Talk:Caboose

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

cleanup[edit]

Just cleared out graffiti that looked like something from Uncyclopedia. -- Teshel 05:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that the paragraph wasn't appropriate for this article (especially when it uses "u" instead of "you"), but the character name is real. I've created Caboose (disambiguation) and linked to it here. slambo 15:00, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The former lead photo[edit]

I had obtained permission from the photographer to use the caboose lineup photo before uploading it here. I am looking through my email archives to find his response... Slambo (Speak) 15:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once you get the license sorted out in the image page, I think it would be great if you would put the image back in the article. I think a photo of a caboose in operation is much better than a photo of one on display. Rklawton 16:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This reminds me of a photo that I took in the mid 1980s on a trip to the Tehachapi Loop; the photo shows a Santa Fe (I think, but it may have been SP) caboose on the end of a train in a siding while another train passes it on the mainline. I'll see if I can find and scan that one. Slambo (Speak) 16:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't able to find the reply that I got from the photographer, so I went through my own railfanning photos and found the image that's on the article now. Slambo (Speak) 13:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

THat's an excellent image for this point. Thanks for providing it. Mangoe 02:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major Rewrite[edit]

I have redone this article to remove the many inaccuracies and duplications in the previous version.

History[edit]

It says:

(These lights were officially what made a train a "train.")

could someone explain this? Pfalstad 15:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The technical definition of a train in official railroad rulebooks in the US is something like "A train is one or more locomotives, with or without cars, displaying markers." There are variations, but basically, as long as the marker lights were turned on, it was officially a train. The lights marked the front and rear of the train (and sometimes also their color denoted the class of the train and its rights over other trains). So, to be a train in the official sense, a single locomotive with marker lights would qualify. I'll see if I can dig up my rulebooks this weekend for an exact quote. Slambo (Speak) 15:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just tagged that with {{Fact}} before I saw this discussion. I understand it now, but the language is confusing (I thought it was nonsense-vandalism at first), and could probably be better. A quote from a rulebook would be perfect.L Glidewell 21:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Double negative / the word "caboose"[edit]

The article says: "The first cabooses, not unlike the nautical originals, were wooden shanties built on flatcars, as early as the 1830s."

This makes no sense... I assume the "nautical originals" weren't buuilt on flatcars? Not only is the use of a a double negative confusing and inappropriate for an article, it seems outright wrong in this situation.

The push toward GA and FA[edit]

While the {{TrainsWikiProject}} banner does not yet include tags for marking article importance within the project scope, I would place this one pretty highly in importance. I think it's time we start a concerted effort to get this article up to at least GA level (it's near GA now) with the ultimate goal of raising it to FA status. Toward that end, I've added a bunch of tasks to the todolist (above). So, let's get out all our references and get started. I'll be travelling to Colorado this week on a railfan excursion (visiting the Colorado Railroad Museum and the Cumbres & Toltec), so if there's something you know of in the area, I may be able to photograph it for use here. Slambo (Speak) 17:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too many pictures[edit]

This is an article which is heavily dependent upon pictures; the problem is that we're running out of room to have a coherent text as a result. Right now I think we're pretty much maxxed out and outght stick to substituting better images rather than adding more. Mangoe 22:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree. In essence, only five caboose types (center cupola, offset cupola, EV, bay window and transfer) were widely employed (excepting historical designs from the early 19th century). Five images would obviously suffice for the caboose itself, and a few more for EOT's, historical models (i.e., prior to the mid-1800's). BDD 17:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EOT, BOLD[edit]

Instead of "End-of-Train" device, why not a catchier acronym, like BOLD, or "Back-of-Locomotive-Device"? --72.205.241.187 13:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because the official AAR designation for FRED is EOT. In any case, EOT's are rarely attached to locomotives. I've never seen one used in that fashion, and I was in the industry for many years. BDD 17:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


USA-centric view point[edit]

Is it just me or is this article very biased in favour of USA Brake Vans\Caboose cars. There is next to no infomation on UK or European types of this rolling stock. Perhaps this should be split off as a US Railway page instead and have an international page written in its place? Sheep21 22:04 04 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps a better solution would be to add information about caboose design and usage from areas other than North America. My own references don't show much beyond what's already in the article. Slambo (Speak) 10:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A Brake Van is not just a caboose. In what they called an unequipped train, a rake of four-wheeled freight wagons, sans vacuum brakes, were slack-chained to each other. The brake van was a heavily ballasted car with good brakes that could when set hold the train on the steepest grade to be encountered in combination with one or more of the fright wagons having its manual brakes set while stopped at the top of the incline. I don't believe that they work unequipped trains any more in this day and age except at the railway museums. Sounds thrilling, and dangerous! --BenBurch 09:37, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I saw one on the Cardiff side of Newport in Southwales today, coupled to the rear of a line of heavy freight wagons on a sidings off'f the South Wales Main Line, although extremely rare to see on the mainline (first time I have seen one in use ever), it seems they are still in use here and there. Although I must agree that they are most likely to be found in Museums and Preservation and Enthuisiast Railways. Sheep21 21:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to see this article split and another created called brake vans or something similar, I believe their are enough differences between the two to warrant another article.Oxyman42 23:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The 'Caboose' article should stand on it's own, without including other types of rolling stock. - MakeChooChooGoNow 23:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cabin Car

Fans of the former Pennsylvania Railroad say that calling the caboose a cabin car was specifically a PRR term.

Radio Sharon (talk) 04:17, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]


I saw another one about 3 weeks ago, an old LNER style Brake Van freshly painted in the livery of EWS. sheep21 22:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have created a separate article for Brake van as suggested by Oxyman42. Biscuittin (talk) 17:51, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the UK, in my travels in Europe in the 1970s I never saw a caboose, except in toy shops displaying U.S.-style model freight trains (usually HO scale). One in Germany sticks out in my memory, as the caboose was in the middle of the train, followed by freight cars -- indicating that the toy shop owner was unaware that the caboose brings up the markers! Perhaps there is nothing on continental European cabooses because they didn't exist. I know for a fact that the Soviet railways never used cabooses. Amustard (talk) 04:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, now that there's a separate article on the UK equivalent which doesn't even share the same name, shouldn't all the text describing the UK car be removed here leaving just the link to the other article? It's not like there's similar descriptive text in the UK article on the differences to the caboose. Of course, there also isn't any protests in the talk section of that article, which really is UK-centric, about it being UK-centric. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.66.153 (talk) 17:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grammatical Corruption[edit]

Is it possible that caboose is derived from cab house (cabin house)? RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 00:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem likely. Etymology tends to point to the French naval term camboose as the most likely antecendent word. BDD 03:54, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The English word derives (by the usual processes of word-borrowing and gradual sense change -- no corruption, grammatical or otherwise, involved!) from the Dutch kabuis which originally meant a "wooden cabin on a ship's deck", then a "ship's galley"; the French "cambouse" is from the same source. (The "-uis" bit, though, probably does correspond to Dutch "huis" = "house"). -- Picapica (talk) 15:56, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if kabhuis entered the Dutch language in 1747, it cannot have been Middle Dutch since that form of the language had been long gone by that time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.95.79 (talk) 22:42, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added citations that I am fairly confident this section is sourced from. Neither source quite match the wiki material however, and even in the older source the etymology is stated as disputed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.2.33 (talk) 15:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cabooses as decorations?[edit]

It is true that most cabooses have been retired from the modern railways, since they served to protect freight trains in the mid-1990's. But as the article emphasizes (History § Paragraph 5, Sentence 1), these now non-revenue rail cars are retained well-beyond their normal lifetime of the freight train era. Thus, I believe that there may be a few freight trains in North American and yonder that still need a caboose, or perhaps using them as a decoration. I am not reflecting on any local or smaller railways, nor am I speaking of toy trains that include cabooses, I am meaning a longer and vaster scale along our railroads. Nonetheless, any of today's trains equipped with a caboose would still require a flashing rear-end device. --Nebula2357 (talk) 21:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article split[edit]

I have copied the UK/Australia section to Brake van. Are there any objections if I now delete this section from Caboose? Biscuittin (talk) 19:47, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a split based upon a caboose and a brake van being different things, or a split because there are caboose and brake van are different names for the thing? If it is the latter than it is better having one article, even if the you don't like the name. (I fall under AUS and preferring "guards van" BTW). Wongm (talk) 10:01, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say they are different things. The Brake van article also includes passenger brake vans. See also Talk:Caboose#USA-centric_view_point. Biscuittin (talk) 22:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use and Communication?[edit]

I would be glad to see more detailed information in the article regarding how cabooses have historically been used, and particularly regarding how the caboose communicated with the engine. (I presume that in latter days crews used radios, but what did they do before the walkie-talkie?) J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 18:02, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Caboose/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Needs more references. Very near GA quality.

Last edited at 17:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 10:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Caboose. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:41, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Caboose. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cupola Bay Window Cabooses[edit]

I find that some railroads, perhaps best known the Missouri Pacific, built and used cabooses that had both a cupola and bay windows. I have not found an image that is apparently free for us to use. J S Ayer (talk) 02:13, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cabooses/cabeese[edit]

I've added two dictionary references that use only "cabooses" in their examples, and there are more. The plural cabeese appears to be a joke, similar to meese for moose. There are examples of cabeese to be found on the Net, but I haven't found any reliable sources that say that cabeese is a correct or alternative plural. I don't think "cabeese" belongs in the article at all, (but reliable sources and a reasoned argument might change that.) After all, we don't discuss the plural form "meese" in Moose.Sjö (talk) 12:25, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, Like mouse/meese, it's just a joke form of the plural and therefore should not be here.  Stepho  talk  10:26, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Armored caboose[edit]

To be included in the article? https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44062/armored-caboose-designed-to-protect-navy-nuclear-trains-is-about-to-start-its-final-testing --Znuddel (talk) 03:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Znuddel: That looks relevant to me, you should feel free to go ahead and add some info from that source to the article. I can do it myself if you don't want to. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please, feel free to include it @Trainsandotherthings:. I only came across this article since I had to Google Caboose :) --Znuddel (talk) 21:20, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing run-on sentence[edit]

In the lead, there is a sentence that is very confusing and a major run-on. I was going to attempt to change it but I am not exactly sure what it is trying to say. Someone with expertise might want to address this.

The sentence is, “Developments in monitoring and safety technology, such as lineside defect detectors and end-of-train devices, and hotboxes for crews to spot becoming virtually non-existent with freight cars being built or upgraded with roller bearings rather than plain bearings, resulted in crew reductions and the phasing out of caboose cars.”

It feels like it is missing something. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 22:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I split it up a bit.  Stepho  talk  02:35, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Caboose&oldid=1200510501"