Hi Jim, Thanks:
I thought it was time for a little laugh.
Also, much of this thread was a test in my exchange with Earl. I know there was 4% below Lobato if Earl said there was. I knew I was wrong when I challenge him by saying “there was no 4%” as a test to see if he was a respectable railroader and he came through with flying colors. When a railroader makes a statement he is very respectable if he will back up what he said when challenged. Why the challenge and not just ask him? Knowledge is valuable so people in the know don’t just spill all the beans, or give up their trade secrets. A good clever manager has to know how to trick it out of them.
This is where I need to apology to Earl and the list for sounding so abrasive in my posts. It is the result of caring over my methods of when employed. My last position was similar to an Office Engineer although it was not that exact title in the end. I had the daily responsibilities for about 5,000 cars on my 4,000-mile territory. I was the ”traffic manager” for more cars than any other customer on the Region except General Motor, and they likely had an entire office force to manage them. I had about 200 employees to work with that loaded and unloaded these cars with all kinds of material for the engineering department. I needed to know a lot about the changing status of these cars in order to keep on schedule with all the production function of many rehabilitation projects. I was in conversation and on the computer all day and I had to ask, record, connive, and con information out of fellow employees and suppliers. Sure I head the phrase “honey draws more…” but they didn’t have my job nor know that most of the people I needed data from did not work for me. Most employees had one boss and one loyalty and I was not on top of the list, but when they made any kind of statement, they could be challenged and they would always fill in the details. Most railroad employees were of the highest character and we all worked as a team. The abrasion was all in the days work. Only once, when I was a Supv. of Train Operations, I was asked to find another employment, but I took it as a joke and I told him I was hired by System and System would have to fire me. I never heard another word about it, but I never spoke bull-s about him near an open intercom again.
In the above thread I leaned from Earl (who recently wasn’t my greatest supporter) that just below Lobato the grade felt like the worst on the climb to Cumbres. This tells me that the two 16 degree curves were not compensated and put more bind into the train from flange friction so even if the grade was not a full 4% it felt like it was. This opens my question if the engines would not benefit if they had some rail washers water spray installed just at the front of the tender to wash off any sand used by the engine. Sand onto the wheels and flanges of the train can really bind it down to a stall. How many places could washers be a benefit when turned on by a fireman?
Ps: Sorry for the slight diversion from pure ng but this gives some rare insight into the hidden world of the office methods used to run a railroad might and might be of interest to some.
