The Train Wire: A Discussion of the Science of Train Dispatching / (Second Edition)

by John Alexander Anderson

The relative succession in which the offices are to repeat should be fixed by rule or usage, to avoid doubt or conflict. It is better that the repeating be done in the same succession as that in which the several offices are addressed. This assures the repeating first by the office receiving for the superior train. As a valuable precaution against error, each should be required to listen while the others repeat. An operator has been known to hear the name of a meeting-place correctly, write it down incorrectly in the order and repeat it back correctly. If he had looked at his copy as the other repeated, he would probably have noticed his error.

In this connection it may be observed that too much importance cannot be attached to the cultivation of a careful habit in telegraphing orders. A certain degree of rapidity in handling the key is not inconsistent with distinctness, but the latter should never be sacrificed to haste and a hurried and careless style of telegraphing should never be permitted.

The operator in the Dispatcher's office should carefully observe each word as repeated by each, to make sure that all is repeated correctly. Some observe the commendable practice of underscoring each word as repeated, thus making sure that their attention is not withdrawn. If the Dispatcher transmits his orders himself and his copy for record is made as the order is repeated, as is the practice of some, his copy can hardly be said to be an original. It may vary from what was sent or designed to be sent, and his operator taking it down has not the opportunity of checking as above, and may himself make a mistake in receiving it. All offices required at the time to repeat an order should do so before the Dispatcher replies. The signal for this reply now generally used, and adopted for the "Standard" Code, is "O K." This is given simultaneously to all, naming each, and each should acknowledge it. It is important that the Dispatcher should know that each has received the "O K." It is not necessary that the Dispatcher personally authorize this reply. It may be properly done by his operator who has watched the repeating. Where the order is not repeated back until the signatures are obtained and sent with it, the response, "O K" and sometimes "complete" is used to cover the whole, but where the practice herein recommended is pursued, the use of two signals is necessary, "O K" being the first. The time at which the order is sent and "O K" given should be noted on all the copies, with the initials or signals of the operators sending and receiving, and the name or initials of the superintendent. The order is then ready for signature and delivery, and, if the train for which it is designed has not arrived, the train copies should be removed from the book, folded and marked on the outside with the train number, and placed in the rack provided, as indicated under The Train-Order Signal.

Practice has varied very much in the method of delivering orders. Some have simply had them authenticated by repeating back as above, with perhaps the proviso that the trainmen compare their copies with that of the operator, and in some cases sign for them. The transmitting of signatures has not in all cases been required. Many rules, especially those of early date, appear to be based on the idea that the whole process of sending, verifying, and acknowledging an order is to be continuous and while the train is at the station. Much that appears in some rules gives the impression that either this idea prevailed or that the phraseology used in connection with it was retained while the practice had changed. On a busy road it would certainly be impracticable to carry out this idea, and it is not now usually attempted.

In early days of train telegraphy, when orders were not prepared with the precision of the present day, it was the custom to add to the order the phrase "how do you understand?" This came to be represented by a signal, the most generally used perhaps being the numeral "31." The reply to this, preceded by "we understand we are to," represented by "13" or other numeral, was required to be written out by the trainmen as their "understanding." This was probably in most cases a verbatim copy of the order. Whether this was actually done by the conductor and engineman is doubtful. Some allowed the operator to do it. With the definite forms of orders now used and well understood, there is certainly no necessity for men to write out their "understanding." The manifold copies, authenticated by repeating back and compared by reading aloud, which also serves to impress the order on the men, must certainly be better than anything written by or for them. There would seem to be no reason for perpetuating a fiction by referring to the repeating of the order as the "understanding" or by the use of "31" and "13" in their original sense, when the question and answer which they represent are no longer designed to be used, and this practice and the expressions which arose under it have almost entirely given place to the improved methods.

Following, then, the practice here recommended and now generally used, the message has been placed in the hands of the operator and its verbal accuracy assured, and the train-order signal being in position to stop the train, the conductor and engineman understand that on arrival they are to go to the office "for orders." One of them (or the operator) should read the order aloud while each looks at his copy, the object being to guard against a hurried reading of the order, to acquaint them fully with its exact terms, and to impress its purport upon them. It is to be hoped that no man would willfully disregard a train order, but there are many who would proceed upon a hasty examination or none at all, if permitted to do so, and perhaps on a wrong impression as to what it directs to be done.

The order having been thus read and compared, the signatures should be taken on the operator's copy. From the many rules forbidding operators to sign for trainmen, and conductors for enginemen, it would seem probable that this is sometimes done. This is a practice which no considerations of convenience can justify. Personal signatures should be insisted upon. Without this there is danger that men will hastily "grab" an order and fail to get its meaning. Time is well spent in securing their particular attention to it, and their signatures attest that this has been done.

There is much difference of opinion as to whether it is important to take the signature of the engineman. Much time is often lost by taking him from his engine, particularly on very long trains, and some think that the purpose is as well served by having his copy delivered to him by the conductor. In the latter plan there is some danger that the attention of the engineman may not be particularly called to the purport of the order, and for this reason the author believes that the practice is best where both signatures are required. The Time Convention code leaves the choice optional.

The signatures having been obtained, the Dispatcher is to be advised, by their transmission to him, in connection with the number of the order signed for and the train number or designation. The reply that all is satisfactory, authorized by the Dispatcher personally, is then to be given in some prescribed form. The word "complete" has been adopted in the "Standard Code," superseding "correct," which was formerly used.

The selected word should be written on each copy, with the exact time at which it was given. The order may then be delivered, and the train order signal so placed as to allow the train to proceed. If the Dispatcher's office is also used as an office for delivering orders, the same formalities in delivery should be observed as at way offices.