Waybills, Part 95: role in operation

 The title of this post may seem a little odd — after all, surely the role of waybills in operations is quite clear? But what I mean is something a little more philosophical: what kind of role waybills may play in layout operations. There is a wide spectrum of possibilities, and one can choose whatever fits.

Of course the operation of a particular layout may not require waybills at all. One may simply issue switchlists. In any period later than the early 1960s, this would in fact be prototypical. Or one may run trains that are pre-positioned, perhaps giving full scope to a complex timetable and train order (T&TO) process, with no switching of cars. 

But assuming that waybills in some form are part of an operating scheme (here I would include car card systems also), what are the issues? Obviously one issue is, how complex is the information on the waybill? A prototype waybill contains a great many items of information, and using a full prototype document, even to an experienced operator, can be a challenge to wade through (waybill from the Andy Laurent collection). Which information is the stuff I need to do my job?

In the last decade, there has been a move on the part of a number of layout owners to used a “cut down” or reduced version of the prototype waybill. I am of course among those doing so, producing waybills more like what you see below (as I’ve reported in many previous posts).

But the point is to achieve some semblance of the actual prototype document without all the authentic but extraneous other information on the prototype document. This is, in a sense, a balance between authenticity and efficiency.

So when visiting operators show up at your layout, what do you want them to encounter, as far as waybills? The scene my be something like the photos below, which shows Garry Smith (left) and Dan Burns at Garry’s layout during the Central Indiana regional operating group, called CIRROPS, in 2019 (photo from The Dispatcher’s Office, Vol. 25, October 2019).

I have heard layout owners complain that their “regular” operators can’t stand complicated paperwork. Clearly, there are efficiencies one can devise. An example is color coding on waybills, to guide understanding of where the car goes (which direction from a yard, for example). This isn’t prototypical, but doesn’t really impinge on the “look” of a waybill, so it seems to me a minimal intrusion. Other reduction in waybill complexity can be devised to match the needs of particular crews.

But whatever we do, I urge that the prototype communications be kept in mind. Here’s an example, from the Library of Congress, in the immense files of Jack Delano’s superb wartime photography. This one (negative OWI-13854-E, Library of Congress) is from January 1943, and shows an Indiana Harbor Belt yard clerk at left, giving Conductor Cunningham his train’s waybills.

Another very helpful piece of communication to crews is the agent’s message, something I discussed at length in my recent article in the March 2022 issue of  Model Railroad Hobbyist (you can read my post about it: https://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2022/03/my-column-in-new-model-railroad.html ). In the article, I showed several messages, some of which are quite extensive, but an important thing to notice in these messages is that the work to be done is described, but not how to do it. An agent wouldn’t dream of telling a crew how to do the work, only to make sure that they understand all that had to be done.

I have only touched the surface of this topic in this introductory post. For background, you might wish to look at the excellent OpSIG book, Compendium of Model Railroad Operations (2017). I will expand on these thoughts in future posts.

Tony Thompson