Nostalgia & History > The way a helper should look

Shoving on the rear of en eastbound a few miles north of Black Butte early 1990's.

Robert Morris
Dunsmuir, CA
Robert Morris Photography

---

Nice Bob, that one's a keeper.

Yup, one behind the cab. Running Backwards is more Dunsmuir-like. That photo is more like a Donner helper

How did train crews feel about engines shoving on them?

Some rode the helper, some the cab

The cab was pushed on only after it was built of steel and Strong enough to withstand the pressure.

wp1801 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The cab was pushed on only after it was built of
> steel and Strong enough to withstand the pressure.

There was also a restriction on how much power was allowed behind the caboose too.

The only thing better would be a back to back pair of these pushing.

Conch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The only thing better would be a back to back pair
> of these pushing.
8 axles max on cabooses.. CA law

In those days, Engineer and Fireman on the helper, Conductor and Rear Brakeman on the caboose.  Dispatchers discretion where we cut off.  Sometimes Grass Lake or beyond even as far as Texum depending on Westbounds needing help.  

sphogger

WAF Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Conch Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The only thing better would be a back to back
> pair
> > of these pushing.
> 8 axles max on cabooses.. CA law

What law would that be? Because all of the stuff I've found so far says no more then 12 axles.
Example: WP ETT 10 restricts helpers behind a caboose to not more than two six-axle operating units totalling 179,400 lbs of TE or not more than two four axle operating units totalling 135,600 lbs of TE or a combination of one six-axle and one four-axle unit totalling not more than 157,600 lbs TE.
It also says that when a helper is used behind a caboose employees must vacate such caboose and ride in the locomotive.
And since the WP operated in California you would figure that their rules would conform to the law.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WAF Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Conch Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The only thing better would be a back to back
> > pair
> > > of these pushing.
> > 8 axles max on cabooses.. CA law
>
> What law would that be? Because all of the stuff
> I've found so far says no more then 12 axles.
> Example: WP ETT 10 restricts helpers behind a
> caboose to not more than two six-axle operating
> units totalling 179,400 lbs of TE or not more than
> two four axle operating units totalling 135,600
> lbs of TE or a combination of one six-axle and one
> four-axle unit totalling not more than 157,600 lbs
> TE.
> It also says that when a helper is used behind a
> caboose employees must vacate such caboose and
> ride in the locomotive.
> And since the WP operated in California you would
> figure that their rules would conform to the law.

I'm going by the SP rule book. If the WP had followed the state law, they would not have dumped everything over the side in Hayward in 1980. THe FRA was not impressed with the WP in their report. A few managers got sacked because of it

SP timetables always allowed two SD9s
behind the caboose.

Did SP trains still have cabooses in the
early 1990s?

timz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SP timetables always allowed two SD9s
> behind the caboose.
>
> Did SP trains still have cabooses in the
> early 1990s?
Yes

That's awesome! I sure am glad I grew up around the SP during these times. I've always loved the BN but if I wanted to see real action you had to go watch the SP in these parts. They did not disappoint.