Actually I have operated a small steam locomotive and even there from the engineer's seat you can't see the fireman's side coming up to a crossing.  Part of the fireman's job is to be your eyes on that side but I have often thought it would be beneficial to have a closed circuit camera feeding a display above or near the engineer's side window.  Time would tell if it were a help or a distraction.  Recording things never occurred to me, I was simply thinking about something that might makes the crew's job easier.  I believe the Amtrak genesis locomotives have a forward facing camera with display, even thought it has forward facing windows.

Interesting topic.

I think having a forward looking camera on the smoke box, and a rearward looking camera on back of the tender are excellent value adders for improving visibility, and therefore safety. The same goes for diesel locomotives.

Bobby Ogage posted:

I think having a forward looking camera on the smoke box, and a rearward looking camera on back of the tender are excellent value adders for improving visibility, and therefore safety.

Ridiculous.

The same goes for diesel locomotives.

The class one railroads have already done this, starting more than 10 years ago.

 

With modern technology weatherproof high-quality cameras and recording equipment have become relatively inexpensive and visually inobstrusive.  Besides the obvious value of providing crew a real-time image of an area normally blocked from view, in the event of an accident such recordings are invaluable. But if the images were fed to a password protected website, additional revenue could be generated by charging a fee for access. The password could be changed with each run. Fans and passengers on board, most of which have cells with internet, could get a birds-eye view of the track, as well as the cab crew being able to have enhanced situational awareness.

Well there's no point in beating around the bush.  Let's hear what you guys really think.

Hey Hot Water. Why are the cameras ridiculous? Please explain.

Bobby Ogage posted:

Hey Hot Water. Why are the cameras ridiculous? Please explain.

They/it would be ridiculous for such a device mounted on/in a steam locomotive for crew use. Running and firing a main line steam locomotive is a VERY intense job, and there is no time for anybody on the crew in the cab to be watching a video monitor. Besides, the visibility for both the Engineer and the Fireman is very good.

When the film crew from Skyfire outfitted the 4449 with all sorts of mini-cameras, they had a video monitoring "board" set-up in the crew car, with a separate screen for each of the many cameras. It was a major project. They produced a VERY successful video for public sale, however such a complicated set-up would serve no real purpose, in my opinion, for any real-time "viewing" in the cab.

There is absolutely no need for a video monitor to be mounted in the cab of a steam locomotive looking ahead. I say that from the point of view of someone who has spent over 50,000 miles in the right-hand seat of the 765. Between the engineer and fireman in the cab, they can see everything they need to see just fine.

It's not like you have to see well enough to steer... 

Hot Water posted:

Bobby Ogage posted:

Hey Hot Water. Why are the cameras ridiculous? Please explain.

They/it would be ridiculous for such a device mounted on/in a steam locomotive for crew use. Running and firing a main line steam locomotive is a VERY intense job, and there is no time for anybody on the crew in the cab to be watching a video monitor. Besides, the visibility for both the Engineer and the Fireman is very good.

Agreed!

I wonder if Bobby Ogage can imagine trying to make out something (or someone) on the track 2,000 feet away by looking at a video screen that's maybe 15" diagonal (if that)? While bouncing and swaying and paying attention to the job? And also while the camera's image bounces and sways on the monitor due to the engine's movement? It would be impossible! Far easier to just look at the real world out the window--much higher resolution.

Steve,

Just my opinion but, I don't think "Bobby OGauge" has any experience with, nor knowledge of, real railroading. Especially steam locomotives!

Hot Water posted:

Steve,

Just my opinion but, I don't think "Bobby OGauge" has any experience with, nor knowledge of, real railroading. Especially steam locomotives!

Well I do.  And in small steam operations I still think it would be useful.  I can clearly remember a time coming up on a crossing when my side was clear, I was whistle blowing for as required, fireman ringing the bell, and a car decided to run the crossing in front of me.  I was close enough that the rear corner of his car had to be in the space between the leading edge of the knuckle and the front beam of the loco.  The fireman and the owner who were both in the cab started reacting audibly once it was clear what the car intended, but by the time the were able to say anything it was already happening.  If had seen myself what was going on I would have had a split second more to close the throttle (the brakes would not have reacted fast enough to help this fool).  In this case there was no collision, but only by the grace of God.  

Yes I know your hands are full with the weight of the train, the track ahead, speed limits for the area, appropriate notch for the climbing or descending, how much air is in the reservoir, the list goes on and on.  But why dismiss a potential safety improvement just because "we've always done it that way?"  Cars didn't used to have seat belts, Construction workers didn't used to need a harness and be tied off, heck you didn't used to be required to wear safety glasses while working on the railroad.  

I agree there is no substitute for looking where you are going.  But having a camera that could help fill in a blind spot could be very beneficial, especially at lower speeds and when making up trains.

your opinion may vary.  

jhz563 posted:

Hot Water posted:

Steve,

Just my opinion but, I don't think "Bobby OGauge" has any experience with, nor knowledge of, real railroading. Especially steam locomotives!

Well I do.

OK, so which railroad have you worked for, and passed all the "book of rules", plus obtained an FRA Engineer's certificate?

jhz563 posted:

Hot Water posted:

Steve,

Just my opinion but, I don't think "Bobby OGauge" has any experience with, nor knowledge of, real railroading. Especially steam locomotives!

 I can clearly remember a time coming up on a crossing when my side was clear, I was whistle blowing for as required, fireman ringing the bell, and a car decided to run the crossing in front of me.  I was close enough that the rear corner of his car had to be in the space between the leading edge of the knuckle and the front beam of the loco.  The fireman and the owner who were both in the cab started reacting audibly once it was clear what the car intended, but by the time the were able to say anything it was already happening.  If had seen myself what was going on I would have had a split second more to close the throttle (the brakes would not have reacted fast enough to help this fool).  In this case there was no collision, but only by the grace of God.  

I had a similar incident occur to me at IRM.  Bell, whistle sounding plus, the Johnson bar in the corner for the loudest noise.  Fortunately, I was going slow enough and the fool was going fast enough...  Anybody who wants to argue with 105 tons of steam locomotive plus 5 coaches in motion is a fool.

No camera is going to prevent some fool from blowing through the crossing at the last second and as you stated in your incident, the brakes would not have reacted fast enough.

Rusty

My thought, this coming from someone that knows little to nothing about steam engine operating, and never really seen the cab of a steam engine, but looking at some of the models that have been put out. I would think there really wouldn't be a lot of room for any kind of monitor to do real time video feed on the boiler, or the tender of a steam engine. Not to mention all the bouncing around they probably do on a track, I can imagine the Locomotive bounces around a fair amount, since I noticed passengers cars shift quite a bit when I was on the Steam in the Valley Last Year. I also think that having a camera feed in the cab could end up being distracting

Though, like I said I know little to nothing about operating a steam engine, or any locomotive for that matter.

The small monitor is called a cell phone. There need be no wiring. It need only be closely monitored when starting and moving the engine. But, as has been noted, certain people (engine crew) consider keeping the crowd away under such circumstances "not my job", despite the fact they have no way of viewing directly in front of the engine. Reminds me of the opposition to seat belts in cars, parachutes for pilots, mandatory headlights for automobiles, air brakes on freight cars, automatic couplers, and artificial horizons for aircraft. It's called "sideways thinking", but what do I know? I'm just an old man closer the end than the beginning. Peace.☺☺☺

Tommy posted:

The small monitor is called a cell phone. There need be no wiring. It need only be closely monitored when starting and moving the engine. But, as has been noted, certain people (engine crew) consider keeping the crowd away under such circumstances "not my job", despite the fact they have no way of viewing directly in front of the engine. Reminds me of the opposition to seat belts in cars, parachutes for pilots, mandatory headlights for automobiles, air brakes on freight cars, automatic couplers, and artificial horizons for aircraft. It's called "sideways thinking", but what do I know? I'm just an old man closer the end than the beginning. Peace.☺☺☺

Right... One hand on the phone, one hand on the throttle and one hand on the brake...

Besides, train crews are forbidden to use cell phones on the job.  Just as one is not supposed to be using a cell phone while driving.

Rusty

Looks like a pretty good view without a camera.  Matt

Tommy posted:

The small monitor is called a cell phone. There need be no wiring. It need only be closely monitored when starting and moving the engine. But, as has been noted, certain people (engine crew) consider keeping the crowd away under such circumstances "not my job", despite the fact they have no way of viewing directly in front of the engine. Reminds me of the opposition to seat belts in cars, parachutes for pilots, mandatory headlights for automobiles, air brakes on freight cars, automatic couplers, and artificial horizons for aircraft. It's called "sideways thinking", but what do I know? I'm just an old man closer the end than the beginning. Peace.☺☺☺

Yes, what do you know? Doesn't stop you from commenting on things you don't know about. Happens a lot on the internet.

As Rusty noted, it is against federal law to have/use a cell phone (or any electronic device, except things like communication radios or cab signals) while in the cab. Willfully having a cell phone on your person, turned on, will get you a $10,000 personal fine. Willfully using such a phone while prohibited will bleed you, personally, $17,000.

Even so, as I've also noted, you wouldn't be able to see squat 2,000 feet down the track on a cell phone screen.

Now, are you quite certain there was opposition to train air brakes or automatic couplers, parachutes and car headlights?

It always amazes me to read advice from people who have never been there or done that. Mounting a video camera and monitor in a steam locomotive cab will cause more problems than it will solve.  

But what do I know. I've only run 765 for 34 years and 50,000+ miles at speeds as high as 75 mph. I guess I must have been running it sideways all those years, since my thinking has now officially declared as "sideways."  

I have a lot of videos, and good ones, shot from the cab of a diesel locomotive.  I really liked the idea suggested here of having live  video to the passengers on an excursion trip.  I assume that Hot Water and the Webmaster have tried the suggestions for video already and they have  found it to be unworkable, because if not, then they too are commenting on something they know nothing about, not?

Hot Water posted:

jhz563 posted:

Hot Water posted:

Steve,

Just my opinion but, I don't think "Bobby OGauge" has any experience with, nor knowledge of, real railroading. Especially steam locomotives!

Well I do.

OK, so which railroad have you worked for, and passed all the "book of rules", plus obtained an FRA Engineer's certificate?

I was certified for the Laurel Highlands RR out of Scottsdale PA, and the Westmoreland Scenic that followed.  I trained under Rich Rupp who at the time was running the South West Pennsylvania RR.  I ran an admittedly very small HK Porter in tourist service as well as gp7, gp9, gp11 and an Alco S2 locomotive.  Yes I took an passed my locomotive engineer's liscense written and practical exam.  

I am not at all comparing my experiences to mainline high speed operations.  But having switched passenger and on occasion a few freight cars with steam, my opinion is that a camera and a display would be useful at times. (Edit - the Porter I operated wasn't nearly as complex as the 765 or any other mainline locomotive.  There would have been room for a 9" display above the engineers side forward door)

Well..I know nothing about nothing, but worked for Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal 60 or so  years as as hostler for few months on an 0-6-0 and would have been happy to have video of the front end couplers. As far as cell phone, that is a recent regulation and could be amended to permitted a dedicated channel. With 200 paying passengers to pay an extra ten bucks for a real-time video they could download, I guess you guys who run 765 have plenty of bucks. It would be set up for one-time access for  specific internet access number, so they could not exchange passwords. So we have the (1) safety issue and (2) the revenue generating issue. A long time has passed since videos were introduced on UP trains. In any event I proposed the introduction of front-end video rule on steam engines to the FRA. Comment when they have a public hearing on the rule. I don't want to go to war with you guys. You  probably treat with grandchildren and kittens with hugs and kisses. Peace.

This is some of the funniest and, at the same time, most senseless stuff I have read in a while.  So let's add something else to what is already a very loud, busy, and intense environment while also acknowledging above (more than once) that this added 'feature' won't really do anything for safety or give any more time to react to a situation.  Anyone that spends any considerable amount of time in the cab can attest to how adding a camera makes no sense.  

While the original question in the post what a good 'what if', these arguments for a camera are laughable.  I had to tell a road foreman to take a step back once because he was asking me 'what does this do' or what does that do'.  There is enough going on that you sometimes can answer a simple question like that, so you really don't have time to look at a monitor, or even worse, a cell phone as mentioned above.  

Why is it that arguments always fall back to, "I was running for X years and didn't need a camera." I think that many of the videos of the steam locomotives are boring because all you see are trains at grade crossings. A camera on the front and rear of locomotives gives an interesting perspective for video viewers. The cameras I proposed have nothing to do with the invasion of the crew's anonymity!

Well..I know nothing about nothing, but worked for Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal 60 or so  years as as hostler for few months on an 0-6-0 and would have been happy to have video of the front end couplers.

I can see where a camera might have been useful in this situation. I'm guessing  a hostler occasionally had to move a engine, line a switch or two by himself with no other help.  Unfortunately for you   no cameras back then.

 As mentioned, the head end brakeman and fireman are the eyes on the left side of the engine. 

If we're talking about a video camera looking ahead for the benefit of the passengers to see the railroad ahead, that's fine and we have done that on the 765. It provides a unique perspective for the paying passengers. It also requires a great deal of work to get the video fed through the train to all the cars, plus a few video monitors in each car. One per car is not enough.

If we're talking about a camera looking ahead with the intent that the locomotive crew will use it to see what's ahead of them, that's ridiculous.

Tommy posted:

I proposed the introduction of front-end video rule on steam engines to the FRA. Comment when they have a public hearing on the rule.

They won't.

Bobby Ogage posted:

Why is it that arguments always fall back to, "I was running for X years and didn't need a camera."

Because anyone who has operated a steam engine knows that the real world presents a clearer picture than a video screen. Come to think of it, everyone should know that the real world is clearer than the sharpest video.

I think that many of the videos of the steam locomotives are boring because all you see are trains at grade crossings. A camera on the front and rear of locomotives gives an interesting perspective for video viewers.

That's a different story. We've had folks (news media, etc.) install go-pro cameras on various parts of the locomotive to record different views.

The cameras I proposed have nothing to do with the invasion of the crew's anonymity!

And it's not "invasion of anonymity" the crew is concerned about! Believe it or not, it's about safety. This all started about 10 years ago when some idiot California commuter "engineer" blew through a red signal because he was too busy texting with his fan boys. He plowed head-on into a UP freight heading down grade.

I'm guessing that you really don't want to see what happens to a human body when the car he's riding in gets "telescoped."

Tommy posted:

I proposed the introduction of front-end video rule on steam engines to the FRA. Comment when they have a public hearing on the rule.

<sarcasm on>

Well that's just wonderful... 

</sarcasm off>

CAMERAS!  We do not need no stinking cameras!  

My position is front & rear cameras for public entertainment. There is no way a camera can replace "eyes on" as conductor, engineer, fireman, brakeman and switchman would have.

Tommy posted:

With modern technology weatherproof high-quality cameras and recording equipment have become relatively inexpensive and visually inobstrusive.  Besides the obvious value of providing crew a real-time image of an area normally blocked from view, in the event of an accident such recordings are invaluable. But if the images were fed to a password protected website, additional revenue could be generated by charging a fee for access. The password could be changed with each run. Fans and passengers on board, most of which have cells with internet, could get a birds-eye view of the track, as well as the cab crew being able to have enhanced situational awareness.

If something happens, the last thing you need to be doing is broadcasting an accident live to thousands of people. Even with a delay, who on the crew in that situation is going to prioritize disconnecting the camera or stopping the feed? What if you collide with a vehicle and the camera is eye-level with the carnage? No thanks.

Looking ahead at the railroad track for hours on end doesn't sound like my version of a good time and the last thing we want passengers doing is staring at their phones while they're paying hundreds of dollars to ride! We should be busy engaging and serving those passengers first and foremost.

With PTC coming, the last thing crews need is another screen to look at in the cab. Any fireman or engineer worth their salt has situational awareness of their side of the railroad as a part of performing their duties in the cab. As Will points out above someone running in front of the locomotive operating at 60MPH will not register in time enough for the train to stop - let alone stop safely.

smd4 posted:

As Rusty noted, it is against federal law to have/use a cell phone (or any electronic device, except things like communication radios or cab signals) while in the cab. Willfully having a cell phone on your person, turned on, will get you a $10,000 personal fine. Willfully using such a phone while prohibited will bleed you, personally, $17,000.

Even so, as I've also noted, you wouldn't be able to see squat 2,000 feet down the track on a cell phone screen.

The rules will differ from railroad to railroad and be influenced by numerous factors including whether cab occupants are under acting under covered service, the train is stopped, etc., which explains how we're able to occasionally film in and live stream from the cab itself during operations with the 765.

Having said all this, we are currently experimenting with a live audio broadcast from the locomotive that would be sent to a server and made audible on a future version of our GPS tracking app. Much less maintenance intensive than a camera system, no liability concerns and it helps circumvent the logistics that may come with excursion trains that lack open windows or open vestibules. The implementation and maintenance of the GPS tracker alone is a little monster unto itself - especially considering the addition of things to maintain for any crew member is a little exhausting -  but we've made some strides in improving reliable performance enough to be confident to implement broadcasting audio as well as the engine's location.

Entertaining thread..You guys must be entertaining as heck in person..

I know nothing about something's but a video record might be just what the insurance company might find useful in retrospect..

EJN posted:

You guys must be entertaining as heck in person..

I know nothing about something's but a video record might be just what the insurance company might find useful in retrospect..

What an insurance company finds useful, and what is helpful to the crew in the discharge of their duties, are two different things.

Yes, video can be helpful with insurance companies. This video, for example, was quite helpful in showing that the train/crew was not at fault.

Notice that a camera mounted on the coupler facing forward would have been completely useless.

The question is now, should a video camera be mounted on every car, facing outward? In addition to cameras facing forward and behind? Do we need to make sure the entire train is covered by video feed? How many video cameras do you suggest we mount to help the insurance companies?

"What an insurance company finds useful, and what is helpful to the crew in the discharge of their duties, are two different things."

Not to mention, the footage could also work against an operator, too. 

645 posted:

smd4 posted:

EJN posted:

You guys must be entertaining as heck in person..

Oh, we are. Especially Sadler.

 

I know nothing about something's but a video record might be just what the insurance company might find useful in retrospect..

What an insurance company finds useful, and what is helpful to the crew in the discharge of their duties, are two different things.

Yes, video can be helpful with insurance companies. This video, for example, was quite helpful in showing that the train/crew was not at fault.

Notice that a camera mounted on the coupler facing forward would have been completely useless.

The question is now, should a video camera be mounted on every car, facing outward? In addition to cameras facing forward and behind? Do we need to make sure the entire train is covered by video feed? How many video cameras do you suggest we mount to help the insurance companies?

 

Will the insurance companies help pay for this too as the way EJN explains it it benefits them more than the railroad company? That will end up on everyone's insurance bill sooner or later. And if having cameras for insurance purposes is so important how about adding them to road intersections that have a high proportion of collisions? See where I'm going with this? When is enough is enough? Don't need cameras everywhere as the majority of time everyone does what they are supposed to do as evident by the large number of trains and highway vehicles that travel everyday without incident.

There are some intersections near where I work equipped with cameras (to say nothing of the red-light cameras infesting Chicago and surrounding area.)  Plus, many grade crossings in the area now have cameras or nearby security cameras are checked after a grade crossing collision.

None of which has stopped the Darwin contestants.

Rusty

Rusty Traque posted:

None of which has stopped the Darwin contestants...

EXACTLY THE POINT!

Thank you, Rusty.

No amount of technology will protect the stupid from themselves. As someone famous once said, "You can't fix stupid."