The reason is if the front pantograph was used and it snagged on an obstruction a good change it would damage the rear one......then the locomotive would have not operating pantograph.  

When did graffiti become a big problem.  Early 1990's??

The main reason for using the second is to avoid additional upward pressure that would happen if the first would be used. The flow of air that is coming from the front pushes it up higher. Most electric locomotives have two pantographs so the second can be used if the first one breaks down. Also with locomotives that have cabs on either side, the direction will change and hence what defines as second pantograph.

With relative low voltage DC systems, like 1500V DC, both pantographs are typically used when a train departs, as the current is really high. When the train is moving the first pantograph will come down. This can be seen in the Netherlands or parts of France. With higher voltage AC systems, 15kV or 25kV, this is not needed.

Regards,

Lolke

Since the graffiti is rarely painted over, is it considered a "problem"?

1997 sticks in my mind as when "urban artists" figured out freight cars made good rolling billboards and shared that idea widely. That may have been when the first magazine dedicated to it was published. I forget the name of the mag, but I do remember being appalled by it. It's one of the reasons my modeling era stops in 1994.

As to Mr Husman's question, graffiti has simply gotten to be too big a problem for the freight railroads to paint over all of it in a timely manner. The transit systems do consider it a real problem and do remove it posthaste.

I've heard some people excuse graffiti by saying "well at least somebody is painting the cars," using the logic that any paint helps stop rust, and the railroads don't care enough about their equipment if they let rusty cars remain in service. However, taggers are much less likely to tag a rusty car. They prefer clean cars because surface rust can ruin their "artwork."

Graffiti has long been applied to freight cars. I have a cement hopper with Bozo Texino's mark, correct for that car. And Herbie was all over the place. There are a couple modern-day examples. But such graffiti was fairly unobtrusive and monochrome, usually done with chalk or crayons. The modern stuff is done with spraycans, and comes in two basic varieties. Some is truly art and often funny. But most is gang related and sometimes offensive. And trust me, there are people who can read it and know where the tagger lives. It's a bit like a dog marking his territory. But since our eyes are better than our noses taggers have to use spraypaint.

Scott Chatfield

Thanks for the info on both.  As for graffiti being a "problem," it is, to me.  Not just on railroad cars, but on buildings, walls, and more.  I'm not referring to the small scale vandalism, but the big glaring rolling billboards.  Perhaps "common" would have been a better word than "Problem."

Before I moved to Floriduh, the boxing gym moved when they lost their lease.  The stuff was everywhere--except that the locals knew that the gym was one building that it would be unwise to hit.  They were right about that!

Well I do not know who told you that BUT Graffiti is certainly NOT A problem on Railroads. Plus it looks great, especially on Locomotives. ;)

When the "artist" spray paints a loaded autorack, I wonder if any overspray gets onto the vehicles?

I had no intention of restarting the endless graffiti discussions, rather, I was interested in when paint like on those autoracks became common.

For those big graffiti projects they actually use latex paint with paint rollers so there is no Overspray.  But on the smaller jobs maybe a little Overspray here and there. But it is easily cleaned off with Laquer and a wipe down.