|
BrokenKnucklez posted:I am freight engineer I've always wondered - how does one go about becoming an engineer? Do you go to school for it or is it more of a trade that you learn on the job?
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2011 03:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 04:01 |
|
|
bytebark posted:Other railroad acronyms: BrokenKnucklez posted:Here are some rail acronyms from a railroader So I gather the prevailing opinion within the rail industry is everyone is poo poo...?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2011 02:39
|
|
|
Rabid Anti-Dentite! posted:Typical week is 20% overtime on a good week with no real problems. Can't comment on the RR aspects of the job, but if this is a selling point for the job its poo poo. Assuming a 40 hour week, 20% overtime means an extra 8 hours per week. And since you're basically doing grunt work I'm going to assume they'll only be paying you somewhere in the neighborhood of $12/hour. I worked a similar gig for about 10 months at my first job out of highschool at a lumbermill when they put me on the ripsaw (the most physically demanding job on the floor.) I came in at 7 and left at 6 (10 hour days after you removed the half hour lunch and two 15 minute breaks.) Granted this was circa-2003 so I was making $7.50 at the time but the overtime was largely not worth it, considering I was physically exhausted by the end of my shift and had no energy to do anything after I got home. If the job pays well enough it might be worth it, but based on my experience I would run the gently caress away from any job that touts "guaranteed overtime every week" as a benefit. Case in point, I passed up a "promotion" at my current job about six months ago when they told me I'd be making the same but I'd get "at least 8 hours of overtime per week." Another way to look at "guaranteed overtime" is it is also "mandatory overtime." Geoj fucked around with this message at 19:38 on May 5, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2011 19:25
|
|
|
BrokenKnucklez posted:Stuff about RR work OK, nevermind what I said earlier. That sounds like a pretty sweet deal actually. Can just about anyone get into this assuming you're able-bodied? I'm assuming its the kind of thing you can learn in a week and master in a few months. I'm kind of getting sick of my current job and $16-18/hour is right about what I'm being paid now. Geoj fucked around with this message at 21:57 on May 5, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2011 21:42
|
|
|
BrokenKnucklez posted:Healthcare...retirement...union negotiated pay and benefits drat, wish I would have known about this 10 years ago. Is it like some union jobs where you need to know someone on the inside/with connections to get in or is the washout rate so high at the bottom rung that they're basically always hiring?
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2011 02:52
|
|
|
 I wonder how many locomotive enthusiasts have spent untold thousands of dollars duplicating this setup for MS Train Simulator...
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2011 00:00
|
|
|
porkfriedrice posted:From what I've read on a rail forum (railroad.net), those trains have recording devices that are similar to the "black boxes" on aircraft I'm going to guess that much like police dashboard camera footage that is only available when it vindicates the police, the data from the recording device will be "lost." I can already hear their excuses; "our IT personnel misread a directive saying to not delete the data" or "we ran out of space on our server and the information pertinent to this case was lost along with 20,000 hours of other recorder data as part of a routine data wipe."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2011 19:26
|
|
|
BrokenKnucklez posted:The worst kind of collision FRA accident report: http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/Accident_Investigation/2006/hq200648v.pdf I found this impressive... FRA Accident report posted:All crew members from both trains sustained non life-threatening injuries; one required an extended hospital stay. I would have figured multiple fatalities with train-on-train action at a combined head-on speed of 60 MPH. Geoj fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Jun 3, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2011 00:56
|
|
|
Fixed Gear Guy posted:I love the YouTube comments with idiots -- all claiming to be the victims' friends -- claiming that it "wasn't their fault," "the gates weren't working," and "WHERE R U BITC IM GONNA gently caress U UP U DISRESPECTIN MY FRIENDZ U DONT EVEN KNO RIP." People like that kill me. In 2005 in a city just north of where I live a 16 year old girl was killed at a railroad crossing when she attempted to cross immediately behind a southbound train and walked right into the path of a northbound train that through some freak occurrence happened to go through the crossing just as the other train was clearing it. For about two weeks afterwards there were protests at the crossing every weekend with the protesters carrying signs saying "CSX kills kids" (etc.) and throwing rocks and eggs at trains as they passed through.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2011 19:24
|
|
|
Toucan Sam posted:If you get hit by a train it is your fault. I don't care if there are crossing gates working or not. The train isn't going to swerve to hit you, they run on tracks. I cross a railroad crossing by my home multiple times per day. I always stop to look regardless of gate position and regularly get honked at for slowing down and stopping. If other people want to trust the gates that's fine but i will check for myself. I'll generally agree with this, but there are some cases where the railroad can be culpable. My friend's father was killed by a train in 1987, I can't recall the exact details but from what I recall the train was running 70+ MPH in an area that was supposed to be limited to 30 (or disregarded a signal limiting it to 30) being run by a guy who was still in training, at a crossing with a defunct gate. His mother took the first settlement they offered without even consulting with an attorney.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2011 06:35
|
|
|
Toucan Sam posted:Like i said, stop and look both ways. The train runs on tracks and if you look for a train at crossings you will see it and you will be able to avoid it. It is traveling on tracks after all. So at what point does the RR become even partially at fault - when the crew is dropping acid? Like I said, I don't know all the particulars. Maybe there was a blind turn just before the crossing and the train going more than twice as fast as it should have while approaching a non-functional signal with an inexperienced operator at the controls was a factor. I think it speaks volumes that the railroad settled without even a hint of legal action. Unless railroads are incredibly twitchy and settle if there's even a possibility of a lawsuit, most businesses that have deep enough pockets to have armies of attorneys don't settle unless their rear end is on the line. Geoj fucked around with this message at 07:31 on Jun 5, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2011 07:25
|
|
|
Cat Terrist posted:PLus trains are big noisy things that are not that hard to see at all. I whole-heartedly agree. There is no scenario where you cannot see a train coming because every railroad crossing in the world has very long straights in both directions with nothing obstructing visibility, and there is no such thing as operator error. In fact, I think we should do away with nanny state regulations regarding crossing signals and trains having to blow their horn to give 15-20 seconds of warning before reaching a crossing because anyone who gets hit by a train is a stupid gently caress who needs to be taught a lesson in *personal responsibility.*
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2011 16:59
|
|
|
Das Volk posted:It's called responsibility, what the gently caress is wrong with you? Of course, this whole responsibility thing only works one way. The railroad or insert any monolithic corporate entity can do whatever the gently caress they want and its everybody else's responsibility to get out of the way.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 00:02
|
|
|
Fixed Gear Guy posted:What exactly do you want the RR to do? Even if you remove all grade crossings in the US you're still going to have idiots walking on the tracks and playing with RR equipment. I'm not talking about random jackasses playing on the tracks or running around gates. I'll give you that a high percentage of railroad fatalities are most likely the fault of the victim, but I don't think its as cut and dried as some are making it out to be. If it is so cut and dried that 100% of railroad accidents/fatalities are the fault of the victim, why not just grant the railroads blanket immunity to litigation? In the case of my friend's father, I know that the train was doing 70 when it was supposed to be doing 30, was under the control of a trainee and the accident occurred at a crossing with a malfunctioning gate. Are you saying that none of those conditions could have factored into his demise? steady posted:Speaking of level railroad crossings, why is it too hard to invest in bridges or over/underpass? It's a one-time payment to build the thing and railroads won't have to deal with lawsuits which are probably a constant drain. If you look at the number of crossings they would have to modify you'd understand the scale is impractical. And its not a one-time payment, every so often the bridge would need to be repaved and every few decades it would need to be replaced. Hell, its hard enough to get some railroads to repair bad crossings as it is. Geoj fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Jun 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 00:36
|
|
|
Toucan Sam posted:personal responsibility I'll ask again; if the onus for safety around trains is completely on the potential victim then why don't we just give the railroads blanket immunity from any and all litigation?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 02:51
|
|
|
Cat Terrist posted:No, you tell US exactly when it's not your fault if you get belted by 1000 tons of very big, very obvious, very noisy and very obvious metal if you are crossing the tracks? I thought trouser chili made a good point - trouser chili posted:If those gates don't work and you blindly trust them you are hosed. See the apartment complex behind there? No horn at this crossing. I dug up this crossing based on the street number and "roofer's mart" sign on the right side. Observe:  Nice, big berm taller than the speed limit sign just next to the tracks, and you can't see too far down the tracks even sitting right in the middle of them. If a train was doing 70+ MPH through this stretch of tracks (which they probably aren't supposed to do), not blowing its horn because of the proximity to a residence and the crossing gate was disabled you might look both ways, proceed through and still get creamed. As I pointed out, not every crossing has a half mile or more of unobstructed view in both directions.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 05:58
|
|
|
Toucan Sam posted:People must get the gently caress killed out of them all the time there. Did you notice the curve there, the train is going to be going a reasonable speed so it doesn't take out an apartment building. I pass through a crossing with less than 100yds of visibility weekly, and i have been doing it for 12 years. I haven't been hit so i guess the stop and listen method still loving works. Clearly I said that people die every day there. You asked for a scenario where someone could be hit by a train without knowing it was coming, I provided one. Is it likely? No, but at the same time its not outside of the realm of possibility. Like, say, if a train was being run by an inexperienced operator at over twice the speed it should have been going and the gate wasn't working (I seem to recall someone talking about that same situation earlier in this thread...) And that curve isn't so sharp that a train would derail at high speed. But hey, even if it did it would be your problem if it hosed your poo poo up because you should have taken personal responsibility and gotten out of its way. Train derailments are big obvious loud things, after all. Geoj fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Jun 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 15:41
|
|
|
nm posted:I want to post a picture of the railroad crossing across a (controlled access) freeway (Beltline) in Madison, WI. Try stopping for that and not causing a 50 car pile up. There's one of these across US 250/30 in Wooster, OH. Can't find it on google maps as I believe the line may be inactive (crossing has "EXEMPT" signs on it,) but they do exist. And yes...stopping to look both ways before proceeding is just as dangerous as blindly trusting the gates in a 60 MPH zone. I get the feeling being rear-ended by a semi at highway speed is going to have the same effect as being broadsided by a train. e: Just found it - Street View Satellite View rcman50166 posted:John Nolen Dr. This is an excellent example. If the train is traveling NW the tracks are obscured by heavy foliage almost until the tracks meet the road...  ...also, the shallow angle at which the tracks cross the road would make it difficult to see down the tracks to the SE if you're traveling north. Geoj fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Jun 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 20:12
|
|
|
Wow, look at that.  I made someone mad enough to spend money. e: twice. Geoj fucked around with this message at 07:48 on Jun 7, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 23:25
|
|
|
^ Thats a fairly low speed run, I would have to imagine it would be considerably louder with the throttle cracked open.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2011 03:04
|
|
|
^ If the train is truly blocking the ramps (as in, not moving) for "hours" I don't think passing through the cars at the couplers is on the same plane of stupidity as crawling under the cars when the engine is spooled up, getting ready to move. Would you say that crossing a gridlocked three lane highway is equally as stupid as crossing the same highway when traffic is moving at ~65 MPH? Also if they're parking the trains across the grade-level crossings and its never acceptable for someone to pass through the cars, then why not just do away with the crossings entirely? From your description it sounds like they're blocked more often than they're open. Geoj fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Jun 10, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2011 23:09
|
|
|
So do railroads share engines as well as rolling stock? Here in Ohio I've been seeing BNSF units pulling trains on CSX/NS lines, and according to the system map on BNSF's website they don't go any further east than Chicago.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2011 01:05
|
|
|
spipedong posted:When reading bridge clearances.... THINK METRIC!  jesus gently caress, I would expect a railroad bridge to hold up better than that. I could see some minor damage to the bridge with the load being utterly destroyed, rather than the other way around.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2012 00:52
|
|
|
InterceptorV8 posted:And what the hell isn't steel only like 30 bucks a ton? Article said that area scrapyards were paying between $.12-.15 per pound for steel, so the 900lb rail segment they took would be worth $135, assuming they could find a scrapyard to buy it (article also mentions that most scrapyards generally won't take rails because they're almost always stolen.) Seems like way too much work for too little payoff.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2012 07:40
|
|
|
^ I was a bit confused by that as well. Looks like it's the train version of Jay Leno's garage (the website;) a private collector sharing what he has with the Internet.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
Advent Horizon posted:Jay Leno doesn't haul freight for hire. Hauling freight on your private train collection would be the equivalent of taking your private rare car collection to the track 
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:Picture out of nowhere for noreason Any backstory to this? Googling the engine number turns up some railfan forum posts saying the yard at that GM plant is notorious for derailments but nothing more.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2012 17:31
|
|
|
KennyLoggins posted:Found the place: So looks like a simple matter of someone didn't stop in time and went off the end of the rails.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2012 20:00
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:To the poster who posted about emissions - I guarantee that clean burning modern diesels are orders of magnitude better for the environment than steam powered locos. Think about the incredible quantities of mercury and other toxic metals which are released by coal-burning power plants, even with emissions control devices. Also considering steam is vented to atmosphere with each cycle of the pistons (which are driven by steam on both the up and down stroke) they're incredibly inefficient - cold water is continuously being added to the boiler to replace what is lost.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2012 06:23
|
|
|
The Locator posted:So it's pretty common when seeing videos of the old steam engines like that, to see a modern diesel electric locomotive right behind it. Why do they do that? Are there some sections where they don't allow the steam locomotive to run? Probably because they don't want to run the steam engine for the entire excursion/don't trust it to not break down. Actually looking at that video, is it even pulling the train or just idling at high speed? I would expect there to be more smoke/steam coming out of the stack...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2012 20:37
|
|
|
BrokenKnucklez posted:Scenario 2: Distributed Power, also known as DPU. Brake pipe reduction happens from both ends. When the front engines set air, the rear engine also makes the same reduction, resulting in brakes setting from both ends towards the middle. IE car 1 and car 99 set air, then car 2 and car 98 set air and so on. Just curious - what's the reason behind this setup? I spent a week in Wisconsin at the start of last month for a family reunion and a BNSF north/south line runs right through my grandmother's family's property along the Mississippi (so we end up watching a lot of trains go by.) About every third train had an engine on the rear, the best explanation we could come up with was so they could change direction without having to move the engines around.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2012 08:38
|
|
|
Zeether posted:I just saw this picture on Tumblr with people saying "Oh my god, imagine how great this would be" and all I could think of was "This won't work at all and I can give a million reasons why": Are you a follower of choo choo logic? Clearly high speed rail won't work because the fast bullet train will collide with a slow freight train at some point. How do we know this is true? Because the budget office says it will be too expensive  Black88GTA posted:Well, to be fair it would be pretty great, as long as it was cheaper and far less hassle than flying. No comments were made about the logistics / operation of such a system. Hell, I'd gladly pay more if it meant not having to deal with the gestapo at airports. Nothing beats getting to the airport 3 hours early and still having to run down the concourse and board your flight just before they seal the door... Geoj fucked around with this message at 01:55 on Feb 6, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
drunkill posted:
Highlight of that video: "We need to get out here, there's a leak" "Look at all that smoke" *rolls window down*
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
ABC news posted:The Metropolitan Transportation Authority said the gates came down on top of the SUV at the crossing, which was stopped on the tracks. The driver got out to look at the rear of the car, then she got back in and drove forward and was struck. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
^ Same thing happened in a city that neighbors the one I live in a few years ago - a teenage girl crossed just as one train ended and walked right in front of an oncoming train going the opposite direction. Despite a bunch of outrage from the community they oddly didn't post any signs at the crossing saying "wait until all tracks are clear to proceed."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Stick Insect posted:Or people living in towns that trains with dangerous goods travel through? Generally the whole point of a strike is to force management to concede to your demands by grinding everything to a halt. If management decides to continue operations by putting non-union salaried employees to work isn't the onus for safety on them and not the striking employees?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
MassivelyBuckNegro posted:He's asking about crew rest under normal conditions. Specifically that CP refuses to budge on mandatory rest after 10 hours on duty. I imagine that they are currently allowed to work no more than 12 without mandatory rest. In the US, persons employeed in train service may not work more than 12 hours without rest. I read it as "striking will disrupt commuter operations and put trains operated by salaried crews hauling hazardous cargo at risk."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
Has the cost of out of court settlements and damaged/destroyed equipment and freight exceeded the annual savings of laying off however many hundreds or thousands of employees yet? I feel like that would have to happen before management would even take notice.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:There are tons of these Videos of hipsters drinking lovely beer, or abandoned rails? I'm legitimately interested in the latter but it seems that most of the abandoned lines within reasonable driving distance from where I am are little more than clear areas where rails used to be, or else they're overgrown by saplings and other brush too big to plow over on a rail go kart. Geoj fucked around with this message at 05:56 on Jun 29, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 04:01 |
|
|
From the comments section: quote:people are in too big of a hurry at rail crossings and try to beat the train no matter how little time they have. quote:And how do you know the semi didn't break down at the crossing? And, while rare, there have been some people in vehicles hit by a train who actually survived. I seriously doubt (and I could be wrong) the driver of a semi was actually trying to "beat the train". My guess (and again, I could be wrong) is that he broke down on the tracks and had no other choice. I didn't read the article, but let me tell you my opinion based on the headline!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2015 05:34
|
|