theconductor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > OK. Say you're 6X's out at your home terminal
> of
> > a double ended pool. Four crews from the other
> > terminal come into your terminal. As soon as
> > they're rested they go 1st through 4th out, and
> > you and the five people above you drop bellow
> them
> > accordingly. So in this scenario, you've now
> gone
> > from being 6th out to 10th out. The railroad
> > would still run the same number of train, but
> > you'd be further down the list, thus you'd have
> > more time at home.
>
> I understand that and I'm really not trying to be
> difficult. If you tie up 6X out on a double ended
> pool and eventually move to 10th, you would most
> likely already be tying up 10 times out one the
> same pool if it only had one home terminal. There
> would be the same amount of people on the pool,
> they would accumulate at the home terminal. Say we
> have 20 people on our pool. If we took 10 of them
> and based them at the AFHT, then there would be 10
> less conductors to tie up behind at home.

Not necessarily. Having a single ended pool typically requires less crews than a double ended pool, so there's no guarantee that there'd be twice as many people at the home terminal of a single ended pool, especially if it's location where there's an adequate source of supply to run "made up" crews. A single ended pool also removes the ability for crews to have shorter layovers at their away from home terminal, since they'd stay in turn and wouldn't be shoved ahead. Me, personally, I'd always rather have more time at home.