# What makes it a Train?



## Chip (Feb 11, 2016)

Running a loco is not "running a train" how many cars behind a loco does it take before it is a "train" 1?...3? Is there a particular number? Is there a particular ORDER of cars? We all know the caboose goes at the back but what about the "middle"? Is there a "proto" order? Box cars before tank cars etc?

Thank You for any information and Happy Rolling.


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

AAR says.
An engine, with or without cars, displaying a marker.


----------



## Spence (Oct 15, 2015)

It actually would be called a consist. I remember that from my days on OGR and Rich Melvin.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

Chip said:


> Is there a particular ORDER of cars? We all know the caboose goes at the back but what about the "middle"? Is there a "proto" order? Box cars before tank cars etc?


There is no prescribed "order", a lot depends on factors such as weight, typically putting light empties at the head of a train is a bad idea, just look at several recent derailments at the Horseshoe Curve in PA, Apparently the boys at NS haven't totally learned that lesson.


----------



## Chip (Feb 11, 2016)

ah ok so it's a routing term then. A "train" is anything takes up time and space on any line. No specific number of cars or order is worried about save weight and safety. 

Sounds reasonable. Thanks!


----------



## Fire21 (Mar 9, 2014)

I always considered a locomotive was a locomotive. Add one or more cars, then we have a train.

But by the explanations above, I can see that anything that occupies a section of rail could be considered as a train..."we have a train in the way".


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

Dennis461 said:


> An engine, with or without cars, displaying a marker.


This is the rule book definition, and is very specific because this specific wording has implications in how other rules refer to "trains" or "engines".

Note that under rule book usage, "engine" is defined as one or more units operated from a single set of controls, so any rules referring to "engine" also cover a multi-unit diesel consist. A double-headed steam train would be two engines, since each has its own independent controls.

The "displaying markers" is actually sort of an important distinction under the rule book - trains are required to display markers on the rear end, and under the rule book definition is only considered a "train" if the markers are properly displayed. A yard engine switching cars is not considered a "train" for the purposes of any rules pertaining to train movement and operation.

However, these definitions are all very precise and specific so that when other rules in the rule book refer to "trains and/or engines" the rules are specific and clear as to what they're talking about.

If you're running a model train on a loop and not too concerned about real world rules and methods, than your definition needn't be as specific.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

Chip said:


> Running a loco is not "running a train" how many cars behind a loco does it take before it is a "train" 1?...3? Is there a particular number?


See replies above. A "train" can absolutely have zero cars.



Chip said:


> Is there a particular ORDER of cars? We all know the caboose goes at the back but what about the "middle"? Is there a "proto" order? Box cars before tank cars etc?


Train ordering is usually based on destination, with cars sorted in yards into "blocks" of cars all going to the same destination (or at least *NEXT* destination, where they may be sorted again for other routes). Within each block, cars are generally not sorted any further, although there are some restrictions in separating different types of hazardous materials to be considered. Sometimes there will be different blocks for the same destination based on type of traffic (e.g. intermodal, automotive, perishables, general) since one type of traffic may be prioritized or sent to a different yard or facility. Type of car is not really considered, except commodity may be. (e.g. ice reefers and stock cars were often handled in specific blocks because the cars' contents are perishable and time-sensiitve and require special handling. Not because there's any effort made to just keep different car types separate. If the cars were moving empty, it wouldn't matter.) Other groupings of similar cars may just occur naturally since a bunch of tank cars picked up at an oil refinery will just travel together until they're split up for different destinations. Same for hoppers from a mine or quarry, boxcars from a paper mill, racks from an auto plant, etc. If a large group travels from one large industry to another, they'll just naturally stay in a group since they're moving together.

Trains may handle one or more "blocks" of traffic.

e.g. a train heading from New York to Chicago will at least have a "Chicago" block, but might also have "Pittsburg" and "Detroit" blocks to set out along the way (just making this up, not sure if there's actually a specific route that travels between all these places).

When the train gets to Chicago, it will be yarded and the cars sorted for other connections, as the "Chicago" block(s) from New York and Detroit may have a mix of cars actually locally destined for Chicago, and cars for other connections via Chicago, interchanging to other trains or railways for the midwest or west coast.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Isn't there now a safety rule that requires that any tank
car carrying combustibles be separated from the loco by
one or more buffer cars?

Don


----------



## Chip (Feb 11, 2016)

Meat and taters you guys are the best! Outstanding information thank you most profusely. "buffer cars" ...loving it...who knew? not me that's for sure. Keep it coming I must know more of this buffer car concept. 

Also, I have a "fire fighting" tank car, should it be at the front of the string of tankers or at the back where the fire would end up? I'm thinking front for flexibility of application but I truly don't know the "industry standard" and as long as I've got it whatever it is from whatever era, I'd like to at least try to "run them correctly" as much as can be.

Thanks again


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

Chip said:


> Meat and taters you guys are the best! Outstanding information thank you most profusely. "buffer cars" ...loving it...who knew? not me that's for sure. Keep it coming I must know more of this buffer car concept.


Where possible*, cars placarded for certain hazardous materials should be placed a minimum number of cars away from the engine or caboose or other occupied cars, or certain other types of hazmat (e.g. don't put poison gas and explosives beside each other). This can complicate the blocking and build up of a train a bit beyond just sorting by destination. In a regular "manifest" freight train, these spacers can be any other non-hazardous cars already in the train.

*In the US the FRA has a current rule that requires such spacer cars to be added to unit trains (solid trains of all one commodity from one shipper to receiver). Technically as above these can simply be any car not loaded with hazmat, but many companies have a collection of older cars (usually old hoppers filled with sand) that are specifically set aside for dedicated use on unit oil trains. (Note this rule does not apply in Canada or if you go in time a bit. Then the minimum spacing rules usually state "unless the entire train consists of placarded hazardous tanks", so specific spacers don't have to be added unless they're already on the train anyway.)



Chip said:


> Also, I have a "fire fighting" tank car, should it be at the front of the string of tankers or at the back where the fire would end up? I'm thinking front for flexibility of application but I truly don't know the "industry standard" and as long as I've got it whatever it is from whatever era, I'd like to at least try to "run them correctly" as much as can be


Fire fighting cars are a rather unique sort of thing. Really only used in certain areas (usually more arid regions out west) where there is a concern of sparks from the locomotives causing brush fires. (Doesn't have anything to do with tank cars in the trains as far as I know.) I'm not real familiar with the specifics of their use, but I think that basically one would be added to any train operating in a region that requires them. Not sure if they'd be on a front or rear.


----------



## Jscullans (Jul 8, 2019)

As far as the caboose on the rear I’m not sure that’s actually prototypical for every train. At least in modern times. The csx switches a glue plant I work at on occasion and they have had an old caboose tied onto the power while switching cars. That’s usually when we have a polar vortex come in and it’s dangerously cold so the train crew can have somewhere warm to hide when they’re not throwing turnouts or tying cars together. That’s the only place I’ve seen an operational caboose that I can ever remember though. They were gone before my time


----------



## Chaostrain (Jan 27, 2015)

A lot of times one or more of the buffer cars is a boxcar with the equipment needed for a hazmat spill. When I see oil trains go by they have one between the engine and tankers and one at the end of the train.


----------



## Atlanta (Apr 29, 2019)

Hey Ya'll,

a train is defined by in minimum one locomotive followed by one car. 

A railcar unit can be defined as train, too when the all cars are driven or only one car of the unit.

Two locomotives coupled behind each other and running without cars behind them call locomotive train. It will be unimportant if the second loco is running powered or unpowered.









Not the shortest train I have seen.

Ya Ingo


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

Jscullans said:


> As far as the caboose on the rear I’m not sure that’s actually prototypical for every train. At least in modern times. The csx switches a glue plant I work at on occasion and they have had an old caboose tied onto the power while switching cars. That’s usually when we have a polar vortex come in and it’s dangerously cold so the train crew can have somewhere warm to hide when they’re not throwing turnouts or tying cars together. That’s the only place I’ve seen an operational caboose that I can ever remember though. They were gone before my time


Cabooses generally haven't been used on the rear of trains since the early nineties.

The only cabooses still in service are used as a riding platform for long shoving moves in places where such things are routinely required.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

Atlanta said:


> a train is defined by in minimum one locomotive followed by one car.


Did you even read the rest of the thread?


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

Dennis has it right in post 2 above, as per the operating rules. That was the definition of "a train" from the time I hired out in 1979 until I retired in 2012.

A "train" could be...
- A single "lite" locomotive (with markers)
- A multiple-unit locomotive consist (with markers)
- One or more engines with a caboose (with markers)
- One or more engines with one or more cars with/without caboose (with markers)

This would constitute "a train" operating on the main or secondary track.

Of course, working back-and-forth in the yard, a conductor or brakeman might call to the engineer on the radio "far enough, stop your train". But in the yard, it's not really "a train", just a cut of cars, but that would do.

On my small layout, I normally run an engine, 4-7 cars, and a caboose.
That's enough of a "train" for me, these days!


----------



## Tallaman (Oct 23, 2012)

Interesting. CSX has an online railroad dictionary and it defines train as "an engine, with or without cars, displaying a marker."


----------



## Atlanta (Apr 29, 2019)

Indeed thats right!
A train is one or are more vehicles between the headlight and end of train markers. It could be a single loco, too.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

Tallaman said:


> Interesting. CSX has an online railroad dictionary and it defines train as "an engine, with or without cars, displaying a marker."


When you think about it for purposes of operation, even a single engine working it's way 'light' between signals on any one block in signal-controlled territory has to be treated like something blocks were meant to control...trains. Whether a train has distributed power, is two miles long, and is moving or not, it controls the block in which it is found. That's what blocks and signals are meant to keep safe. A single engine occupying the block/space between two signals 'owns' that space as much as the much longer train ahead of it in its own block.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

mesenteria said:


> When you think about it for purposes of operation, even a single engine working it's way 'light' between signals on any one block in signal-controlled territory has to be treated like something blocks were meant to control...trains. Whether a train has distributed power, is two miles long, and is moving or not, it controls the block in which it is found. That's what blocks and signals are meant to keep safe. A single engine occupying the block/space between two signals 'owns' that space as much as the much longer train ahead of it in its own block.


Not just signals but any form of dispatching and movement control and authorization.

Doesn't matter if it's 0 cars or 200, all the same rules must apply.


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

*4014 follows this definetion*

From UP rules, 2019

Train
One or more engines coupled, with or without cars, displaying a marker, and authorized to operate on a main track. A term that
when used in connection with speed restrictions, flag protection, and the observance of all signals and signal rules also applies
to engines.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

cv_acr said:


> Not just signals but any form of dispatching and movement control and authorization.
> 
> Doesn't matter if it's 0 cars or 200, all the same rules must apply.


Agreed, but my point was that even a single engine running light is a train if it occupies a block, contrary to at least one member's statement of fact earlier. Doesn't have to have markers or even cars. If it is deemed to have occupied a block, it is de facto dispatched, so it's a train...light or 'laden'. No two trains can/ought to occupy the same block. Whether it's a lone engine or not is entirely irrelevant because, if it's in the block, it occupies the block, and must be considered a 'train'.


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

On my layout, if there is a locomotive, and it is pulling cars behind it, and it LOOKs like a train. 

It is a train.

Keep it simple. If you like the look, go with it!


----------



## Atlanta (Apr 29, 2019)

Signalmen onto signalboxes or interlockting towers are advanced to look on every passing train or vehicle moving by onto RR track if it will have a deisplayed End of Train Marker or red Lantern(s).

Such rules are still valid onto mechanical or elektric mechanical interlocking towers in germany as example.


----------



## pumasheed (Feb 18, 2017)

Chip said:


> Running a loco is not "running a train" how many cars behind a loco does it take before it is a "train" 1?...3? Is there a particular number? Is there a particular ORDER of cars? We all know the caboose goes at the back but what about the "middle"? Is there a "proto" order? Box cars before tank cars etc?
> 
> Thank You for any information and Happy Rolling.


Very simply...a train is a locomotive(s) with at least 1 car.


----------



## pumasheed (Feb 18, 2017)

mesenteria said:


> Agreed, but my point was that even a single engine running light is a train if it occupies a block, contrary to at least one member's statement of fact earlier. Doesn't have to have markers or even cars. If it is deemed to have occupied a block, it is de facto dispatched, so it's a train...light or 'laden'. No two trains can/ought to occupy the same block. Whether it's a lone engine or not is entirely irrelevant because, if it's in the block, it occupies the block, and must be considered a 'train'.


Locomotives regardless to how many without cars are considered light power, not trains irregardless of where its occupying blocks, etc...

Yes, trains can occupy the same block...do it all the time. TWC, Dark territory, suspended, cab signal indication, etc... 

Light power moves must have a functioning rear headlight(dim), EOT or red flag(daylight only) when on the main. 

Dispatchers see train symbols. Yardmasters typically lets the dispatchers know what's what in any given area. Its not assumed that every symbols is a train by definition.


----------



## GlennL (Dec 18, 2016)

I think a judge once said, “ I know a train when I see one and this is a train”
Or was that something else he was talking about?
A bunch of cars without an engine isn’t a train, but an engine without cars can be a train. That’s my take anyway. 

I position cars on my trains, based on color, Same sized box cars and I have to move the longer O boxcars to the back so they don’t pull over going around tighter corners. I try to keep the cigar ones with the liquor ones.


----------



## rogruth (Mar 6, 2012)

Is it possible that the definition could be different with different railroads and different times? In my younger days in eastern Ohio two railroads, the PRR and the B&O, through town employed many local people. This would have been @ 1940 to mid 1950s. They usually referred to a train as a loco and caboose ( cabin car on the PRR ). Of course this might have been local usage.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

pumasheed said:


> Locomotives regardless to how many without cars are considered light power, not trains irregardless of where its occupying blocks, etc...


Not quite correct. "Light power" is specifically a term for an engine with no cars, but such a move absolutely can be a "train" as discussed extensively here.



pumasheed said:


> Light power moves must have a functioning rear headlight(dim), EOT or red flag(daylight only) when on the main.


That's the "marker(s)" required by the rule.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

rogruth said:


> Is it possible that the definition could be different with different railroads and different times? In my younger days in eastern Ohio two railroads, the PRR and the B&O, through town employed many local people. This would have been @ 1940 to mid 1950s. They usually referred to a train as a loco and caboose ( cabin car on the PRR ). Of course this might have been local usage.


Actually the definition really doesn't change much by era.

In pretty much any era, a train is a loco, with or without cars, and markers. 

On passenger trains, markers are hung on the last car and there is no caboose. All passenger cars had mounting brackets for the marker lanterns.

On freight trains, the markers were typically hung on the caboose. Freight cars don't have brackets for marker lanterns. In the 1940s-50s train crews were much larger with at least 5 guys, compared to two today. According to the rulebook, a caboose isn't required to make it a train, just markers - but according to crew requirements, a freight crew requires the accomodation.

When operating practices and labour agreements allowed crew sizes to be cut down and cabooses eliminated, they replaced the caboose with the EOT or "FRED" (flashing rear end device). The reason the end-of train device includes a flashing red light is that it functions as the marker under the rule in addition to its brake sensing functions etc.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

It should also be noted that "displaying a marker" can mean several things:
- it could be illuminated red lights (such as on the end of a passenger car or on some locomotives)
- it could be an "end of train device" (standard equipment on modern freights)
- it could be a portable flashing marker (simple flashing light that doesn't transmit end-of-train data to the head end)
- it could be a simple flag stuck into the knuckle or hung on the back of a caboose

I've run trains with ALL of these.
All were "trains", because they had:
a. an engine
b. with or without cars
c. displaying a marker.


----------



## pumasheed (Feb 18, 2017)

cv_acr said:


> Not quite correct. "Light power" is specifically a term for an engine with no cars, but such a move absolutely can be a "train" as discussed extensively here.
> 
> 
> 
> That's the "marker(s)" required by the rule.


Thanks for your response, but I'm truly confident that what I quoted you is 100% correct. If not for possibilities of weird reactions and/or actions I would love to list what qualifies me and current occupation. But this social media thing can get out of hand for no good reason whatsoever.

Rules are only narratives of regulations and tend to change/update frequently within the various class 1 railroads. Any railroad can make rules, but again, if they are class 1, regulation must be abided without fail. 

I will guarantee you that if any railroad in question are FRA applicable, I am 100% correct. Railroad companies/subs ie, commuter, private transfers, that DO NOT operate on the general railroad system are not binded by the FRA regulation. Keep in mind, that some short lines and commuter line do operate on class 1 trackage.

Whew...I know I probably just confused everyone, but sometimes the general public will get a hold of rules and don't know the intent or application. Also, keep in mind that with the rules, there are also SGO's and SSI that applications and revisions as needed. As the GCOR is very general for all railroad to which it applies. General Code of Operating Rules.

Hope I made sense in my rambling.

The regulations are public and are easily accessible...if I recall correctly... regulation part 232 specifically section 5 (232.5/definitions) will help you better understand what I just mentioned.


----------

