Western Railroad Discussion > Can foreign power lead on the UP (In the PNW)?

I heard recently that foreign power is not allowed to lead trains in the Pacific Northwest, but are allowed to in other regions. Is this true? Why? 

Certain segments of the original UP main lines are equipped with US&S Coded Cab Signal system(CCS) these line segments require the lead locomotive to be so equipped. In the PNW the mainline from The Dalles, OR to Riverdale, OR is equipped with CCS. Also the Overland route from Omaha, NE to Ogden, UT is also equipped. IT is my understanding that once PTC is fully operational across all required UP lines then CCS will be decommissioned.

Above post is correct. This is why, for example, when a potash train with a CP leader comes down to Hinkle, it invariably gets a UP loco on the point before it heads west. It's not that UP's averse to running trains with CP leaders (they have been doing that a fair bit through the Blue Mountains lately, actually, as well as north of Hinkle), it's the cab signal thing.

 

Back in the 1960s and 1970s, UP ran foreign leaders in cab signal territory on occasion, both on the Overland Route and through the Columbia Gorge. Back then, there was no strict requirement that CCS-equipped units be leaders in CCS territory. Guess that changed.

Best regards,

Rob L.

rob_l Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Back in the 1960s and 1970s, UP ran foreign
> leaders in cab signal territory on occasion, both
> on the Overland Route and through the Columbia
> Gorge. Back then, there was no strict requirement
> that CCS-equipped units be leaders in CCS
> territory. Guess that changed.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rob L.

Interesting. Didn't know that. Maybe that helps explain a photograph that has long puzzled me: in one of Jesse Burkhardt's books of Gorge/NW rail photography, there's a shot from the late 90s of a solid set of SP power, led by an SD70M, crossing one of the fills at Memaloose or Viento with a mixed freight. I've long wondered how that was possible, since the ex-SP SD70Ms never had cab signals as far as I know (and you still don't see them leading here). But if the rules were more relaxed in the past, that might explain it.

I've recently seen trains on the UP Nampa Sub with all-CP power and I saw one last weekend with BNSF power leading.
Phil

rob_l Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Back in the 1960s and 1970s, UP ran foreign
> leaders in cab signal territory on occasion, both
> on the Overland Route and through the Columbia
> Gorge. Back then, there was no strict requirement
> that CCS-equipped units be leaders in CCS
> territory. Guess that changed.
>

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/236.566 is the requirement.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/236.567 is the procedure for en route failure.

I can't find revision history anywhere, but both sections look the same as I remember them from decades ago.

The Q (BN[SF]) has an exemption between Chicago and Aurora: only Metra trains are required to be equipped. That exemption goes way back and if I remember correctly, is related to speed limits in effect as if there were no cab signals.

Dim memory tells me that there may have been such an exemption for some part of Santa Fe, but that could be wrong.

Perhaps the foreign leaders also happened to have US&S Coded Cab Signals. I believe that Conrail, or parts thereof, may have used it. Others did too, but I can't think of any at the moment. Otherwise, perhaps UP was cheating on the en route failure application.

TAW

I think Tom's right (as usual) there was an exemption attached to a speed reduction.

Out

UP leaders are required on CCS territory, as is ATC on former equipped CNW.

When the big floods a couple of years ago took BNSF lines out of service the FRA granted a waiver that allowed the BNSF consist to remain unchanged while being rerouted on the CCS lines.

Temporary reroutes (Moffat Tunnel closures, etc) do not quaility and still gets a UP leader in Denver or in UT.

We have not heard of any plans to take CCS out of service when PTC is cut in. We REALLY like the cabs and is an awesome extra level of protection/safety and also allows better velocity when everything is working (signal upgrades when you can't see the wayside signal).

Up until 1971, CB&Q and then BN leaders were commonplace on the UP between North Platte and Grand Island. SP leaders were commonplace on the UP west of North Platte, practically daily on the Overland Route and once in a while on the North Platte - Portland run (to balance horsepower hours). I am pretty sure the BN power and the SP Power was not equipped with UP CCS. During the summer of 1971, the EMD SD45Xs as leaders were commonplace on the UP side of the Columbia Gorge. I doubt they were equipped with UP cab signals.

If you go back in the photo record, you can find IC leaders on the UP to Los Angeles in 1969, CB&Q leaders on the UP to Green River in the mid-1960s, etc.

By the summer of 1973, the operations of foreign leaders disppeared from the UP. So I believe the law must have changed sometime around 1972.

Best regards,

Rob L.

Cab signals are not techically required in cab signal territory.  Any foreign unit can in fact run as a leader in cab signal territory as long as "absolute block" is established ahead of the train between the locations in which the train is running.  Its similar to track warrants in dark territory.  As long as another train has a warrant in a given area, no other trains can be given overlapping authority AND run at track speed, and no following moves are allowed.  If a BNSF train were running on the UP between Granger, Wyoming and Green River, for example the dispatcher would have to inform the crew that "absolute block has been established ahead of the BNSF XXXX between CPG 847 and CPG 817 and recieve an "ok" time.  Running with absolute block is a pain and reduces the effiency of a subdivision however.  The dispatcher can no longer follow the non equiped train behind another train using block signal protection.  The dispatcher also cannot use crossovers or change the traffic pattern ahead of the train. That section of track basically becomes completely dedicated to the non equiped train while it is traversing the section.  This is why equiped leaders are used.  It is usually less of a pain to just add a leader then to run using "absolute block" protection rules.  

I run out Pocatello, Idaho and have used this exact procedure to move a foreign train to Green River.  Our line from Pocatello to Granger does not have CCS.  Once we get to CCS territory at Granger, however, the train must be equipped with cab signals.  Occasionally we will get a train that is not equiped or inoperable leaving Pocatello and the terminal does not have a locomotive to spare for us.  Yes, this is a lack of planning, but we can still run the train.  If they decide that they will run it to Green River and then add a CCS equiped unit there, we will run normal to Granger and then establish Absolute Block for the remaining 30 miles to Green River.

This same absolute block procedure also applies to CCS/ATC/ATS and any other overlapping safety system.  There is always a backup plan, because at the railroad, the "plan" is usually faulty and prone to problems.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/29/16 10:42 by HogheadMike.