A
Anonymous05/25/25, 06:33No.2041354Passenger cabooses
Why weren't these a thing more often in the heyday of railroads?
>gives freight trains an additional source of income
>passengers can presumably pay for tickets less since freight trains usually run on slower schedules
>allows for mixed trains without the need to pull a coach from regular passenger service
>can be coupled to the back of a regular passenger train during periods of high demand, the crew will enjoy the added privacy too
>lonely freight train crews will enjoy the additional company
>can be outfitted as extra crew accommodation when not in revenue service
33
Replies
A
Anon05/25/25, 07:59No.2041356
>have to now provide passenger services
>may need to adjust routes
>regs may mirror FAA regs requiring a minimum stewardess:passenger ratio
>all for a pittance
A
Anon05/25/25, 08:15No.2041360
composite brake vans weren't uncommon for UK railroads but IDK about mixed traffic trains, I imagine they were really only a thing on quiet branch lines and private railways
one of the private mining railways near me on the west coast of Tasmania, the North Mount Lyell Copper Company line to Pillinger had composite brake vans too but this was a short lived industrial railway, I figure mixed traffic services are more of a "short line" thing
A
Anon05/25/25, 08:25No.2041361
Passenger rail, never ever, provides good margins. This makes intuitive sense if you consider the load density of coal.
For passenger travel to make sense you need to move as many people in terms of revenue, consistently, as you get from one 34K gallon tank car. And without the crew needs since that's a payroll. Crude oil doesn't need a functioning shitter to smoke in.
Mail was the lifeblood of railroad profitability in many cases, and that moving to trucks removed any reason for railroads to do anything but take low value bulk goods from one port or intermodal depot to another, with the longest train possible before the couplers start to snap.
A
Anon05/25/25, 08:26No.2041362
>long and heavy freight trains now need to make regular stops for passengers getting on and off, raising energy costs for the train higher than the additional income from a few passengers
No, seriously, these things had their use on branch lines with just a few lighter freight trains per day. Even in parts of Europe this wasn't uncommon, so they definitely were a thing, but I'd guess they never got a lot of attention precisely because they were used on lines with low ridership.
A
Anon05/26/25, 05:20No.2041435
For such a small number of passengers and presumably short haul freight, it's way easier to slap some freight cars behind a doodlebug.
A
Anon05/26/25, 11:49No.2041452
passenger cabooses do not pair well with freight filled with manure/smelly shit
A
Anon06/03/25, 17:44No.2042477
I'd love me self a Czech or Slovak BDs wagon. Freight for bicycles, heavy luggage and conductor compartment with that protrusing three piece window and passenger 6 seater compartments combined.
A
Anon06/10/25, 17:56No.2043395
>slack action
a caboose at the end of a freight train, especially one with a a few car lengths of slack, is subject to extreme violence. you can be teleported from one end to the other if you have a rough engineer
>liability
making your freights into passenger trains exposes you to a high level of legal risk for the upside of the fares of only a few passengers
>facilities
people need food, water, and a place to shit. crews pack lunches, the rr provides drinking water for crews, and shits are taken in the woods or on the motor. you can't allow passengers to starve or get thirsty and you must keep the bathroom clean, so this requires at least one employee to tend to the maximum thirty passengers but likely much fewer.
>initial terminal
entire freight trains do not idly sit by for days, a crew builds the train from different tracks every day. the best possible method requires having the caboose stored in a regular location, loading passengers and supplies from a building, then doubling the finished train over onto the caboose. with all the time consuming variables involved in building and airtesting the train, the passengers may wait for hours before the train is even built.
>final terminal
the passengers need to know where they are getting off. rail yards are often miles long and the freight can't just drop the caboose anywhere. an inconvenient move to a caboose passenger platform can cost an hour and depending on the layout interfere with other crewsmy rr operates mixed freights (regular passenger train with freight cars on rear) if there are hot cars or issues with the regular freights. it works out ok, you just go to the depot with a yard motor and pull the cars off/slap some cars on. the downside is excess slack action, lower speeds, and the fact that you are often carrying hazmat on the same train as passengers.
A
Anon07/07/25, 11:21No.2047669
>gives freight trains an additional source of incomeMost "Local" passenger service was just whatever random crap that the government forced railroads to keep running, so it would be kinda stupid to slow down freight, the main source of income, just for a line that would, at most, make a few dozen bucks a month.>passengers can presumably pay for tickets less since freight trains usually run on slower schedulesMost railroads usually had fixed rates for passenger service, Now I'm not saying you'd pay the same for the 20th century and a train to smalltown, but most smaller services were typically the same price>allows for mixed trains without the need to pull a coach from regular passenger serviceMixed trains were pretty rare, especially in North America, Freight and Passenger were separate tasks with separate locomotives>can be coupled to the back of a regular passenger train during periods of high demand, the crew will enjoy the added privacy tooMost passenger equipment was.. Not really MODULAR, but had a standard design, mostly to make repairs and maintenance easier. If something broke on one car, the part could just be pinched from another.>lonely freight train crews will enjoy the additional companyI worked on Norfolk Southern for five years, I'd rather kill myself then have to deal with the sheer amount of foamtards these days>can be outfitted as extra crew accommodation when not in revenue servicethis ones actually a kinda good point i admit
A
Anon07/09/25, 02:52No.2047901
Wasn't they called a cattleman's car?
A
Anon08/04/25, 02:40No.2050459
>lonely freight train crews will enjoy the additional companyNo one wants grumpy passengers as company
A
Anon09/28/25, 15:57No.2054792
Sacrificed crew space for a relatively minuscule number of passenger seats
A
Anon10/20/25, 13:38No.2056642
We need to bring back cabooses
A
Anon10/20/25, 14:41No.2056653
all that trouble to be slower and less flexible than a bus.
however, consider: passenger containers on a container ship.
A
Anon10/20/25, 14:42No.2056654
imagine the views
A
Anon10/21/25, 00:41No.2056697
here in Chicago I sometimes see a CNW caboose roaming around in active service.
A
Anon12/26/25, 09:22No.2061938
>fire regulations for a shipping containerAren't they already pretty fire resistant owing to their all-steel construction? Or do you mean things like installing electrical wiring/stoves in one?
