Why no more cabooses?

Hey guys, I know this is probabaly common knowledge or old news, but I always wondered why cabooses are no longer used. Is it because they are trying to save on weight? And what were the purpose of a caboose? Was it a conductors mobile office or sleeper?

With the invention of the Telemetry Marker (that little flashing red light on the end), the caboose became obsolete. The Telemetry Marker sends information to a display in the locomotive indicating whether the end of the train is moving and the brake pressure at the end. Because the Engineer can now tell that the train hasn't broken in half, there's no need for someone at the end to alert the engineer.

It was really more of a "do we really need it" situation, although the caboose doesn't add considerable weight to the train, it does take extra time to hitch it to the end, and it costs money to maintain equipment, so less equipment to maintain equals less money spent.

Some railroads still have cabooses in their rosters for extended reverse moves.

The real push to do away with buggies was to save money by reducing crew size from five to four then three and now two. Roller bearings reduced the incidence of bearing failures, and improved metallurgy reduced the incidence of coupler and drawbar failures, resulting in fewer on-road failures, providing increased pretext to have full-size crews become the quantity between 1 and 3. Of course, longer cars cars plus heavier loads and mega-trains, reversed some of the decline in failure rates.
Additional issues would have been the costs of fitting retention tanks to caboose sanitation as well as general updating of an aging fleet.

Not to forget the introduction of defect detectors in the late '70's, early '80's, installed every 20 miles or so.

Moved to "Operations" forum........

Charlie

Cabooses are used manly for switching/local movements now. They are used as platforms and usually are locked from entering the cabin. Here is one caboose i took a picture of in Lincoln, NE. There were two cabooses in the yard including one atached to the yard engine. This on had markings warning no entry to the cabin. Just for use as a shoving platform. http://jwdp.rrpicturearchives.net/showP ... id=2132067

one thing that they miss here , the ability to detectmid train derailments where the hoses / couplers dont part . a branch line here recently suffered 5 miles of track damage , because of such a derailment . there was some talk of putting guards vans ( cabbooses back on such trains to try and detect these derailments , instead they just closed the branchline .

David Benton wrote:one thing that they miss here , the ability to detectmid train derailments where the hoses / couplers dont part . a branch line here recently suffered 5 miles of track damage , because of such a derailment . there was some talk of putting guards vans ( cabbooses back on such trains to try and detect these derailments , instead they just closed the branchline .

Fixing the track wasn't an option?

So why is a caboose sealed to prevent entry? Safety ? Legal/labor issues? If it could be entered would that change it from a " platform "back to a caboose and bring mandatory manning into play?
Interesting...

Passenger wrote:

David Benton wrote:one thing that they miss here , the ability to detectmid train derailments where the hoses / couplers dont part . a branch line here recently suffered 5 miles of track damage , because of such a derailment . there was some talk of putting guards vans ( cabbooses back on such trains to try and detect these derailments , instead they just closed the branchline .

Fixing the track wasn't an option?

It was an option , but unfortunately they decided the amount of traffic wasnt worth it . it has been mothballed , hopefully it will return to service someday .

If you ask me, no more cabooses is a really bad idea. Replacing a human's eye's and ears, with a small computer with a blinking red light, just to save money is just plain stupid. And for those railroads that still have cabooses to close them up tight is equally stupid.

I would prefer to have a man or two, at the end of the train, then a computer. That branchline situation is a prime reason why change isn't always a good thing. Railroads will spend millions of dollars on engines and maintanence and the such like, but won't spend a dime on keeping a few cabooses around. The more technology replaces a job normally done by a person...well let's just say that's bad.

airman00 wrote:If you ask me, no more cabooses is a really bad idea. Replacing a human's eye's and ears, with a small computer with a blinking red light, just to save money is just plain stupid. And for those railroads that still have cabooses to close them up tight is equally stupid.

I would prefer to have a man or two, at the end of the train, then a computer. That branchline situation is a prime reason why change isn't always a good thing. Railroads will spend millions of dollars on engines and maintanence and the such like, but won't spend a dime on keeping a few cabooses around. The more technology replaces a job normally done by a person...well let's just say that's bad.

Not necessarily. Surely folks here have not now just noticed the lack of cabs! They've been gone since the early 90's. With the advent of "Fred" or the EOT device that monitors for the things you bemoan, IF cabs were generally needed, they WOULD be used. But they, in truth, and for the most part, are part of the march of technology!

Tell the truth now. Isn't this more the laments of railbuffs than the realities of modern railroading? Admit it! IF the foamers had their way, railroads would still be running steam trains, maintaining track with "gandy dancers", and running little red cabooses just so the buffs could stand around and take pictures!!! Um, you'd also not have many railroads around to take pictures OF if they couldn't modernize! And cabs just AIN'T part of modern railroading anymore! Hey, I wish I had $.50 for every cab I supplied with coal, soap, towels and water back in the 80's!

GF

i think the way to go is more technology . if the EOT had a video camera pointed at the track the damage to the track would have been noticed sooner .

Gadfly wrote:

airman00 wrote:If you ask me, no more cabooses is a really bad idea. Replacing a human's eye's and ears, with a small computer with a blinking red light, just to save money is just plain stupid. And for those railroads that still have cabooses to close them up tight is equally stupid.

I would prefer to have a man or two, at the end of the train, then a computer. That branchline situation is a prime reason why change isn't always a good thing. Railroads will spend millions of dollars on engines and maintanence and the such like, but won't spend a dime on keeping a few cabooses around. The more technology replaces a job normally done by a person...well let's just say that's bad.

Not necessarily. Surely folks here have not now just noticed the lack of cabs! They've been gone since the early 90's. With the advent of "Fred" or the EOT device that monitors for the things you bemoan, IF cabs were generally needed, they WOULD be used. But they, in truth, and for the most part, are part of the march of technology!

Tell the truth now. Isn't this more the laments of railbuffs than the realities of modern railroading? Admit it! IF the foamers had their way, railroads would still be running steam trains, maintaining track with "gandy dancers", and running little red cabooses just so the buffs could stand around and take pictures!!! Um, you'd also not have many railroads around to take pictures OF if they couldn't modernize! And cabs just AIN'T part of modern railroading anymore! Hey, I wish I had $.50 for every cab I supplied with coal, soap, towels and water back in the 80's!

GF

There is nothing wrong with modern technology. With today's advances in modern technology, it is quite amazing what can be done. I signed up recently for google earth, and it's pretty cool. However getting back, I've been saying that no cabooses is a bad idea, and not just because I like them. Reducing manpower isn't always a good idea. What if that little computer fails? Then what? You could just as easily have a man with a laptop computer in a caboose doing the same thing as that little blinking red light.

Now yes it is amazing that little device can do so much. But now railroad crews have been reduced from 3-5 men to just 2. Imagine being that guy who gets laid off because he's not needed anymore. Is that great? Technology is replacing too much of what humans used to do.

airman00 wrote:But now railroad crews have been reduced from 3-5 men to just 2. Imagine being that guy who gets laid off because he's not needed anymore. Is that great? Technology is replacing too much of what humans used to do.

Well, see, here's the thing: there's only one reason to pay somebody more money: because they can do more for you. When you can run the same train at the same level of safety with only 2 men, you can afford to pay them as much as you were paying the 3-5 men. (I'm not say that that's what happens. I'm just saying that that's where the money comes from to pay people more.) Now, you might think that this would result in more and more unemployment until nobody has a job. It doesn't. What happens is that you have 1) more prosperous people and 2) more people looking for a job. Add to that people with great ideas, and people with money to risk, and you have a constant stream of new jobs and new products. All of this happens without anybody meaning for it to happen. I call it the hand of God, but some people prefer the more agnostic "invisible hand". Some people like to play God, and move people around as if they were chess pieces, creating laws and rules as if they knew how to make prosperity. God punishes these people for their hubris from time to time, e.g. right now. We call them politicians.