In the August issue of Trainline there is an article from one Mr. Randall Little about "guest engineers".
Is he reffering to engineer for an hour programs,or are there actullay groups out there that go back to the cars and ask if anyone wants to run the train???
The Article is a little foggy about what he is really talking about.
If anyone is doing anything like that it should be stopped!! I can not belive anyone is that stupid!
He makes it sound that way and Dan & Karen Ranger jumped on board in support of his article.
I can't belive anyone would do that. If he is refering to Engineer for an hour programs they are extremly misinformed!!!!
There are F.R.A. approved Engineer for an hour programs going on. They
( the F.R.A.) probbally know more than the above quoted experts!
Oh and by the way If I upset anyone, flame away, I have thick Skin!

irss@eriecoast.com

> Oh and by the way If I upset anyone, flame
> away, I have thick Skin!

Actually, no, do not flame away. It is a violation of the Terms of Service for this board.


eledbetter@rypn.org

Eric, you are correct. sorry!

irss@eriecoast.com

> Eric, you are correct. sorry!

As hard as it may be to believe, there are few groups here and there that will allow a non-engineer to sit in the seat when there is a trainload of people behind. That is totally different from "engineer for an hour" or "rent a locomotive" programs.

Fortunately, there are only a few groups that are this reckless. It's usually done to impress a potential benefactor, but that is no excuse, IMO.

Heber Valley will on occasion issue a "cab pass" for a guest to ride in the cab on a passenger run. They may throw a scoop of coal for the fireman and they may sit in the fireman's seat during the run, but the closest they get to the engineers seat is with the train stopped (usually for the picture of them "at the throttle").

The "pass" which requires the CMO's signature is retained by the engineer during the ride and then turned in with his (sorry, no hers, yet) paperwork at the end of the day.

sc 'doc' lewis

Heber Valley Railroad -- "rising from the ashes"
utweyesguy@aol.com

> As hard as it may be to believe, there are
> few groups here and there that will allow a
> non-engineer to sit in the seat when there
> is a trainload of people behind. That is
> totally different from "engineer for an
> hour" or "rent a locomotive"
> programs.

Hmm.

Back when I was involved with BSM and Penn's Landing, I managed to get myself some time at the controls at a couple other trolley museums. One was with paying passengers aboard the car, the rest were either "special trips" after hours or, in one case, a regular trip that happened to have only me and my family aboard the car. In all cases, the individual organizations involved had restrictions which I was happy to honor for the chance to run something different from what I normally ran. Penn's Landing would allow visiting volunteers from other operations to operate on occasion, always under close supervision.

There's a big difference between a streetcar or even an interurban car and a locomotive, however. Ninety percent of running a locomotive is handling a train. Any Bozo can operate a trolley or light locomotive with a few minutes' instruction. It takes lots and lots of practice to become proficient at handling a train, however. More so with a passenger train, since freight generally doesn't complain when you bump it around a bit.

SCRM recently had a small internal tiff regarding this. Our policy is that we don't care what you've done where, at our railroad you start as brakeman, qualify as conductor, and then MAYBE enter training to qualify as an engineer. Who gets to train as engineer is based on seniority, experience, and ability. A couple members took some engineer training at another museum and thought they could come back and hop right into the cab. One of these guys hadn't even completed his basic brakeman's certification! They were told in no uncertain terms that NO ONE leap frogs, period. They didn't like that but they're both still active volunteers so I guess they're dealing with it.

Anyone who lets a person with no known experience on that railroad handle a passenger train full of paying riders is, in my opinion, nuts, stupid, and asking for trouble. I'd be reluctant to let even a visiting professional engineer run a loaded train on our line until he'd had at few trips with an empty train to familiarize himself with the railroad and our antiquated equipment. You can call me paranoid if you like, but we've got a spotless operating safety record and I want to keep it that way.

The South Carolina Railroad Museum
mconrad@compuzone.net

Hmmmm as well.

I've done it all as well--run a streetcar at the Balto. Streetcar Museum, switched cars with an E8 out of emergency necessity on a 100-degree day, advanced a coal train with modern GEs, and run a GE 45-tonner and caboose up the track and back, all by invitation and always under the CAREFUL supervision of individuals responsible, and NEVER operating at anything faster than I thought I could handle. (Hmmmm, now, about that steam loco opportunity.....)

The interesting point is, in every case I know of, the invitation was spontaneous and unplanned--and every time, I was VERY reluctant at first to dare to try it. In the one case, the engineer in charge later remarked, "It was exactly because you WERE nervous that I was willing to give you the chance. You know exactly how big the thing is, how big the responsibility is, and how many ways there are to [screw] up and how big the mess can be. If you were gung-ho to try it and foaming at the mouth, I wouldn't have let you. But getting over that massive knot in your stomach is the first step towards more and better." And I agree. My father taught me to drive by the exact same technique--surprise driving lessons when I least expected them--and it worked marvelously.

Let's face another reality: I'm younger than most of them. And somewhere along the line, they HAVE to find ways to get new blood into their systems. Maybe someday, based on my "superlative" handling of 264 that day, I might end up as a volunteer motorman down there at the streetcar museum. Maybe someday I'll end up buying one or more of those E8s, or be involved in their future employment. Odd or dangerous as it may seem, the "spontaneous" cab ride and turn at the throttle may be a necessary bait to reel in future rail preservationists--as well as being a clandestine screening and indoctrination process.

As for the multi-hundred-dollar "Engineer For A Day" programs, I think in many ways they do much the same thing. It would be nice if we could reduce the crowd for those to serious railroad wannabes rather than a guy who'll run a steam loco this birthday and fly a fighter the next. But, yes, as long as the market is there for them, AND the supervision is total and complete, why NOT soak the wannabes for all the money we can? One wannabe might bring as much profit as the whole weekend's operations, if the training is done at the same time as prospective crew members......

And just so you know, don't assume that just because you throw money at an operation that such shenanigans are going to occur. One private-charter operator of my acquaintance reports that, in spite of operating dozens of pricey charters over one particular line and tipping the crews well, he has NEVER had a chance to take the throttle of the steamer(s).

LNER4472-NOSPAM-@bcpl.net

> As for the multi-hundred-dollar
> "Engineer For A Day" programs, I
> think in many ways they do much the same
> thing. It would be nice if we could reduce
> the crowd for those to serious railroad
> wannabes rather than a guy who'll run a
> steam loco this birthday and fly a fighter
> the next. But, yes, as long as the market is
> there for them, AND the supervision is total
> and complete, why NOT soak the wannabes for
> all the money we can? One wannabe might
> bring as much profit as the whole weekend's
> operations, if the training is done at the
> same time as prospective crew members......

I didn't intend my post to be a slam against "engineer for an hour" programs. I consider such programs to be really good ideas, so long as they're done with a light engine. There's a lot less that can go wrong with a light engine going back and forth on a track protected by locked derails at both ends. I just feel it's foolhardy to put anyone who hasn't been trained on that specific equipment and on that specific railroad in the seat with loaded passenger cars behind them.

The South Carolina Railroad Museum
mconrad@compuzone.net

> Hmmmm as well.

> Odd or dangerous as it may seem,
> the "spontaneous" cab ride and
> turn at the throttle may be a necessary bait
> to reel in future rail preservationists--as
> well as being a clandestine screening and
> indoctrination process.

> But yes, as long as the market is
> there for them, AND the supervision is total
> and complete, why NOT soak the wannabes for
> all the money we can? One wannabe might
> bring as much profit as the whole weekend's
> operations, if the training is done at the
> same time as prospective crew members......

Here's a good reason: If anything goes wrong with said wannabe at the throttle, that high-priced liability insurance policy your museum or railroad bought is not worth the paper it's written on. You will not be covered and you most likely will not be able to get any insurance in the future.

IOW, you risk the future of the whole endeavor if you engage in this kind of thing or allow it to go on.

THAT was the whole point of the article in TRAINLINE.

> I didn't intend my post to be a slam against
> "engineer for an hour" programs. I
> consider such programs to be really good
> ideas, so long as they're done with a light
> engine. There's a lot less that can go wrong
> with a light engine going back and forth on
> a track protected by locked derails at both
> ends.

Heber Valley Railroad's "Your Hand on the Throttle" Program gives individuals the opportunity to run "heavy" with two or three freight cars and a caboose. Instructor and one other "student" in the cab and the conductor with one or two other "students" in the caboose awaiting their turn at the four mile run (Decker to Wallsburg sidings). Each gets a run from Decker to Wallsburg and back (approximately 8 miles total run).

sc 'doc' lewis


Heber Valley Railroad -- "rising from the ashes"
utweyesguy@aol.com

> Here's a good reason: If anything goes wrong
> with said wannabe at the throttle, that
> high-priced liability insurance policy your
> museum or railroad bought is not worth the
> paper it's written on. You will not be
> covered and you most likely will not be able
> to get any insurance in the future.

> IOW, you risk the future of the whole
> endeavor if you engage in this kind of thing
> or allow it to go on.

Bingo. Not only does it raise the insurance issue, but the prospective FRA fines for willfully letting an unlicensed engineer, or student, handle a train can be enough to bankrupt most operations ... not to mention bring down the wrath of other FRA types who will suddenly take a closer look at your organization.

It should also be mentioned that FRA fines for willfully violating CFR's can be levied not only against the corporation, but the individual who broke the rule.

To me, it's not worth risking a personal, five-digit fine just to let some wannabe have their few minutes of glory...

Fiv4HghStk@aol.com

> the prospective FRA fines for
> willfully letting an unlicensed engineer, or
> student, handle a train
I'm confused. Does the above mean that students
can't handle trains?
49 CFR 240.123 (c) (5) (ii) reads:
A railroad that elects to train a previously
untrained person to be a locomotive engineer
shall provide initial training which, at a
minimum:
Is conducted so that the performance skill
component shall
Place the student engineer at the controls of a
locomotive for a significant portion of the time

The above may be the loophole to allow a student
engineer to train before getting an engineer's
certificate (49 CFR 249 doesn't require licenses).

TyburnRR@cs.com

> I'm confused. Does the above mean that
> students
> can't handle trains?
> 49 CFR 240.123 (c) (5) (ii) reads:
> A railroad that elects to train a previously
> untrained person to be a locomotive engineer
> shall provide initial training which, at a
> minimum:
> Is conducted so that the performance skill
> component shall
> Place the student engineer at the controls
> of a
> locomotive for a significant portion of the
> time

> The above may be the loophole to allow a
> student
> engineer to train before getting an
> engineer's
> certificate (49 CFR 249 doesn't require
> licenses).

That's not a loophole. It IS a PART of engineer training. And that part of the training doesn't happen until a lot of other training has taken place, including classroom, rules, air brake and many other things. Letting some goomer run the engine with passengers behind is NOT engineer training, and there is no way you will ever sell the FRA or an insurance company the premise that it is.

To further explain Steam Realist's response, a student engineer is granted a Class 3 license and is only allowed to operate under the direction of an instructor engineer. Our instructor engineers are designated through an Operations Bulletin. This allows the Engineer Trainees to schedule themselves to work with an Instructor.

The Engineer Trainees are also required to receive efficiency checks and check rides from an SLE (Supervisor of Locomotive Engineers) on an annual basis.

G. Mark - TVRM

TVRM Shop Updates by Steve Freer
aw90@comcast.net

SR,

You raise a good point. We all need to understand that our high liability rates and "FRA Approved" EFAH programs are only as good as the first major screw up. Our insurance carrier has made it clear before how their company views this activicity and the risks involved. Plus, as I understand it the FRA and a RSAC may be currently involved in giving this another hard look. Make your money while you still can folks, the day is coming when your insurance carrier and or the government will supply you with some required minimum locomotive operators standards.



minterjr@mindspring.com