Railroad Forums 

  • At The Throttle With Your Manager Onboard

  • General discussion about railroad operations, related facilities, maps, and other resources.
General discussion about railroad operations, related facilities, maps, and other resources.

Moderator: Robert Paniagua

 #139444  by thebigc
 
UPRR engineer wrote: And Golden Arm buddy, why would a master engineer such as yourself have "UPHILL SLOW, DOWNHILL FAST- TONNAGE FIRST, SAFETY LAST" at the bottom of every post? You dont like to run "The Rocket" trains? I love to run the heavy coal/soad ash trains as much as i do the "shooters". Just wondering whats behind that buddy.
One of the oldest ones in the book. You can also substitute "profits" for "tonnage".

On the subject of bosses, I actually miss the old-timers. They'd call you on the carpet (more RR vernacular) and give it to you with both barrels. But that was the last you'd hear of it. These days a boss will pull you aside, tell you how you screwed up, don't do it again, I'm your buddy so everything's cool. A week later, I'm getting registered mail and my buddy is the charging officer. Where I work, the bosses forget where they came from in a hurry.

 #139453  by UPRR engineer
 
thebigc wrote: These days a boss will pull you aside, tell you how you screwed up, don't do it again, I'm your buddy so everything's cool. A week later, I'm getting registered mail and my buddy is the charging officer.
I had that same thing happen to me, i think they get told not have a confrontation at the time of the "big bust" if they can. Did they pawn the buck off by saying "the Superintendent decide you needed some discipline". I just smile with a i know it was you kinda look, and say "where do i sign....Buddy" Ive never heard the "its the supers fault" line cuzz it doesnt matter one way or the other who's name is on the paper im signing, eather way it was my fault, i always fess up at the accident location, it would be nice if they always told you what the whole deal was when they show up to see your "switching trophies".

 #139510  by Robert Paniagua
 
"Nelson Bay" is just another username that someone has, and he lives in Florida. Don't let that confuse you now.

Back on topic gents...

 #139551  by thebigc
 
UPRR engineer wrote:
thebigc wrote: These days a boss will pull you aside, tell you how you screwed up, don't do it again, I'm your buddy so everything's cool. A week later, I'm getting registered mail and my buddy is the charging officer.
I had that same thing happen to me, i think they get told not have a confrontation at the time of the "big bust" if they can. Did they pawn the buck off by saying "the Superintendent decide you needed some discipline". I just smile with a i know it was you kinda look, and say "where do i sign....Buddy" Ive never heard the "its the supers fault" line cuzz it doesnt matter one way or the other who's name is on the paper im signing, eather way it was my fault, i always fess up at the accident location, it would be nice if they always told you what the whole deal was when they show up to see your "switching trophies".
Hey, if I screwed up, I screwed up and I'll face the music. I just get upset when some new pencil-neck pulls me aside about this alleged infraction and acts like they're gonna cover it up for me after a dressing-down and then fires off a H&I letter with their name on it. This just irritates me to no end. And don't top it off with one of those "it's coming from higher-up" cop-outs. Try being a man for once and just be straight with me.

Where I work it seems for every decent guy who gets a management position, they hire ten former loads. And these loads are gonna tell me where the bear sits in the buckwheat? Not happening!

I still prefer the old-school method where I get screamed at and that's the end of it.

Most of our newer bosses are just weasels.

C

 #147477  by GOLDEN-ARM
 
"UPHILL SLOW, DOWNHILL FAST....." this is standard operating prodedure, on most roads. The carriers assign horsepower to tonnage requirements, generally by the average tonnage of said train (rarely accurate), tractive effort/horsepower of assigned consist, and generally not considering ruling grade, but an average grade. If you had enough horsepower to run them hills, at track speed, you would often times have consists too large, to satisfy rules regarding "powered axles", and head-end horsepower. while those 3 sd-40-2 locos might run the Lehigh Line at track speed(50 mph, for this illustration), things go south, pretty quick, when heading west, of 3 Bridges. You might actually need 6 of those engines, to continue up the "HILL" at track speed. Hence the saying, uphill slow.... Same goes for the other side, of that hill. By the time you realize the dynamics are just another "wish", you are going "DOWNHILL FAST..... Tonnage first obviously the Carrier wants to maximize his crew usage. (why run 6-60 car trains, and run them quickly, when you can drag 3-120 car trains, with half the crews, or 2-180 car trains with a third of the crews. And I will not comment here, about any Carriers "views" on safety. An old joke has it that if you asked a manager to describe what safety meant to him, the reply would always be the same "Let me get back to you, on that........" Sad, but unfortunately, true. Safety is of the utmost of importance, as long as it doesn't interfere with the operation of trains. Regards :wink:

 #147481  by LCJ
 
Chessie System used to run loaded coal drags with one or two units -- just enough to barely make it over ruling grades. CSX may still do that -- I don't know.

Chessie was also well known for running rolling stock until it fell apart -- absorbing FRA fines as part of their operating costs. It was cheaper than repairing the equipment.

We had a loaded Chessie hopper down at Pepco on the Pope's Creek in Morgantown, MD that literally fell apart -- collapsing in the center onto the track. Rolling scrap (full of coal) is all it was.

 #148308  by UPRR engineer
 
Humm.... lol I dont feel that way GOLDEN-ARM. I've never met a railroader who thought they should have enough power to pull any hill at track speed or have enough dynamic brake to slow/hold the train off the other side, 0.9 horse per ton is plenty enough for me. It wouldnt be a rollercoaster if all drags were over horsed. Here in GR you could draw a clear line between the hogs who can haul ass on the down hill side and the ones that just get it off the hill slow and scared by just using the dynamic brake. Most of the BLE guys on the one side, UTUE's on the other. (all tho there arent many of us BLE guys here) The only safety issue i see is that alot of those UTU guys shouldnt be qualified if there not able to bomb off the hill and stay in control. Is the golden arm your bowling arm or the one you use to set air buddy? :wink:

 #148312  by UPRR engineer
 
LCJ wrote:
Chessie was also well known for running rolling stock until it fell apart -- absorbing FRA fines as part of their operating costs. It was cheaper than repairing the equipment.

We had a loaded Chessie hopper down at Pepco on the Pope's Creek in Morgantown, MD that literally fell apart -- collapsing in the center onto the track. Rolling scrap (full of coal) is all it was.
Im glad the UP isnt like that. Not maintaining the freight cars would be a cause for concern.

 #149627  by GOLDEN-ARM
 
It would be nice, to be able to run "TRACK-SPEED", at all points on the run, but it is not economically feasible, with the amount of HP needed to do that. Why would you not want to run up the mountains, at track speed UPRR Engineer, if you could ? Think of all of those hours, days weeks, and eventually years wasted, DRAGGING trains across a railroad. Smaller, faster trains make more sense, for operating efficiency, but the bottom line is how to do it the cheapest way possible, Irregardless :wink: of the cost. Traffic jams would be a thing of the past, with shorter, faster and more direct service trains, than long, heavy and slow, all inclusive trains, that must set-out and pick-up, at every point along the system. I will drag 'em or bunch 'em down those hills, doesn't really matter to me, although the DB is the "politically-correct" way to do it. getting down as fast as possible, and getting a run on the next hill, is how I do it. I want to get on the train, and back off, as quickly as possible. Why spend 12 hours on a run that could easily be made in 5 hours ? Trains can be run at closer, quicker intervals, when everyone is running track speed, than when you get stuck, following under-powered drags up and down the hills. Just my opinion, however, your actuall experiences may vary. Regards :wink:

 #149628  by crazy_nip
 
if efficiency mattered, then every railroad would be class 5 rail with multiple bi-directionally signaled ctc mains. Every railroad would have brand new power, and lots of it. Every railroad would have tons of extra, rested crews.

but all that stuff costs money, so the railroads exploit men and equipment to get the absolute MOST out of them for the least ammount of money

that is how it is...

 #149632  by LCJ
 
but all that stuff costs money, so the railroads exploit men and equipment to get the absolute MOST out of them for the least ammount of money

Every business decision is a trade off. There is no one factor that governs all of them. Getting the most from investment of shareholder capital, without doing undue harm, is generally good business practice.

"Exploit" is most commonly a pejorative term. Can I infer it was intended as such here? Just wondering.

 #149641  by GOLDEN-ARM
 
I can't find fault with the carriers' trying to get the most for the money, either. It would be nice, though, to see the economy of running shorter, quicker trains. I cannot fathom it would hurt the bottom line, but then again, I am not privy to the ins and outs, of the accounting side of the game.Most days, I would take a train to Selkirk, from the NJCT, and it would be a 10-12 hour ordeal. On a major holiday, however, and the managers needed trains to be moved, we would often make a round-trip, NJCT to Selkirk, and return, with less than 10 hours, total time on duty !!! Only TVLA ran comparable times, and that was only in the North direction. The road can be run, with adequate power, and fluidity in the traffic patterns, but it takes a real effort, from both sides of the team. Labor and Management both have to want to succeed, to make this happen, and unfortunately, they (we) don't always see eye-to-eye, in this matter. If I was the carrier, I would want to maximize my profits, as well. But not at the expense of making the road a giant parking lot. Terminal delay times (dwell time) is still very high, on most class-1 roads, and averqage speed on the road, is also very dismal. The roads could be run faster and more efficiently, but at the cost of re-thinking the way of doing the job, from both sides of the coin. Just my opinion....... :wink:

 #149644  by LCJ
 
Efficiency, as I see it, takes much more than just more money. Efficiency means doing more with less. Smart managers can do that, with support of their people. Without that support, it wouldn't matter how much was spent on high-falootin' doo-dads like CTC and all new power.

Exploiting people usually works against this, though.