The controversy over locomotive remote control in the U.S. continues to boil, frustrating suppliers. The FRA can get things to simmer down, but few believe that will happen.

By William C. Vantuono, Editor

Opinions on remote control for yard locomotives tend to run to extremes. The technology is either reviled as unsafe and job-threatening or touted as a productivity-enhancing tool that, in the long run, will create jobs. There is no middle ground. But where labor and management are concerned, that's what will have to be reached if remote control is to come into widespread use in the U.S., as it has in Canada.

The United Transportation Union's opposition to remote control is typical of the polarization that has occurred. UTU characterizes the technology as "dangerous," despite evidence strongly suggesting otherwise. According to CANAC, whose Beltpack technology is used extensively in Canada, there have been no accidents attributable to remote control in over 1.5 million hours of operation. To date, 1,665 operators have been trained on Beltpack, and over 125,000 shifts have used it. Yard operations that converted to Beltpack have seen accidents reduced by almost half.

Though there is a growing U.S. industrial market for remote control, railroad applications have thus far been limited to a handful of small carriers. The principal suppliers of remote control-CANAC (and its U.S. acquisition Vectran), CATTRON, Telemotive, and Theimeg-remain optimistic that the locomotive market in the U.S. will open up, though they don't anticipate anytime soon.

The suppliers' frustration is evident in comments made to Railway Age, especially where the Federal Railroad Administration is concerned. The perception is that FRA is embroiled in the sensitive and often bitter politics of job protection. One industry veteran said the issue "will go away if a Republican president is elected in November." Another said remote control "is buried for this administration."

"The FRA is supposed to be supporting new technology," says one supplier. "Here, they're preventing it. Remote control is leading edge-not bleeding edge-technology. There is a way to work with the unions to implement it in the U.S., as has been done successfully in Canada, but the FRA doesn't want to define what that is." This supplier feels that the FRA's perception of remote control is overly simplistic: "They think we're trying to adapt a garage door opener to a locomotive. The technology has been around more than 50 years and has proven itself, but the FRA doesn't want to recognize that. They have stepped in and said this a technology they feel is not safe to use on the railroads. Yet it's used everywhere else."

The FRA, when queried about the perception that it's dragging its heels, indicated that there may be some movement later this year. "We're trying to bring the industry stakeholders together," said Associate Administrator for Safety George Gavalla. "Where and how is remote control being used? What are the safety and operational issues? We don't have a real good sense of that right now. We want to be in a better position to determine what, if anything, needs to be done. We can understand and sympathize with where the vendors are coming from, but we have to take a broader perspective. I hope we can get something going within the next couple of months."

The real issue here is productivity. If railroad costs go down, advocates say, the savings are passed on to customers. Thus, efficiency improvements in yard switching will lead to increased business. This in turn will create jobs-though more likely behind a computer than a locomotive throttle. So it's more of a job shift than job elimination.

But there are operating jobs at stake, and that's mainly why remote control has become an emotionally-charged political issue, rather than a safety or an economic issue. "The jobs the unions believe remote control will eliminate are some of the most attractive jobs," said one railroad official. "These are the yard jobs-predictable hours, five days a week, in a locomotive cab. We're dealing with shifting those people to road jobs, or putting them on the ground in all kinds of weather." Most observers feel that what's happening in the railroad industry is similar to what other industries experienced many years ago. "Take a look at the steel mills," says one. "There were the same discussions-and the same excuses-20 years ago. Labor finally realized that productivity had to increase to save what jobs were left. The companies that modernized survived."

Suppliers keep busy
Remote control technology, while getting more sophisticated, is become easier and safer than ever to use.

CANAC says its purchase of Vectran illustrates its commitment to the U.S. locomotive remote control market. The company has consolidated production of locomotive products into a new Pittsburgh facility that will double capacity. CANAC is introducing a new product line based on Vectran's VR10. The yet-to-be-named line will incorporate CANAC's Beltpack technology, and "will be the basis for a higher level of reliability, functionality, and versatility." Vectran customers will be able to migrate from a throttle-and-brake product all the way up to a Beltpack-type system with speed control, preserving their Vectran investment. CANAC also says a new Beltpack radio subsystem, which is being retrofitted to existing units, "eliminates loss of communication between remote controller and locomotive."

CATTRON's top-of-the-line, fully-programmable MP (Multi Processor) series of PRRCs (Portable Radio Remote Controls) for locomotives and railcar movers have been enhanced with several new features. The MP series is now available with JS (Joystick) Controllers: JS-T (Joystick Toggle) and JS-P (Joystick Paddle), which will operate with existing systems as replacements or spares. These controllers also feature lightweight, durable, extruded-aluminum/epoxy-coated housings. Remote full instrumentation is available with the TALKBACK feature, which sends such digital status information as direction, engine alarms, wheelslip, and throttle and brake information from the MP decoder to lights or an alpha-numeric display on the controller. The enhanced MP Generation II version offers precise slow-speed control and GPS capability

Telemotive's new 18K Engineered System product line, which will be available in the third quarter of this year, "incorporates the latest developments in electronic programmable circuit design, surface mount manufacturing, and failsafe radio protocols." This system features the new ergonomically designed JLTX Belly Box transmitter, "a lightweight, rugged transmitter with an external battery pack to provide ease of battery recharging." Telemotive has also introduced a pneumatic self-check feature, a five- to seven-second safety check that automatically shuts down the locomotive if a malfunction is detected.

Theimeg's newest offering, called "Clip-On," is a portable unit developed with New Zealand's Tranz Rail that allows remote control of locomotives in a multiple-unit lash-up. The receiving device, equipped with quick-disconnects for MU ports and a gladhand coupling for the air line, functions as the lead unit in an MU consist. It can be easily moved between locomotives, thereby offering greater operational flexibility. Based upon Theimeg's European-spec TH-EC/LO, the domestic model's receiving unit is a single enclosure with wheels. Clip-On is being tested on a unit coal train operated by Western Kentucky Railway, Wheatcroft, Ky.