Home Open Account Help 302 users online

Railroaders' Nostalgia > Can we go on this?


Date: 11/08/17 10:41
Can we go on this?
Author: TAW

Telling the story of my, let’s say, unusual approach to the incidents at Windy Point and Tiber ( https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?18,4410571 ) reminded me of an amusing event at Belton.

I have mentioned often that I learned from guys who handled WWII. Part of the requirement that they had for me was learn what every rule means, what it does, how it can be applied, and why (leading to bizarre behavior like this: https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,2188342,2188342#msg-2188342). That is the root of why I started using Form Y train orders in lieu of CTC permits on the Montana Division. It didn’t take long after starting on Havre West that I realized that a single section foreman working one place was getting a dozen CTC permits. Out of that dozen permits, many were extended time and again. There were more calls asking for more that wasn’t there to give. There was another call for the foremen to report clear. They could work against a lineup, even in CTC, but the lineups were worthless the instant the dispatcher finished transmitting them, which could be a chore lasting an hour or more. Some guys breezed right through them in minutes. Those lineups were worthless the instant they started sending. Updating lineups required the dispatcher to write the update information on the lineup, listen to the repeat, and get the name of the guy who got the update. That just piled on more work that there wasn’t time for.

Meanwhile, due to the Montana full agency law, I had operators. The Montana Division didn’t have mobile agents like much of BN had, so there were there at my beck and call 8a until 5p with an hour lunch.

The first time I decided to use a Form Y order instead of a permit, the Chester section foreman wanted to do some work all day somewhere east of Chester. I told the foreman that I was going to fix him up with a Form Y for the day and tell him though the agent at Chester when trains would be coming. That made sense. The lineup update procedure was necessary because the lineup was authority to use the main track. Telling the foreman when trains were going to show up was not. The Form Y provided protection and authority. Telling the foreman when trains would show up was merely not-safety-related information.

Years later, on Seattle East, I used a similar procedure with CTC permits. The railroad was pretty much empty between Wenatchee and Spokane on 1st trick, except for No 3 (ZCHCSSE9 or some such thing). No 3 was really hard to predict out of Yardley. There was Spokane UPS to unload and the roundhouse dealing with whatever complaints about the power had accumulated in the 10 or so hours since Havre. I had no operators, the luxury I had on the Montana Division, but I had flat terrain over which my radio transmissions could be heard with no problem. I had Gandys and signal maintainers that I trusted (accomplished mostly because they could trust me). I made a deal with all of the regulars (not any itinerant guys who happened onto my railroad). Here’s permit until quitting time. No 3 is the only train you’ll see. Keep your ears on. When they move at Yardley, I’ll broadcast a time at Odessa, Wilson Creek, and Adrian. Be ready to give me the permit by those times.

Back to Montana. When I told the Chester foreman how I was going to handle him for the day, he replied that he thought to get a Form Y, you had to put in a request the previous day and hope it was approved. I told him that was unless I decided otherwise. I rang the agent at Joplin. I don’t think that phone had rung in a decade. The voice responding sounded a little confused Joplin? I asked him if he had any train order forms, preferably Form Y. He was gone a bit and came back with I found some GN orders in the freight room. I told him that would work. The agent at Chester actually had some BN orders, but neither had Form Y. Form Y, like Track Bulletin Form B, was a fill in the blanks order. Only the blanks fill-in was transmitted and repeated. However, I had no blanks, so I had to treat it like any other order. I put blocking on the CTC machine so trains wouldn’t get by Chester or Joplin and stuck out the order. I started doing that any time one of the sections east of Summit had extended work in one place. There were enough agents out there to make it work.

I had a different approach on the day that came to mind. The westward track was going to be out of service between Columbia Falls and Whitefish all day. There was an agent at Belton (West Glacier Park). They normal way to handle that was to give westward trains a D-R (against the current of traffic) to run from the end of CTC Conkelley to Whitefish. That had some disadvantages. It was Rule 97 territory. Trains moving with the current of traffic did not require train order authority. That meant that any D-R had to also contain running authority. The D-R also had to be put out to opposing trains (Eng 9999 run extra Conkelley to Whitefish has right over opposing trains on the eastward track Conkelley to Whitefish Eastward trains get this order at Whitefish). However, Rule 97 would allow a yard engine to just get on the eastward track and go on their yard engine clearance. I had to protect every westward train against eastward trains that I could not really control other than by way of an order addressed to the yardmaster. The last line of the order was due to the fact that an eastward train could have used the main track under yard limits between the end of CTC and wherever they stopped, which might necessarily be west of the station. Of course, for every westward train, there was a group address to eastward trains and the yardmaster that had to be taken down after the westward train arrived and was on the book. On a job that never had enough time, all of that was too much if it wasn’t necessary.

The rules provided another way to deal with this situation; one that nobody ever used. Form D-S train orders stated that one of the two tracks was used as single track. When a D-S was in effect, the other track didn’t exist. That killed Rule 97 operation. I had complete control of the railroad, which meant that I did not need to protect the westward trains against eastward trains that did not exist. Belton still had a train order signal. I didn’t need to block the CTC signals to use them as train order signals. This was a piece of cake: stick out a Form S to westward trains at Belton, eastward trains and the yardmaster at Whitefish, then fix each train with a running order as needed. I had already figured the day and there were no close meets. I didn’t need to worry about what to do if the east man wasn’t ready to go and needing to help the west man into Whitefish against a train that was already fixed.

That afternoon, I fixed a west man at Belton. He got the D-S order and a running order Conkelley to Whitefish. The operator told me that after they got by, the conductor asked him if they could really go on this. The operator told him sure and asked why not. The conductor told him that his brother in law worked out of Glendive. He never got just one order. There were always right over and wait and meet and all sorts of things he didn’t see here. He said that he wasn’t familiar with single track and just wanted to be sure. The operator told him that was because his brother in law was on 100 miles of railroad that was full of trains and he was on 12 miles of railroad on which he was the only train. The conductor replied Oh, ok, that makes sense. That provided a refreshing short interlude in another otherwise killer day on Havre West.

TAW



Date: 11/10/17 19:07
Re: Can we go on this?
Author: roustabout

Interesting that no one has commented on your latest gem, Thomas. So here is my $0.02: Yet another great tale, sir. I am so glad that I never had to deal with train orders; track warrants were enough for me and a real challenge for a one or two of the conductors I've worked with. Mostly, there were a few times one would take a 'void and reissue warrant' (a proceed warrant at that) and manage to try to get limits that were ahead of where we were at the time. I've turned the radio off just in time to brief them on what they were about to do. The one good thing is there we were always the only train out there so there was little chance of running into anything. I just wanted to be able to retain my seniority until I was old enough to retire (only a few months from now!).



Date: 11/12/17 13:10
Re: Can we go on this?
Author: Margaret_SP_fan

Never been a rail, just a long-time railfan who
is awed by how the heck you dispatchers manage
to do all that. You really have to have the same
abilities as a 3-D chess players in order to be a
really good dispatcher. Those abilities are so far
beyond what I can do that I simply cannot imagine
how the heck you guys and gals do it!

I love your stories! Thanks so much cor posting
them here. They are always very interesting.
Please keep 'em comin'!



Date: 11/12/17 20:11
Re: Can we go on this?
Author: dbinterlock

Agreed, keep those stories coming, every one a gem.
Dbinterlock.



Date: 11/13/17 07:56
Re: Can we go on this?
Author: tomstp

Yes, TAW is very entertaining.



Date: 11/24/17 16:03
Re: Can we go on this?
Author: inCHI

Interesting!



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0699 seconds