[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/n/ - Transportation


Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 15 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Attention: All work safe boards are soon going to be on the 4channel.org domain.

For now, all boards are accessible through either domain.

Make sure to update your script blockers and whitelist the new domain.

The 4chan Vtuber Competition is over. Click here to see the winning entry!




File: aussie.png (1.71 MB, 1173x770)
1.71 MB
1.71 MB PNG
prime example as to why we need at the very minimum two crew members on trains, unlike certain class 1 railroads in america *cough
cough up bnsf cough* are working to set. thoughts on single member crews?
>>
When did BNSF go to one-man crews?
>>
>>1253935
they havent yet, but they were working to try and buy out unions to get employees to vote for them back in i think it was mid to late 2016. was a feeble attempt, but still an attempt
>>
>>1253938
They're been trying that for well over a decade. Don't think the other class 1's wouldn't jump on it if they could.

Eventually they'll probably get it, too, one way or another. Another good reason not to work at the railroad, the fear of losing your job for good is ALWAYS hanging over your head.
>>
>>1253925
you also need an automatic vigilance device
>>
You actually don't need any crew on a train when you have computers
>>
>>1253971
These trains are operated remotely from a facility here in Perth. What seems weird to me is that they could derail it from 800km away but they couldn't pull the brakes.
>>
>>1254017
Probably brake failure, in that case number of crew onboard literally doesn't matter
>>
>>1254017
Rio has remote controlled trains. BHP and Fortescue still use drivers.
>>
Anyone speculate on how it happened?
>>
>>1254093
>Probably brake failure, in that case number of crew onboard literally doesn't matter
Couldn't you kill the engine and wait?
Or engine brake it for that matter.
>>
>>1254603
inertia?
>>
>>1254603
>>1254603
If you kill the engine you lose your ability to pump up what brakes you might have and you lose dynamic braking capability. Even so depending on the grade and the tonnage, dynamics might not be enough.
>>
>>1253925
Lac Megantic should've been enough to put the kibosh on this shit in a lot of north america at least, but muh profit motive.
>>
>>1254610
Friction would stop the train anyway
>>
File: san_bernardino.jpg (96 KB, 800x550)
96 KB
96 KB JPG
>>1254984
Eventually, sure
>>
>>1254610
You don't need to "pump up" the air to set the brakes unless you drop below a critical amount. In order to reach this point you'd have to perform serious errors in train handling.
>>
>>1255076
In other words, you need to pump up the air before you set the brakes.
>>
>>1253925
Stop complaining.
It's not like jobs or safety are important anyway
>>
>>1255078
Truly and rightfully, you pump air to release the brakes. You reduce pressure to apply them.
>>
>The "two crew" meme lead that Taiwanese rail department being able to get away from their procedural problem by simply installing two crews and then pretend the problem have beeb magically solved just by doing so
>>
TE&Y labor costs alone are over a billion dollars a year for just UPRR.
>>
>>1257491
Point?
>>
>>1257534
So theyll go to one man crews and automation as soon as they can get the feds approval. Conductors are fucked.
>>
>>1257660
It's not a decision the government can make right now. Crew consist agreements are between the carriers and the unions.
>>
File: fullcrew.jpg (171 KB, 1000x536)
171 KB
171 KB JPG
Return of five-man crews again when?





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.