George Andrews Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> To OPRRMS, which part of my statement regarding
> computers is not true ???

I'd say all of it.

> Consider the following:
> Desktop controls, microprocessors, electronic fuel
> injection & prime mover emissions controls, even
> the horn operation,( push a button for a pre -
> programmed 'long - long - short - long '
> sequence), oh yea, blow the horn and the ditch
> lights alternate flashing. You think all this is
> done with tubes & servos ??? How about GenSet
> locomotives ??? The onboard computer determines
> when to turn on the charging engines, and how
> many. I have recently read of a new train brake
> module, computer controlled, that will simplify
> the mess of hoses & valves under the cab floor,
> and allow for extended ops betweens required
> inspections. Let's not forget Distributed Power
> Unit controls, GPS tracking, and coming soon :
> Positive Train Controls.

All of what you have described are components of the locomotive, and all are reactive to something the engineer does. Now, someday there may indeed be computer-operated locomotives - the GE / UP test trains that were run last year were mostly successful, and VTMS that UP is currently testing in three areas may one day take over that function - since it's been around for a long time in industrial and transit applications.

> One last thing, if modern locomotives are NOT
> computer controlled, why did YOU mention that "
> The ( Amtrak ) P - 42's are notorious for their
> computer problems" ???

Why? Because they are! But go back and reread what was posted about the P-42s. Their computer problems result in the locomotive not responding to power commands requested by the engineer. For example, won't move after stopping when the engineer advances the throttle. And why's that? Because one or more microprocessors called an error.