’s hard to see how you get automation of the 3 cars 2 cars 1/2 car type calling without a LOT of finicky technology.

[Hawghead]

The railroad doesn't own most of their locomotives, they are leased.  When a locomotive is in storage the company doesn't have to pay the lease or pays a much reduced rate.  You'll find that a lot of those engines are old SD70s and 90s, worn out to the point of needing major overhaul and no where near as fuel efficient as the newer engines.  The Union Pacific has reduced it's locomotive repair facilities and personnel to the bare bones, while at the same time putting a big percentage of engines in storage.  The result is that the engines that are still being used never see the inside of an engine house.  Engines on a train going from Portland to Chicago are just refueled and given a basic daily inspection and sent right back west so there is need for much fewer locomotives.

Scott

[Jbub]

The railroad doesn't own most of their locomotives, they are leased.  When a locomotive is in storage the company doesn't have to pay the lease or pays a much reduced rate.  You'll find that a lot of those engines are old SD70s and 90s, worn out to the point of needing major overhaul and no where near as fuel efficient as the newer engines.  The Union Pacific has reduced it's locomotive repair facilities and personnel to the bare bones, while at the same time putting a big percentage of engines in storage.  The result is that the engines that are still being used never see the inside of an engine house.  Engines on a train going from Portland to Chicago are just refueled and given a basic daily inspection and sent right back west so there is need for much fewer locomotives.

Scott

I tried to get some photos and video of them today but the road is closed for some paving work. But from what I can see it's mostly sd70m's and a few GE's here and there. Maybe some AC4400's and -9's, I'd have yo get a closer look.

[squirrelhunter]

Has there been a hazmat or fatality derailment while a train is under control of Trip Optimizer? I'll be very curious if that technology will survive its first major interaction with the civil court system.

Also, an industry that spawns lots of complaints from the public and local governments, is reviled by its customers and doesn't employ anyone is a fat target for state and federal legislators looking for ideas for future legislation.

[Hawghead]

Has there been a hazmat or fatality derailment while a train is under control of Trip Optimizer? I'll be very curious if that technology will survive its first major interaction with the civil court system.

Also, an industry that spawns lots of complaints from the public and local governments, is reviled by its customers and doesn't employ anyone is a fat target for state and federal legislators looking for ideas for future legislation.

I don't know if there have been others, but here on the Portland Subdivision there has been only one.  Leader (EMD's version of Trip Optimizer) was running the train when 16 cars of an oil train derailed and caught fire just west of the siding at Mosier.  However, train handling was not the issue, a rail broke in a curve due to the undetected failure of lag bolts that were used on that section of track.  The lag bolts are less likely to pull loose like spikes often do, but when they break below the tie plate, there is no visual way to tell, as the head of the lag bolt is still sitting on top of the tie plate and looks normal.

The problem with automated train handling systems is not that they can't do the job, but that they require a lot of maintenance the railroad doesn't want to spend the money to provide.  Every day there are more stories in the news about this or that maintenance facility being closed by the railroads.  While almost all of our locomotives are equipped with some kind of Energy Management System, what the railroad calls Trip Optimizer and Leader, so far this year I think probably 10% of the lead locomotives on my trains have had an EMS system that worked.  So do you really want a train load of hazardous material rolling through your town controlled by a system that the railroads don't want to spend any money on to maintain?  Airliners currently have the ability to take-off, fly to a destination and land all without a pilot at the controls, do you want to fly in one?

Scott