Omaha daily bee., 1919-06-15
COST OF STOPPING A TRAIN.

What does 1t cost to stop rail-
road train? 1t depends on the size
Of the train and its speed. Esti-
mates run from, about 80 cents for
light train up to as high as $1.75
for a heavy freight, and they do
not, Of course, always agree. The
subject interests railroad men at the
present time, we are told by G. C.
Anthony, former assistant signal en-
gineer of the Pennsylvania, because
the necessity Of stopping at certain
points Is obviated by the use of sig
nails, and 1t is desirable to know
the exact saving. Writing in The
Railway Age New York, May o..
Mr.. Anthony tells us that at rail-
way crossings, in the absence of in
terlocking signals, the stoppage of
trains is now generally required by
Jaw. The same requirement may
be made by usage, or by the regula-
tons of state railway commissions,
at other points, such as drawbridges
and functions. 1t may be seen that
when we count the cost Of stopping
many trains daily at a considerable
number Of points, the annual bill
may foot up to an amount that is
ton. Says the writer:
'It is likely that many railroad
officers view with gentle suspicion
that estimates that have been pre-
pared to show the operating econo-
mics effected by the installation Of
signals or interlocking, because Of
the favorable showing made, and,
besides, there may be little hope
that the predicted benefits can be
detected after the work is done.
Nevertheless, in many cases the
benefits are real, however difficult
1t may be to show beyond question
their money value.
Impossible as it may be to de-
termine the cost Of stops with GER
tainty, and difficult as it may be to
see in the operating results the saw
ing effected by eliminating certain
stops, nevertheless this saving is
real money In addition to such
direct financial saving there is the
elimination of damage in starting
heavy freight trains, and the general
improvement in train movement due
to cutting out the stopping OF all
trains at certain point. The cost
of the damage to trains may be in
cluded in the cost Of the stops, but
even II it Is, the indirect and some
times quite far-reaching effects in
the way of accommodating delays,
both to the damaged and to other
trains, may mean considerable loss
In the course of year. So, too,
with the general improvement in
train movement. 1t is not merely
q matter Of saving so many min
utes per train, lost in the stops. The
few minutes lost by freight train
In stopping at crossing may mean
bad combination in meets and
passes on all the rest Of the run, re-
sulting in many times the original
delay before the terminal is reached;
and other trains may suffer at the
same time. If it is not always, or
often, possible to show the money
loss from such arrangements of the
movement, the elimination Of one
cause of them means, as every one
knows, real benefit thrown in for
good measure above more definite
money savings.
Although there is no quick and
easy way of showing beyond dispute
just what saving will result from
eliminating stops Of trains by in
stalling interlocking in a given case.
the result can, with proper conser-
vatism, be estimated convincingly.
As interlocking costs and the cost Of
stopping trains have both risen,
though probably not in just the same
proportion, it is safe to say that the
relation, as estimated years ago, Is
not now very far wrong, or at any
rate is not too favorable to inter-
locking for general purposes-Liter-
ery Digest.