Turbo - designs almost finished

[wazzou]

I know absolutely nothing about these prototypes.  What was the prime mover?
What was with all of the windows on the cab units?  Could passengers pay a higher fare to ride there or something?

[jagged ben]

Then there's this official Amtrak publicity shot: http://history.amtrak.com/archives/service-attendant-and-engineer-with-turboliner-1972/@@images/c5f6d8de-1444-42ac-91bb-5c7fd9758ac7.jpeg

Our culture really has gone backwards in so many ways.   

[jmlaboda - RIP]

What was the prime mover?

The prime mover was a jet engine.

[C855B]

More specifically, they were Pratt & Whitney PT6 shaft-drive turbojets, two to six in each cab unit. What was truly unique about these was the engines were geared directly to the wheels, with no generator or traction motors in the middle.

The windowed elevated sections on the cab units were operator cabins and observation lounges.

Nice article on Wikipedia.

[Point353]

What was with all of the windows on the cab units?  Could passengers pay a higher fare to ride there or something?

The windows were for the passenger seats in the dome sections over the jet engines. The exhausts for the jet engines came up through the center of the domes on either side. There was a transparent partition between the passenger seats and the cab, but you could literally look right over the engineer's shoulder on the right-hand side. Two seats on the left-hand side of the cab were for the fireman and brakeman.
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d2/6/2/5/7625.1461630502.jpg

At least in the US, I don't ever recall there being a surcharge to sit in the domes.  The times I rode it, the dome seats were first come, first served. The dome seats were somewhat less comfortable, with low backs that didn't recline as compared to the lower level seats which were similar to airline first-class. IMO, the view from the dome was worth the compromise. 

[peteski]

There was a transparent partition between the passenger seats and the cab, but you could literally look right over the engineer's shoulder on the right-hand side. Two seats on the left-hand side of the cab were for the fireman and brakeman.

That's so cool. But this would never happen in today's world climate. 

I didn't realize that these units needed a fireman . . .   

[Point353]

I didn't realize that these units needed a fireman . . .   

The fireman was likely there at the insistence of the "brotherhood".
As I recall, his main (and maybe only) function was to confirm that the engineer had read the signal aspects correctly.
In retrospect, it's reassuring to know that there was a second person in the cab just in case the engineer became incapacitated.

[nkalanaga]

Some railroads, after eliminating the firemen, brought them back as "assistant engineers".  Not for safety reasons, but because they found that they were running out of engineers.  One of the reasons for having firemen, even in steam days, was to train new engineers.

Today, it's probably all done in classrooms and simulators, with only a few runs to learn the specific route.

[C855B]

I thought that firemen were required on GE locomotives... so they didn't have to wait on the local volunteer FD to put out the turbo seal conflagrations.

 

[Missaberoad]

As @Point353 already pointed out the unions were able to protect the jobs of fireman well past the end of steam, some lasted well into the 1970s until they trained as engineers or retired. Often the fireman would take on some mechanical duties keeping early diesels running, in addition to being another set of eyes.

Some states also had laws requiring 5 and later 4 man crews.

It was quite the controversy back in the day... Look up "Featherbedding" for some interesting reading on the fight between labor and the companies on crew sizes.

There's some Jobs today that I wish we still had 4 man crews. flat switching (especially kicking) is so much quicker and safer with the extra brakeman.

Today, it's probably all done in classrooms and simulators, with only a few runs to learn the specific route.

Classroom work and simulators are used, but after that an Engineer Trainee is assigned to an experienced engineer to run trips with them until they are ready to qualify, usually 3 to 6 months. at least that's SOP up here...

[peteski]

I was just joshing about the the fireman on a jet-powered train, but I also found the explanations very informative. 

I also agree that there should be a 2-person crew on at least passenger trains. Regardless of PTC.

[nkalanaga]

Most North American freight trains do have 2-person crews, with the conductor in the cab with the engineer.  I suspect that Amtrak trains are the same, as they run over freight railroads. 

Commuter lines I don't know about.  They may run with one person. 

[peteski]

Most North American freight trains do have 2-person crews, with the conductor in the cab with the engineer.  I suspect that Amtrak trains are the same, as they run over freight railroads. 

Commuter lines I don't know about.  They may run with one person.

Weren't there few fairly recent Amtrak passenger train accidents where there was only the engineer in the cab?  The one where the train derailed on the curve as it was traveling at a high rate of speed is one of those accidents.

[GhengisKong]

Weren't there few fairly recent Amtrak passenger train accidents where there was only the engineer in the cab?  The one where the train derailed on the curve as it was traveling at a high rate of speed is one of those accidents.

Yes that was the one in Philly a couple of years back.

[jagged ben]

I also agree that there should be a 2-person crew on at least passenger trains. Regardless of PTS.

PTC