All engine control desks/stands created equal?

rrman posted:

Today saw three units on UP track. CSX in lead, NS in middle (probably running off power hours), UP in third place.

I would assume for most part all engine controls are same, like a car ie steering wheel in front, gas on right, brake in center, turn signal arm on left side of column etc.

Nope, not even close. When the "AAR Control Stand" came into practice, about 1972, the EMD and GE control stands were VERY similar. Then that stupid "Desk Top Controller" design was requested by the railroads, which was designed/developed by the railroads and the operating craft bunions, none of which had ever spent ANY significant time behind the throttle! Now, there is the current generation of so-called "standard cab designs" with the "wide nose" safety arrangement.

  You might have to look around for the headlight and wipers etc., but main controls would be standardized positions.

That depends on the age of the unit.

  And now with PTC on board, controls and displays should be more standardized I imagine, so any engineer of that road could sit at console of anybody's lead engine and run consist.

One would surely hope!

Or is this bad assumption?

Right.

Thanks Hot Water. Figured someone with you long experience would have seen/run it all.

Has there been any thought of having a heads up display, something like some fighter planes use?

Dominic Mazoch posted:

Has there been any thought of having a heads up display, something like some fighter planes use?

Why? IF you have a long freight train behind your power consist and you had to go into emergency, there is really nothing you could do even if you saw the emergency a few seconds early.

To some degree, yes, there is similarity among desktop control stands and among AAR "cash register" control stands. However, the actual orientation of the control stand and the seat and the side window has a lot to do with the efficiency of their use.

The GE version and the EMD version of the AAR control stand had the main controls oriented in about the same spot on the front of the control stand, but the switches and the illumination differed.  GE had throttle and dynamic handle positions identified by an arced label above the respective handles.  The EMD version had a number strip that showed through a window.

Around 1973, somebody decided that there must be a badge attached to the control stand to identify and instruct in the use of the handles . . . (sigh).  Engineers had never needed them, but they always do these things for the dumbest who might ever use them.

Yes, there are differences among different classes of locomotives, in the location of auxiliary controls, but there has been a move to standardize the appearance and color of various mushroom buttons, push buttons and control valves.  There are three basic locomotive air brake controls in use today:  upright all-pneumatic 26L schedule such as was used until the advent of desktop controls; upright electronic control for air brakes, similar in shape, but with a much different feel; and electronic desktop, with some having a button on the automatic brake handle for releasing the locomotive brakes when a train brake application is being made, but most do not have that feature.  

[Pardon me now, while I put on my iron pants.  I get them from the same place Hot Water and Big Jim get theirs.] 

The fact that some whiny Engineers have complaints about these auxiliary controls is evidence that those Engineers are members of the sewing circle, where they sit and complain like old maids while awaiting arrival of their trains.  You get what you get and you don't pitch a fit.  Steam Engineers were lucky to find anything the same on different classes of steam engines.  But institutional knowledge was required then, and the knowledge and skill of an Engineer were his calling card and the measure of his standing with his fellow employees and his railroad company.  They did not have a stainless steel badge to identify anything they were going to use.  Sometimes there would be metal tags on certain valves on the backhead of a steam locomotive boiler, and other times there were none.

You've seen me state this before: Proper preparation prevents poor performance.  If an Engineer boards a locomotive that does not look exactly like anything he has ever seen before, then he has to take a little time to look the controls over, make mental notes about what is where, release the brakes and proceed . . . that is the kind of knowledge that is required in order to justify the generous pay of Locomotive Engineers.

Number 90:

I have heard this version, making it the 6P line--

Proper Preperation Pevents P@!! Poor Performance!

Dominic, I have heard that version, too.  The version that I use -- the 5 P's -- was taught to me by my employer at the time, the U S Army.   I like it because it can be used in the company of ladies, children, and nuns.

BNSF has removed the desktop controls on their GP60M locomotives and installed AAR type.

645 posted:

Oh yes, they also said older units (think GP38-2 and SD40-2 types in particular) with the standard AAR control stand are preferred for both over the road and switching operations as they are more comfortable for seating positions/placement of controls.

Agreed!

I think that I have well documented my disdain for desktop controls over the years. Mainly because it left me with a back ache from having to be hunched over for so much of the time, not being able to stretch out my long legs. Also, pressing a button to blow the horn is just very boring.

Give me a good AAR control stand so that I can stretch out with a pneumatic horn handle in my hand to put a little personality in my signals!

Big Jim posted:

Give me a good AAR control stand so that I can stretch out with a pneumatic horn handle in my hand to put a little personality in my signals!

  You could run an engine like that with one hand most of the time.

Number 90 posted:

Big Jim posted:

Give me a good AAR control stand so that I can stretch out with a pneumatic horn handle in my hand to put a little personality in my signals!

  You could run an engine like that with one hand most of the time.

You do realize of course, that EMD and GE no doubt paid super big bucks to some high priced consulting firm to come up with something totally different.  Most likely designed by computer geeks/nerds used to their game consoles, having no idea of who what how of operation.  "So hey, if it works for me, then those guys/gals in the cab will welcome this great innovation with open arms".....

Number 90 posted:

Big Jim posted:

Give me a good AAR control stand so that I can stretch out with a pneumatic horn handle in my hand to put a little personality in my signals!

  You could run an engine like that with one hand most of the time.

Yep!

Probably used a computer simulation -typical of today. "If it works-screw it up so we get more work."

rrman posted:

You do realize of course, that EMD and GE no doubt paid super big bucks to some high priced consulting firm to come up with something totally different.  Most likely designed by computer geeks/nerds used to their game consoles, having no idea of who what how of operation.  "So hey, if it works for me, then those guys/gals in the cab will welcome this great innovation with open arms".....

I hate to say this, but, I had asked about why we were getting some of the inane features in the new cabs coming out at that time. I was told that the NS & BLE local had a joint "Loco cab committee" and that the BLE were in on the design. Well, the sorry sob's never told us about this committee! Thanks a lot brothers! Just another reason why I couldn't stand the BLE. And don't go reading too much into that statement as I am not anti-union, I just never could stand the BLE. 

Big Jim posted:

rrman posted:

You do realize of course, that EMD and GE no doubt paid super big bucks to some high priced consulting firm to come up with something totally different.  Most likely designed by computer geeks/nerds used to their game consoles, having no idea of who what how of operation.  "So hey, if it works for me, then those guys/gals in the cab will welcome this great innovation with open arms".....

I hate to say this, but, I had asked about why we were getting some of the inane features in the new cabs coming out at that time. I was told that the NS & BLE local had a joint "Loco cab committee" and that the BLE were in on the design. Well, the sorry sob's never told us about this committee! Thanks a lot brothers! Just another reason why I couldn't stand the BLE. And don't go reading too much into that statement as I am not anti-union, I just never could stand the BLE. 

And,,,,,,,,as the late Paul Harvey used to say, "And now the rest of the story!",,,,,,,,that stupid "Locomotive Cab Committee", was generally made of Union Reps, that were no longer day-to-day Engineers! The EMD Engineering Dept. had to institute an internal "Cab Committee", which I was part of for awhile, but every time I, and some others with lots of field experience, voiced our concerns & objections over the desk top controller design, (which actually first came out of Canada), we were quietly rebuffed. During the meetings with the railroad's "Locomotive Cab Committee", it got even worse. 

After talking to a few of my good friends, who were working, long time, locomotive Engineers, one of the anti-desk top controller design responses I received, and passed on to all parties in one of the combined "Cab Committee" meetings was, "Try sitting at your dinning room table, in a chair that will not move, for 8 to 12 hours!". Naturally THAT went over like a lead balloon. Since all the Union "experts" were forcing the issues, both EMD and GE Engineering Depts. had to design and provided what the customers wanted. Thus, the desk top controller designed by the Union went into service.

After many rears of ever mounting complaints, clearer heads finally prevailed, and the "AAR Design" controller was finally implemented into the wide nose "Safety Cabs", which was pretty similar to the cab interior design of the EMD UP DDA40X from 1969. Imagine THAT!