Train length

[Erik W]

Here's an interesting article on train length.  I'll be curious if any new regulations come out of this.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-train-safety/growing-length-of-u-s-freight-trains-in-federal-crosshairs-after-crashes-gao-idUSKBN1E01B9

Erik

P.S. - I hope all the old    here are doing well.  I've been lurking a bit lately, and enjoying everyone's work.

[Jbub]

The FRA told Reuters it is also investigating the June derailment of a 13,147-foot CSX train in Crestline, Ohio.

2.48 miles long. Imagine getting caught at a crossing when it's doing 5 mph

[TLOC]

I know this helps profit margins and therefore the stockholders. Unfortunately in this era of big business they forget about the importance of jobs to their workers. The jobs to their workers is what really drives the economy but they are interested in increasing profit margins. There is nothing wrong with that except at what cost to their workers. I’m sure the agency will say the length of the train will be up to the railroads. As to a 2+ mile long train blocking crossings, even though the train can be ticketed by local authorities I thought I read that it means nothing to the RR because they are federally regulated not locally. Not matter what increased train lengths hurt the worker.

My own opinion only
TomO

[Mark5]

2.48 miles long. Imagine getting caught at a crossing when it's doing 5 mph

Yeah really. Way back in '67, N&W ran a 500 car coal train (21,424 feet or just over 4 miles) from Iaeger, WV to Portsmouth, OH. Supposedly it took 20 minutes to pass a grade crossing ... 

[Chris333]

I was reading in the Ashtabula, OH paper that CSX is stopping trains and blocking crossings for up to 7 hours. Sometimes blocking 3 major road crossings at a time. And they keep getting tickets for it.

[lock4244]

CN has run a few stack trains between Mtl and Toronto that were a few hundred feet shy of 3 miles. One issue that drives CN running these monsters is crew availability, or lack thereof. Now to be honest, they started doing it while EHH was at CN to boost profits and lower crew starts by running fewer but longer trains. At present CN is very short on crews in the Toronto area after about 30 guys jumped to Via Rail. Fewer trains means few crews, so the longer the better.

Who decides what is too long though? What criteria does one use?

[Maletrain]

I was reading in the Ashtabula, OH paper that CSX is stopping trains and blocking crossings for up to 7 hours. Sometimes blocking 3 major road crossings at a time. And they keep getting tickets for it.

Can the local authorities "impound" the trains that block intersections?  Could a few layed-off (and p***ed-off) railroad employees be "deputzied" to assist in "relocating" the train just enough to clear the intersections, but not the mainlines?  Might get some attention from the RRs that a "fine" doesn't create.

[Chris333]

/>
http://www.starbeacon.com/news/local_news/delays-leave-folks-steaming-csx-apologizes-for-trains-backing-up/article_40cca8fc-b6a5-50b9-aed0-b010e44b43bd.html

http://www.starbeacon.com/news/local_news/more-officials-join-the-csx-train-battle/article_7b399cfc-df23-55ba-bbf5-d0a6944af829.html

[Mark W]

This topic seems to come up every couple of years.  But like mentioned, passing regulation on train length will be very difficult. 

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/13/local/la-me-monster-train13-2010jan13


My understanding has always been the railroad owns and maintains the grade crossing, so really (from their point of view) there is no expectation that any crossing is road passable at any given moment, or for any period of time.  It's the railroads property, not the public's.

If any regulation is to succeed, it won't have anything to do with train length, it will be with impedance of traffic and establishing an expectation of passage. 

[Scottl]

CN has run a few stack trains between Mtl and Toronto that were a few hundred feet shy of 3 miles. One issue that drives CN running these monsters is crew availability, or lack thereof. Now to be honest, they started doing it while EHH was at CN to boost profits and lower crew starts by running fewer but longer trains. At present CN is very short on crews in the Toronto area after about 30 guys jumped to Via Rail. Fewer trains means few crews, so the longer the better.

Who decides what is too long though? What criteria does one use?

We really see long trains on the Kingston sub for sure. I think part of it too is they seem to have perfected the DPUs and they don't break couplers as much any more.   It was the same out west in the Fraser Canyon this year, the trains are really long but the locos are distributed front,mid and rear.

[learmoia]

There is a RR rule for 10 minutes "when practical" (with exceptions.).. Stopped for signal, disabled, ect.. doesn't mean much to the public, but in a class 1 case.

The exceptions will get you out of 95% of the situations.

~Ian

[lock4244]

We really see long trains on the Kingston sub for sure. I think part of it too is they seem to have perfected the DPUs and they don't break couplers as much any more.   It was the same out west in the Fraser Canyon this year, the trains are really long but the locos are distributed front,mid and rear.

Those 206 car potash trains (#730) are usually running 2+1+1 of late, all the way from Sask to NB. They're long, but it's the 28,000 tons weight necessitating the two DP's. The early 730's were 2+1 and generally 153 cars. A number of the daily stack trains on the Bala Sub, and therefore over the entire length of the NOD, are run over-siding length (11 to 12k feet), and generally get 1+1 or 2+1.

Keep an eye out on the Kingston Sub, CN's leasing 120 locomotives including CREX ES44AC's, GECX C40-8W's, PRLX SD75's, and a pair of EMD Tier 4 units in UP colours. There are also at least 12 ET44AC's coming, of which four arrived at Mac today on a 524 out of Ft Erie. Word is CN has purchased them, but no confirmation yet.

[Blazeman]

There was a story in WSJ the other week about longer trains in the west and the usual hand-wringing by interested parties and a "no such problem" from the RR sources.

This piece explores the practice in more depth to review pros and cons.

https://www.progressiverailroading.com/rail_industry_trends/article.aspx?id=55035&source

[Lenny53]

CN has run a few stack trains between Mtl and Toronto that were a few hundred feet shy of 3 miles. One issue that drives CN running these monsters is crew availability, or lack thereof. Now to be honest, they started doing it while EHH was at CN to boost profits and lower crew starts by running fewer but longer trains. At present CN is very short on crews in the Toronto area after about 30 guys jumped to Via Rail. Fewer trains means few crews, so the longer the better.

Who decides what is too long though? What criteria does one use?

One run of CN 149 out of the port last year swung by Taschereau Yard to pick up some empty well cars and ended up being 247 cars long.