Shunting (rail)

(Redirected from Shunt (rail))

Shunting, in railway operations, is the process of sorting items of rolling stock into complete trains, or the reverse. In the United States this activity is known as switching.

A CIE 141 Class shunting the Enterprise rolling stock to enable a NIR Class 111 to haul a service from Dublin Connolly to Belfast Central in 1985
Railway shunting capstan found at site of former Hull and Barnsley Railway sidings south of Springhead works
A heavy steam shunting locomotive, SR Z class, Great Britain

Motive power

edit

Motive power is normally provided by a locomotive known as a shunter locomotive (in the UK) or switcher locomotive (in the US). Most shunter/switchers are now diesel-powered but steam and even electric locomotives have been used. Where locomotives could not be used (e.g. because of weight restrictions) shunting operations have in the past been effected by horses or capstans.

Hazards

edit

Coupling

edit

The terms "shunter" and "switcher" are not only applied to locomotives but also to employees engaged on the ground with shunting/switching operations. The task of such personnel is particularly dangerous because not only is there the risk of being run over, but on some railway systems—particularly ones that use buffer-and-chain/screw coupling systems—the shunters have to get between the wagons/carriages in order to complete coupling and uncoupling. This was particularly so in the past. The Midland Railway company, for example, kept an ambulance wagon permanently stationed at Toton Yard to give treatment to injured shunters.

Of the 20,964 staff accidents in the UK that were investigated by the Railway Inspectorate between 1900 and 1939 (around 3% of all staff accidents), 6701 have been classified as involving shunting. Of those 6701 cases, 1033 were fatalities. All of the 20,964 Railway Inspectorate accident investigations have been transcribed and made freely available by the Railway Work, Life & Death project, along with around 28,000 other cases.[1]

 
Light dual-mode (electric and diesel) shunter SBB Tem 346 at work on the Swiss Federal Railways

The main tool of shunters working with hook-and-chain couplings was a shunting pole, which allowed the shunter to reach between wagons to fasten and unfasten couplings without having physically to go between the vehicles. This type of shunting pole was of an entirely different design than objects of the same name in North American practice (see below).[2]

Poling

edit
 
A shunting pole preserved at the National Railroad Museum in Green Bay, Wisconsin, US

In some countries, a pole was sometimes used to move cars on adjacent tracks. In the United States this procedure was known as "pole switching" or "poling" for short. In the UK it was known as "propping." In these instances, the locomotive or another car was moved to be near the car that needed to be moved. The on-ground railwayman would then position a wooden pole, which was sometimes permanently attached to the locomotive, and engage it in the poling pocket of the car that needed to be moved. The engineer would then use the pole to push the car on the adjacent track.[3][4][5][6][7] Before poling pockets or poles were common on switching locomotives, some US railroads built specialized poling cars which could be coupled to locomotives that lacked poling pockets.[8][9] The practice was most prevalent in rail yard operations circa 1900.[10] Poling was the cause of some accidents and in later years was discouraged before the practice was abandoned.[11][12][13][14][15]

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^ Esbester, Mike (27 March 2023). "The Accidents". Railway Work, Life & Death. Retrieved 28 June 2023.
  2. ^ "Tools of the trade". Barrow Hill Roundhouse. Retrieved April 11, 2021.
  3. ^ Haines, Henry Stevens (1919). Efficient Railway Operation. New York: The Macmillan Company. p. 276 – via Internet Archive. poling pocket.
  4. ^ Middleton, William D.; Smerk, George; Diehl, Roberta L., eds. (2007). "Poling Yards". Encyclopedia of North American Railroads. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. p. 281. ISBN 978-0-253-34916-3 – via Google Books.
  5. ^ Droege, John Albert (1906). "Chapter X: Pole Switching". Yards and Terminals and Their Operation. New York: The Railroad Gazette. pp. 97–103 – via Google Books.
  6. ^ "Patent 1,263,426. Push-Pole Pocket For Railway Cars". Official Gazette of the United States Patent Office. Vol. 249. Washington: Government Printing Office. April 1918. p. 765 – via Google Books.
  7. ^ "Poling on railroads - Ask Trains from the March 2015 issue". Kalmbach Publishing. February 15, 2017. Retrieved July 6, 2018.
  8. ^ "Erie Poling Car". Railroad Gazette. Vol. 26. October 26, 1894. p. 787 – via Google Books.
  9. ^ "Railroad Men and Matters". New York Times. November 8, 1894. p. 8 – via Newspapers.com.  
  10. ^ Loree, Leonor F. (1922). Railroad Freight Transportation. D. Appleton. p. 46 – via Internet Archive. railroad poling.
  11. ^ "Is Severely Hurt". Princeton Daily Clarion. Princeton, IN. January 10, 1910. p. 1 – via Newspapers.com.  
  12. ^ Ohio. Commissioner of Railroads and Telegraphs (1883). Annual Report of the Commissioner of Railroads and Telegraphs. Columbus: Myers Brothers. p. 1140 – via Google Books.
  13. ^ Harrington, Daniel; Worcester, A.W.; East, J.H. (1950). Information on the Prevention of Quarry Accidents. U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 50 – via Google Books.
  14. ^ Aldrich, Mark (2006). Death Rode the Rails: American Railroad Accidents and Safety, 1828–1965. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. p. (n.p.). ISBN 978-0-8018-8236-4 – via Google Books.
  15. ^ Esbester, Mike (29 October 2020). "'Improper propping'". Railway Work, Life & Death. Retrieved 28 June 2023.

Further reading

edit
  • Bostel, Nathalie; Dejax, Pierre (1998). "Models and algorithms for container allocation problems on trains in a rapid transshipment shunting yard". Transportation Science. 32 (4): 370–379. doi:10.1287/trsc.32.4.370.
  • Boysen, Nils (2012). "Shunting yard operations: Theoretical aspects and applications". European Journal of Operational Research. 220 (1). et al: 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2012.01.043.