Western Railroad Discussion > UP exec Guerdon Sines

One of Union Pacific's key officers leading into the Mike Walsh era, Guerdon Sines, passed away Friday. Under his leadership, MoPac was an industry leader in information technology. MoPac chief Downing Jenks said in the 1969 MP annual report that TCS "may well be the most revolutionary development in railroading of this century." One contemporary said "the guts of TCS still drive UP’s transportation scheduling system today because the code was so well written and efficient."

Sines worked for NYC, Penn Central. SP and MoPac before coming to head UP's Information Technology development. He retired in 1990. His funeral will be Tuesday in Georgetown, TX,

I remember meeting him in his office in the old UP headquarters building. He impressed me as being very stern and formidable but I worked up enough nerve to make a lame comment on the SP picture he had hanging in his office!

John Bromley
Omaha, Nebraska



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/14 11:31 by Copy19.

John: You couldn't be more right! He was a giant. The industry takes for granted today some of the IT capabilities he spearheaded in the 60's, 70's and 80's.

Woody



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/14 11:33 by xg093.

All,

"the guts of TCS still drive UP’s transportation scheduling system today because the code was so well written and efficient."

There are some folks in the operating crafts that might disagree with thay statement.

J.

Having worked for the MoPac, I would have to agree that MoPac's TCS was at the least, a trendsetter.

The guts of TCS are only now being replaced (as part of an IT renewal costing hundreds of millions) as the core of the UP operating system.

J.Ferris Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All,
>
> "the guts of TCS still drive UP’s transportation
> scheduling system today because the code was so
> well written and efficient."
>
> There are some folks in the operating crafts that
> might disagree with that statement.
>

The quote merely says the code (i.e., the software) was well written and efficient. Meaning, given the specifications of what the code is supposed to do, it did that efficiently. You can decide for yourself how much of an accolade that deserves.

Whether the design of TCS was really good, i.e., whether the logic of TCS and its output lead to efficient railroading or not, is another matter.

Best regards,

Rob L.