Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
BaltACD, I agree with most what you said. But there are some differences. My web searches showed how much information about flooding are available to the public in that area. If BNSF didn't get them they should reconsider their warning sources. Unusal high waters can lead to weak points or damages in dam that can't easily be detected by MofW employees. I think in these situations Rules 6.21 comes into play. Again: In unusually heavy rain, storm, or high water, trains and engines must approach bridges, culverts, and other potentially hazardous points prepared to stop. If they cannot proceed safely, they must stop until it is safe to resume movement. It takes into consideration that MofW might not find any defects because they are likely there but still hidden. I think a check by MofW showing no defects doesn't relieve the RR from executing Rule 6.21. But that is just my interpretation and I'm not a railroader. Regards
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag