Re: Why Transfer cabooses?

Richard Townsend
 

As long as we're doing cabooses, was the use of side doors on cabooses also controlled by state law? Was there a nationwide ban on side door cabooses at some point?

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
To: main <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, May 21, 2018 3:12 pm
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Why Transfer cabooses?

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 02:17 pm, Aley, Jeff A wrote:
But if bobber (4-wheel) cabooses were outlawed in interchange (and Transfer service IS interchange, is it not?), then they couldn’t use their old 4-wheelers.
 
Let's not confuse this... while many things can be traced back to the AAR/ARA/MCB interchange agreement, this is not one of them. The examples that people have been presenting are in response to state laws that have to do with workplace safety, specifically the safety of train crews. I thought this was also an ICC edict, but I may well be wrong, given the number of examples of four wheel cabooses in use to WWII and slightly beyond, but they were required to have steel underframes like their big brothers, this under regulation of the ICC, which aside from rate making, was charged by Congress to administer the Safety Appliance Act.

Dennis Storzek

Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.