Luckily in this stage of my illustrious career here , I work in IT. That's why I'm at the computer all day here. When I started at GE , I was a wireman. I started on the line building U-50's for the UP. Worked that job for ten years. Built units for just about everybody over the years,BN, SCL , Southern , Penn Central. I moved on , because I had electronic background from the Army. Tested Loco's and Transit cars at GE for quite a while. Yes it was fun to throttle them up and see what they'd do ! I moved on again and maintained equipment that inserted chips and components into electronic boards. We did in the beginning produce all our boards in-house. Then I moved into the IT world. I walk over to the assembly building quite often just to see what's shaking over there. At this point after 37 years I'm retiring in Jan. Be glad to fill-in any missing details.
modern model railroads
- Thread starter bnsfmodeler
- Start date
bnsfmodeler
Member
o cool, i wanna be an engineer for UP, NS, CSX, or BNSF mostly BNSF though when i get older. My dad knows an engineer on the BNSF Ry. and he said within the next 8 to 10 years (i am 14 now) over 75% of the engineers will be retiring and that means by that time ill be old enough and theere will be lots and lots of spots open to become an engineer.
thanks
Austin
thanks
Austin
I'm starting to wonder , with the technology I see even today, (I support the R&D dept.) if enginners will even exist. We run a dept now that tracks all the new GE units on the UP, the men sitting at the PC's can check all diagnostics, and even control the unit remotely from our research dept. This is of course being developed with plans for unmanned trains ! That's scarry. Good luck on your plans any way. I'm sure the unions won't go down without a fight.
bnsfmodeler
Member
aww man that stinks to hear that, well hopefully some will still be manned, like mainline trains might still be.
thanks
Austin
thanks
Austin
JeffShultz
Stay off the tracks!
as long as grade crossings exist, there will be manned trains.
bnsfmodeler
Member
YES and grade crossings will probably exist forever
thanks
Austin
thanks
Austin
Mingo Assist
re·sus·ci·tat·ing the EL
I tell you what Gapple, you talk that way around our yard youde be lucky to make it home.
Thats a big issue right now..there has been talk of 1 man trains in the recent past and it didnt go over well, you go to unmanned you can kiss a city goodbye if something goes wrong..unmanned trains are pure ignorance.
Dont get me wrong, Im not jumping on you by any means but I HOPE TO GOD I NEVER see that day.
That's exactly why I said the unions will fight on to stop that , hey I'm union too! I hate lots of thing I see daily that are taking our jobs away. And I hope to God we never see the day either. I'm just explaining some of the things I see happening around the buisness.
I think remote control trains, with operators sitting in front of a centralized console and monitoring train movements by television is not only likely, it's inevitable. I know union guys and most railfans don't want to hear that but railroads have one great competitive advantage - a private right of way. Yes, there will always be grade crossing but how many grade crossing accidents have actually been prevented by an engineer in the cab compared to the number of crew killed an injured in such accidents? An operator can see what's happening at a grade crossing from a TV screen as well as he can from the cab, maybe better with some of the detection systems that have been developed. Remote control mainline trains will not just save the cost of wages for crews, it will save lives and a huge expense for workers comp costs. For those that think this is fantasy, we and the Israeli's have unmanned drones with the capability to hunt down and kill a target with the operator sitting a thousand miles away.
OldGettysk
Running the MC & Buffalo
Hey People once said that a caboose was essential part to a train and that was replaced .
macjet
Member
My industry is making the change also. UP2CSX is right. I share airspace with unmanned drones, mainly the Global Hawk, every time I go to work. These aircraft are operated by remote operators on the ground. The technology is already here to replace pilots. Category IIIc aircraft are capable of auto landing in 0/0 conditions. The flight crews responsibility in this situation is to monitor and program.
Eclipse aircraft and some of the other very light jet manufacturers are building into their single pilot aircraft capabilities to monitor the pilot from a remote location and provide assistance as if there was a second pilot on board.
Our transport category aircraft over the years have gone from four man crews to three mans crews and now finally two man crews. Automation and technology advances have removed the need for navigators and flight engineers.
Does anyone remember when elevators used to have operators in them? Has anyone ridden the monorail in Vegas? There is no operator in there. What about ATM's?
Technology is going to change the way we operate and interface with machines and equipment. The driving factor should be one of safety and not cost. I don't know about rail but we are currently in the safest period of aviation's brief history. Never have we had so few accidents and fatalities. I think this is a great credit to the professionals who operate our national airspace system and our transport aircraft. I would assume a loss of our professional rail brethren would result in a loss of operational safety and efficiency as well. No amount of technology can completely replace a trained and dedicated professional. Ask Airbus. They tried and failed with the loss of life.
While the balance between man and machine may change and fewer men may be needed to operate future machines we should never completely rely upon or replace our gray matter with a silicon chip.
Eclipse aircraft and some of the other very light jet manufacturers are building into their single pilot aircraft capabilities to monitor the pilot from a remote location and provide assistance as if there was a second pilot on board.
Our transport category aircraft over the years have gone from four man crews to three mans crews and now finally two man crews. Automation and technology advances have removed the need for navigators and flight engineers.
Does anyone remember when elevators used to have operators in them? Has anyone ridden the monorail in Vegas? There is no operator in there. What about ATM's?
Technology is going to change the way we operate and interface with machines and equipment. The driving factor should be one of safety and not cost. I don't know about rail but we are currently in the safest period of aviation's brief history. Never have we had so few accidents and fatalities. I think this is a great credit to the professionals who operate our national airspace system and our transport aircraft. I would assume a loss of our professional rail brethren would result in a loss of operational safety and efficiency as well. No amount of technology can completely replace a trained and dedicated professional. Ask Airbus. They tried and failed with the loss of life.
While the balance between man and machine may change and fewer men may be needed to operate future machines we should never completely rely upon or replace our gray matter with a silicon chip.
I must be weird to actually see one of those Global Hawks fly by and realize there's no one in it. 
You're right, Mac, this is the safest period ever in commercial aviation, at least in the US and Europe. Part of that is due to the vastly improved avionics and mechanicals on today's aircraft and part of it is due to automation. If I'm flying a triple seven, I can tell if their's a pilot making a check fight on landing. Pilot=bumpy landing, computer=smooth landing. Aircraft operate in a completely different environment than railroads. There's no private right of way, it see and be seen, and it's in three dimensions. There's no doubt that a great pilot is still better than the best computer. The famous controlled crash in Iowa of the DC-10 that lost all the hydraulics was due to three great pilots who happened to be in the right place at the right time. However, that's a very rare event compared to the thousands of fights that are flown every day with the computers doing 90% of the workoad.
Railroads are a different story. The engineer rarely makes a difference in something like a grade crossing accident because he can't do a 180 like an aircraft and can't get his train stopped in time to prevent the collision. The engineer and crew are more likely to be victims than hero's. I'm quite certain that railroads would have already made more advances in remote control trains if not for labor issues. As Paul said, those of us who are old enough never thought we'd see the day without a caboose at the end of a train but that has already happened. More remote control will also happen once the labor issues revolving around it are resolved.
You're right, Mac, this is the safest period ever in commercial aviation, at least in the US and Europe. Part of that is due to the vastly improved avionics and mechanicals on today's aircraft and part of it is due to automation. If I'm flying a triple seven, I can tell if their's a pilot making a check fight on landing. Pilot=bumpy landing, computer=smooth landing. Aircraft operate in a completely different environment than railroads. There's no private right of way, it see and be seen, and it's in three dimensions. There's no doubt that a great pilot is still better than the best computer. The famous controlled crash in Iowa of the DC-10 that lost all the hydraulics was due to three great pilots who happened to be in the right place at the right time. However, that's a very rare event compared to the thousands of fights that are flown every day with the computers doing 90% of the workoad. Railroads are a different story. The engineer rarely makes a difference in something like a grade crossing accident because he can't do a 180 like an aircraft and can't get his train stopped in time to prevent the collision. The engineer and crew are more likely to be victims than hero's. I'm quite certain that railroads would have already made more advances in remote control trains if not for labor issues. As Paul said, those of us who are old enough never thought we'd see the day without a caboose at the end of a train but that has already happened. More remote control will also happen once the labor issues revolving around it are resolved.
Last edited by a moderator:
Gee, guys , I didn't mean to start a food fight ! I was just telling the kid the technology I see being developed here at GE , and I'm sure EMD as well. Jim I think is more right than wrong on the issue though. No enginner can stop that train in time to avoid an idiot. It will be quite a while I think till the technology matures enough to replace all the operators though. Most of the majors, even now, in their dispatch centers can track every train and stop them if need be to avoid congestion and/or accidents. So the time is acomin !
Jerry, no food fight intended or perceived, I hope. It's interesting to speculate on the future of railroading. We do it all the time with locomitives and freight cars but don't often think about the systems that actually run the railroads. It's easy for me to see big changes ove the next few decades as the railroads follow other industries into more automation. Maybe it's because I started out seeing NKP Berkshires and PA's as a kid and see how different the current GE and EMD offerings are compared to what I used to understand as a locomotive.
OldGettysk
Running the MC & Buffalo
Just food for thought . Computers work faster then humans . So I can see a computerized train or even car running without Human assistance !!!!
Mingo Assist
re·sus·ci·tat·ing the EL
I see it but not for ALONG time, especially like here in the Ohio Valley.
First its gonna take MILLIONS to modify cars to auto uncouple. Then your smaller companys that have sidings that want personalized switching service {we have a few down here} may not have the money to make the track mods and the railroad wont loose customers so I still see a conductors position in that instance.
1 Man trains was tried down here about 5 years ago and it failed miserably.
I DO see auto systems but I DONT see it in my railroad lifetime here. WAY to much needs to be done for it to work safely and efficiently.
First its gonna take MILLIONS to modify cars to auto uncouple. Then your smaller companys that have sidings that want personalized switching service {we have a few down here} may not have the money to make the track mods and the railroad wont loose customers so I still see a conductors position in that instance.
1 Man trains was tried down here about 5 years ago and it failed miserably.
I DO see auto systems but I DONT see it in my railroad lifetime here. WAY to much needs to be done for it to work safely and efficiently.
jbaakko
Diesel Detail Freak
Thats what they said on the History Chanel too, 1 Teraflop now (1 terabyte of calculations a second), but still they cannot think like a Human. They lack common sense, so there's applications that it does not suit, yet. Designated routes w/o human interference may be best suited for that.
How'd we get on this subject anyways?
It's called thread drift.
Mingo, I only see automated trains for run-throughs any time in the next 20 years exactly because of the reasons you stated. The railroads will still need engineers and conductors to make up and break up trains and deal with set outs and pick ups. The capital costs to deal with these issues is staggering so it will be a long time before the railroads have the money to deal with these more mudane task without humans. It will certainly be interesting to watch what happens in the next generation though. I won't be here but I wonder how many of the younger railfans will complain about missing the times when humans used to run trains like us old guys complain about missing the times when trains had a caboose?That's usually but not always true. UVAS drones in Afghanistan have been controlled from several hundred miles away by operators in Pakistan. Althought the Israeli's have not officially confirmed it, there are reliable reports that they are flying UVAS and TUVAS over Iran on a regular basis from stations in Israel, almost a thousand miles away. There's no technical reason that a drone couldn't be controlled form almost any distance away with the use of satellites. That same technology that would allow an operator in Omaha to control a UP train anywhere on the system. It just takes money.
