update:
MBTA Files Lawsuit In Commuter Rail Crash
BOSTON (AP) -- In the lawsuit, the MBTA says CSX Transportation and a lumber company failed to properly secure a freight car that got loose and struck a commuter rail train. The incident in Canton last month injured 150 commuters.In the suit filed Thursday, the MBTA claims CSX workers who delivered the car to the lumber company failed to set a hand brake; neglected to lock a steel gate between the lumber yard and commuter rail tracks; and didn't secure the car's wheels.The suit also claims a device designed to deliberately derail the car was not properly set.A CSX spokesman and the owner of the Cohenno lumber company of Stoughton refused comment.The suit is asking that the defendants to cover costs associated with the crash, including medical claims and track repairs.
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=85093
BaltACD wrote: Paul3 wrote: BaltACD,We don't have accents. All the rest of you talk wicked funny. Oh, and it's Bah-stin, not Bastan. http://www.boston-online.com/glossary I knew someone from Baltimore when I was in college. He called it "Ball-more"...like there was no "t" or "i".Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************Actually true Baltimorean's pronounce it more with two A's and one L.....Baal-more...those from the Maryland Eastern Shore have their own take on how to pronounce it.
Paul3 wrote: BaltACD,We don't have accents. All the rest of you talk wicked funny. Oh, and it's Bah-stin, not Bastan. http://www.boston-online.com/glossary I knew someone from Baltimore when I was in college. He called it "Ball-more"...like there was no "t" or "i".Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
BaltACD,We don't have accents. All the rest of you talk wicked funny.
Oh, and it's Bah-stin, not Bastan. http://www.boston-online.com/glossary
I knew someone from Baltimore when I was in college. He called it "Ball-more"...like there was no "t" or "i".
Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
The natives used to say it something like "Bawlimer". Not to be confused with a couple of newspaper columnists who spelled Baltimoreans as "Baltimorons".
I have assembled a video of the event with emphasis on the interview of the engineer.
http://cs.trains.com/forums/1409512/ShowPost.aspx
~Rick
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
What someone hasn't mentioned yet is that this accident may have been caused by the failure of the handbrake to actually work. A friend of mine is an engineer/conductor on a short line around here, and he told me about the time when he was riding a car that had been kicked. He wound up the handbrake...and nothing happened. Fortunately, the car came to a halt by itself without hitting anything too solid, but a lot further than where he wanted it. Handbrakes can fail.
However, that being said, my money is on the lumber co. moving the car and it got away from them.
Oh, and FYI: that RR friend of mine also said that one of his RR buddys (a CSX engineer) told him that the lumber co. derail had a gouge right across the top of it after this incident. On the Railroad.net MBTA Forum, another CSX employee told everyone that these derails are tied into the CTC system. Since several other trains had passed this lumber co. switch without getting a restricting signal, this means that the switch and the derail were both apparently lined and locked for the Stoughton Branch main.
More info: I have the track charts for this area, and the grade is all downhill from the lumber co. The grade is mostly 0.7% to 0.9% with only a small grade going up towards Canton Jct. Also, the grade on the NEC in this area is 0.71% down towards Boston.
DMUinCT,The runaway car went through three grade crossings, not two. The car hit the MBTA train on the NEC, not on the Stoughton Branch. If you look at the video on this incident, the helicopters show the catenary quite well...and the Stoughton Branch is not electrified. Also, the only Amtrak speed limits above 125mph in all of North America are between Bleachery Curve (MP 205) in Mansfield to East Jct. in South Attleboro and in the Kingston flats south of Providence, RI. Both are 150mph zones.
This runaway could have been far, far worse. If the MBTA train it hit hadn't been a Stoughton job, the interlocking at Canton Jct. would have been set for the NEC. These switches have moving frogs, which would have almost certainly derailed the car on the NEC (this is the same interlocking that derailed an AEM-7 a few years ago because the switch maintainer did not throw the frog manually after he manually threw the points).
If this car had derailed on the main...would it be still tripping the cab signals? What if the next train happened to be a Boston bound Amtrak Regional or Acela job? They bust through there at more than 100mph (120mph? Not 140mph). If it hit a derailed and fully loaded freight car at that speed it would be like the German ICE train hitting that bridge abutment a while back (especially considering that there are two bridge abutments in the area and along rock cut). Not to sound too alarmist here, but hundreds could have died.
http://cs.trains.com/forums/1406769/ShowPost.aspx#1406769
Can anyone answer this forum?
Yeah, I heard they have some MP40s on order, can anyone confirm that?
Oops,
As long as the frame isn't too badly bent, it should be repairable. MBTA is very short on motive power right now, so this accident came at a bad time for them. They've been sending F40's and Geeps out for rebuilds left and right.
ArtOfRuin wrote: Here's a pic of the damaged F40: http://photos.nerail.org/showpic/?photo=2008033016494630149.jpg&order=bydate&page=1 <> EDIT: Just read the header. It's an M-K rebuld not a screamer. Thanks for the correction Ty!
Here's a pic of the damaged F40:
http://photos.nerail.org/showpic/?photo=2008033016494630149.jpg&order=bydate&page=1
<> EDIT: Just read the header. It's an M-K rebuld not a screamer. Thanks for the correction Ty!
Does the locomotive has a chance to be repair and run again?
Ouch. Hope they repair it...
Also, I think that one's an M-K rebuild, not the origanal EMD "screamer"....Could be wrong though.
True, the railcar (which is wrongly labeled as a bulkhead flat, it's actually a centerbeam BTW) could've derailed and crushed anyone in the way. If there was enough time, it would most likely be safe enough about 1 1/2 car leingths forward from the point of impact, unless the car bounced off the front of the loco or something....
In the case of not enough time to do that, the smartest thing would probably to stay in the loco, although if a freightcar was rolling towards me, I probably wouldn't think clearly and just GET OUT OF THE WAY.....
TrainManTy wrote: Yes, that could be a problem....I know I wouldn't waited....come to think of it, I'd have gotten out of the loco...What would the engineer stand to gain from staying in the loco? He could just get out for the actual impact, then get back in and radio the dispatcher....
Yes, that could be a problem....
I know I wouldn't waited....come to think of it, I'd have gotten out of the loco...
What would the engineer stand to gain from staying in the loco? He could just get out for the actual impact, then get back in and radio the dispatcher....
BaltACD wrote: Recording of the Engineer/Dispatcher communication
Interesting. No problem with the accent, BTW.
I'm not sure I'd have waited for permission to back up, though. Don't know if he had enough time to actually get changed over and start backwards, but I doubt anyone would have faulted him. The collision was going to occur anyhow, and any speed backwards might have lessened the impact.
On the other hand, if he was moving backward and became incapacitated by the collision, there'd be a whole 'nother set of problems...
Larry 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...
Recording of the Engineer/Dispatcher communication
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/specials/engineer_call_audio/
Not being a Bostonian, but having experienced the culture shock of being a Northerner transplanted to the South....the Bastan accent is thick and difficult to cut through.
Depends on multiple factors:
Where?
Trying to keep on the ties?
How absolute the thing has to be thrown on the ground? (Gravity, what a concept!)
Grade? potential speed?
Car & Lading value?
Where are you trying to throw the car...?
What are you protecting?
Who sets the derail?
Use. (how often used) and purpose.
http://www.wch.com/wcrowder.htm
Thanks for the detail information but I have one question. What derailer is best suite for the job? I saw alot of samples but I don't work in the industry.
Main Line Derailer (at Draw Bridge). Amtrak Northeast Coridor.
Click on photo to enlarge.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
Hey Mudchicken -
Thanks for posting the photos and clarifying your terminology for each type. I'd looked for a photo of the "hop-toad" / flip-over/ "floppy" / "Hayes Model EB hinge-type derail" on the Western-Cullen-Hayes website, but couldn't find one there, even though it's one of their products and referenced elsewhere in that site. I'll have to dig out one of my old paper catalogs and find and scan a photo of a single-direction one and maybe post it - as you know, your photo is of a bi-directional one.
I'd very much like to see a depiction the PRR version of a Double Split-Point (with frog). I worked with 3 ex-PRR Track Supervisors and an ex-Asst. Division Engineer ("world's largest alumni club", they told me) from 1975 to 1988 and spent a lot of time plowing through the PRR's Standard Plans book, but I don't ever recall seeing or hearing about one of those.
Interestingly, even Hayes notes that cars can sometime "skip over"/ past their derails - see the 7th paragraph of "The Purpose of a Western-Cullen-Hayes Derail" at:
http://www.wch.com/derailpurpose.htm
I'm having problems accessing the prr.railfan.net links that you provided (below). Instead, I suggest trying the following for the "Single Switch Point Derail" with guardrail ("Truckside Rail ?") from the UP RR website for "Technical Specifications for Construction of Industrial Tracks" - http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/operations/specs/track/index.shtml ,
"13.00 Derails Requirements" - http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/operations/specs/track/13.shtml at:
http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/operations/specs/attachments/exhibit_i-2.pdf
The "16'-6" Double Switch Point Derail" is at:
http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/operations/specs/attachments/exhibit_i-1.pdf
The "Sliding Derail with Wheel Crowder" (see the Hayes "Purpose of A Derail" explanation referenced above) is at:
http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/operations/specs/attachments/exhibit_i-3.pdf
For more information, see the "Permanent Derail Installation Instructions" at:
http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/operations/specs/attachments/exhibit_i.pdf
Hope this is helpful.
- Paul North.
Luck, Luck, Luck, you have no idear how bad this could have been.
The action of the brave Union Crewmembers reduced the injuries, but it could have been much worse. The runaway car was a Bulkhead end Flat Car with a packaged load of wood. I rolled down onto the "Stoughton Branch".
The Stoughton Locals leave Boston's South Station, stop at Back Bay, then move out on the Northeast Corridor at 60 mph. After the 128 Station Stop (I-95) they open up to 80 mph until Canton Junction where it moves from the southbound track, across the northbond track to the single track "Stoughton Branch".
A station stop at Canton Junction, then Canton, and then end of line at Stoughton where the line opens up to a double track siding.
This runaway did make it through 2 Grade Crossings. Had the Commuter train not been there to hit the runaway car, the runaway car would have rolled a short distance more onto the Northeast Corridor where Acelas run at 140 mph!
Typical Stoughton Local entering the Stoughton yard.
TYPICAL Flop-over ("Hop Toad") from Aldon's site: http://www.westernsafety.com/aldon/aldonpage2.html
W-C-H Site: http://www.wch.com/
W-C-H and Aldon supply the bulk of the fabricated sliding and flopover derails in the US...
Typical Switch Point Derail ("Alligator"):
Double Split Point: (PRR Version w/ frog) http://prr.railfan.net/standards/standards.cgi?plan=59767-- (Quick trip to nowhere) http://prr.railfan.net/standards/standards.cgi?plan=61490--
(ODD - Cannot seem to quickly find the very common [and effective] single split point derail with guardrail...)
There is some skill and know-how required to properly place a derail. Surprising how many have failed to understand some basic physics. Then again, the guy with a cape & an "R" on his chest and us dirty feathered types tend to wind up cleaning up those blunders.
Then again, we had photos on here a while back of a certain industry trying to use a rerailing frog as a derail. (and another photo of a hop-toad with a rerailing frog immediately behind it)
rrboomer wrote: My biggest question is why didn't the derail stop the car?My personal opinion is the "Flop over" style derail should not be used to protect main tracks and controlled sidings. Instead the split point type derail, wired into the signal (if any) system should be mandatory.
My biggest question is why didn't the derail stop the car?
My personal opinion is the "Flop over" style derail should not be used to protect main tracks and controlled sidings. Instead the split point type derail, wired into the signal (if any) system should be mandatory.
Do you have a picture to show the two different derails?
Agreed! A double split-point (DPSS) derail and a U-5 to set the opposing signals to red. Even if the track runs uphill to the turnout eventually someone will figure out a way to shove blind on the other end of the cut and push the other end out onto the main track. The industrial track guidelines for at least the Class Is I'm familiar with do not require a DPSS on an uphill track in all cases, but I put them in anyway because I lay at sleep at night worrying about things like this.
RWM
Paul_D_North_Jr wrote: Links to 2 articles - read both for all the details - and an aerial photo:http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/03/26/freight_car_rams_commuter_train_injuring_150/http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1082906&srvc=home&position=alsohttp://www3.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO76078/In brief: The track occupancy signal circuits apparently alerted the engineer of the commuter train in time to stop. The investigation into the placement of the car on the lumber co.'s siding about 5 hours earlier is continuing - handbrakes, chocks, etc. Wonder why it sat there for 5 hours, and then decided to move - employee error ? (recall a Mud Chicken post a couple weeks ago about industries using front-end loaders to move cars oftgen leading to runaways and heaps of wreckage, etc.) wind ? Will be interesting to find out.- Paul North.
Links to 2 articles - read both for all the details - and an aerial photo:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/03/26/freight_car_rams_commuter_train_injuring_150/
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1082906&srvc=home&position=also
http://www3.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO76078/
In brief: The track occupancy signal circuits apparently alerted the engineer of the commuter train in time to stop. The investigation into the placement of the car on the lumber co.'s siding about 5 hours earlier is continuing - handbrakes, chocks, etc.
Wonder why it sat there for 5 hours, and then decided to move - employee error ? (recall a Mud Chicken post a couple weeks ago about industries using front-end loaders to move cars oftgen leading to runaways and heaps of wreckage, etc.) wind ? Will be interesting to find out.
CSX Again! http://csx-sucks.com/pictures/?MMR.jpg
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.