Trains.com

NS derailment in Attica, NY

3196 views
13 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
NS derailment in Attica, NY
Posted by Overmod on Friday, February 16, 2018 7:06 PM

Yesterday, probably as a consequence of the heavy weather, a NS train derailed in Attica, NY on a washout and the power ran down an 80' embankment.  Some of the pictures referenced on LocoNotes are fairly spectacular.  Apparently two farmers ran into the field where the locomotives came to rest and helped extricate the crew; they deserve all the congratulations we can give them.

As a blessing, though, no one was killed or badly injured; both crewmembers are recovering at Erie County Medical center with little worse than broken bones and lacerations - they feel 'lucky to be alive'.

This raises an issue: should restraining harnesses be provided on locomotives?  Simple 'seat belts' wouldn't have helped this situation much, even though there is not a tremendous amount of damage to the cab structure.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, February 16, 2018 7:11 PM

Amazing  -  I thought only CSX derailed! SoapBox

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Friday, February 16, 2018 8:18 PM

Overmod
...should restraining harnesses be provided on locomotives? 

I would opine not.  Incidents such as this are rare at best.  

The costs would cascade.  Not only would there be the cost of the harness, but now you have to ensure that said harness is properly anchored, which would be problematic with a seat that is adjustable both fore and aft, but swivels as well.

An incident such as this would have required a five point restraint, a la race cars.  Anything less might well have resulted in more injuries than occurred.

Of course, one could argue (if you will) that even one life saved makes it worth the cost, but then it's only if it's used.  Given seat belt usage in cars, that usage would be abysmal.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Friday, February 16, 2018 8:20 PM

No, seat belts are a bad idea since a lot of the accidents involve hitting something large and heavy such as another train or a large truck resulting in damage to the front of the locomotive.  The cab nose is built to withstand such an accident while providing the crew with a safe area on the floor in the cab.  A safety belt would prevent the crew from getting to the safe area and would result in more crew deaths.

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Friday, February 16, 2018 8:32 PM

caldreamer

No, seat belts are a bad idea since a lot of the accidents involve hitting something large and heavy such as another train or a large truck resulting in damage to the front of the locomotive.  The cab nose is built to withstand such an accident while providing the crew with a safe area on the floor in the cab.  A safety belt would prevent the crew from getting to the safe area and would result in more crew deaths.

 

Exactly.  If a gasoline tanker blows through a crossing, I want to be able to jump down to the floor as fast as possible - not get hung up in a seat belt.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    December 2011
  • 440 posts
Posted by Uncle_Bob on Friday, February 16, 2018 10:39 PM

From video on the local news, 9692 was one of the engines involved; another GE was on its side in a field, but its number wasn't visible.  The tv reporter referred to a culvert as a "tunnel under the track" that "caved in," even though water was steadily flowing out of it and there was no sign that it had, in fact, caved in. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Saturday, February 17, 2018 7:26 AM

Uncle_Bob
...another GE was on its side in a field, but its number wasn't visible. 

It was 9274, from another forum.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    December 2011
  • 440 posts
Posted by Uncle_Bob on Saturday, February 17, 2018 7:58 AM

Thank you, Tree

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: North Carolina
  • 1,905 posts
Posted by csxns on Saturday, February 17, 2018 8:30 AM

BaltACD
Amazing - I thought only CSX derailed

I thought the same and giving CSX a rest.

Russell

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: NW Pa Snow-belt.
  • 2,216 posts
Posted by ricktrains4824 on Saturday, February 17, 2018 8:36 PM

What!?!

A derailment that is not involving either a passenger train or CSX!?!

How in the world can this be?

Oh.... It was a washout.... Well, that explains things then.

Ricky W.

HO scale Proto-freelancer.

My Railroad rules:

1: It's my railroad, my rules.

2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.

3: Any objections, consult above rules.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 1,190 posts
Posted by mvlandsw on Saturday, February 17, 2018 8:59 PM

zugmann
 
caldreamer

No, seat belts are a bad idea since a lot of the accidents involve hitting something large and heavy such as another train or a large truck resulting in damage to the front of the locomotive.  The cab nose is built to withstand such an accident while providing the crew with a safe area on the floor in the cab.  A safety belt would prevent the crew from getting to the safe area and would result in more crew deaths.

 

 

 

Exactly.  If a gasoline tanker blows through a crossing, I want to be able to jump down to the floor as fast as possible - not get hung up in a seat belt.

 

What difference does it make where you fry?

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Saturday, February 17, 2018 9:10 PM

You want to wear a seat belt?  Go for it.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • 2,671 posts
Posted by Lithonia Operator on Tuesday, February 20, 2018 8:01 AM

That was a really nasty-looking derailment. Do we know how fast the train was going?

Still in training.


  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, February 20, 2018 8:20 AM

LithoniaOperator

That was a really nasty-looking derailment. Do we know how fast the train was going?

Thought I saw that somewhere, but can't find it.  I would imagine they were running track speed, though, so figure somewhere between 25 and 40.  Given the ride they took, 30-ish wouldn't surprise me.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy