Stu Bennet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can someone explain what's up with the way UP
> handles crewbase locations and train assignments?
> It seems like they tend to put all their eggs in
> one basket so to speak. For example, I've noticed
> in Northern California, the vast majority of the
> crewbases only crew locals and switchers, with
> Roseville supplying road crews for trains that
> originate/terminate or change crews at other
> crewbases that are treated mainly as away
> terminals. For example Roseville has the
> Roseville-Oakland, Roseville-Dunsmuir, and
> Roseville-Milpitas pools all to itself despite
> Oakland, Dunsmuir, and Milpitas having their own
> crewbases. It seems to me like this just creates a
> very unbalanced system, with alot of crews working
> out of one terminal, with the others relegated to
> mainly local duty.

Unlike the way it was when it was the SP and double-ended freight pools were common, UP uses a Hub and Zone concept for TE&Y crews at most locations, including in the Roseville Service Unit. Roseville is the "hub" of the Hub, with most freight pools having their home terminal there. However, UP can run "Made Up" crews out of the away-from-home terminals using an engineer and conductor from the "away" point. There is some deadheading (and occasional cross-deadheading), but not a lot. UP thinks it work great, apparently, so that's all that matters.

If there's one thing I've learned since 9/11/1996, it's that a lot of what UP does doesn't make much sense. Like, not having nearly enough four-axle units to cover all the assignments, resulting in crews having to "share" locomotives during a shift. Oh, well. Only 24 more days left to serve on my sentence . . .