jeffrey-wimberly Had a visit from one of the reps at the Hanger clinic today. They're in the process of making not one but two prosthetic legs for me. A new one for the left leg and a re-sized replacement for the right leg. I learned today that I will have a new TV to watch by Monday. Most of my time consists of boredom. It would be better if I had something to on. If anybody has a project to contribute you can send it to Jeffrey Wimberly, C\O Rosepine Retirement & Rehabilitation Center 18364 Johnny B Hall Memorial Hwy, Rosepine, LA 70659
Had a visit from one of the reps at the Hanger clinic today. They're in the process of making not one but two prosthetic legs for me. A new one for the left leg and a re-sized replacement for the right leg. I learned today that I will have a new TV to watch by Monday. Most of my time consists of boredom. It would be better if I had something to on. If anybody has a project to contribute you can send it to Jeffrey Wimberly, C\O Rosepine Retirement & Rehabilitation Center 18364 Johnny B Hall Memorial Hwy, Rosepine, LA 70659
http://www.labbymemorial.com/home/index.cfm/obituaries/view/fh_id/10166/id/2866216
ALL:
As a retired professional railroader, I am tired of the many comments of signal rules and operations on a day to day basis.
Let's not forget that three railroaders died! I have not heard of the third railroader being found yet. Quite a tragedy.
Ed Burns of Anoka, MN
NP EddieLet's not forget that three railroaders died! I have not heard of the third railroader being found yet. Quite a tragedy.
She was found, and her funeral was held. A number of people have posed reminiscences for her.
The only reason for commenting on 'signal rules' is to figure out whether something can or should be done to prevent something like this from happening again.
We have assuredly not forgotten the dead, or the tremendous miracle that is the fourth person surviving a 100mph+ mutual impact.
schlimm Obviously I did not. But if you have the old system, two traind did not routinely approach each other from opposite directions at speed. The "wrong way track" was only used for pick ups, set outs and maintenace, not rgular operations. In the case of the Panhandle crash, the two trains would not have been having a cornfield meet at a ~100mph closing speed.
Obviously I did not. But if you have the old system, two traind did not routinely approach each other from opposite directions at speed. The "wrong way track" was only used for pick ups, set outs and maintenace, not rgular operations. In the case of the Panhandle crash, the two trains would not have been having a cornfield meet at a ~100mph closing speed.
To run a train wrong main in current of traffic (back in train order days) in many areas, a train order would be given to the affected trains and it was up to the crews to act accordingly. There would be no switch tender or tower man to line the crossovers. (Form D-R, basic example: Extra 200 West has right over opposing trains on eastward track crossover mp207 to crossover MP215. Instead of crossover location an actual station name might be used.)
The train directed to run against the current of traffic would have to stop at the end of it's wrong main authority (MP215 above) and line it self back to the "right" main. An opposing train running "right" main would have to stop before the last named crossover point (again MP215), unless it had identified that the train authorized to run wrong main had fulfilled the order.
If one or both engine crews forgot or fell asleep, a collision could happen. The train running with signals, if awake, might be running at 20mph or less but the one running without could be running at allowable track speed for operating against the current. If the one with signals fell asleep, they could well be at track speed, too. Even though the closing speed might be less than 100 mph, it will still be messy and possibly fatal to some of the crew.
Note that in the beginning of the above paragraph I said engine crews. There's one back-up back in the day that might explain why you didn't hear of too many such incidents. The rear trainmen also had a copy of the order (some railroads provided that both conductor and rear brakeman/flagman receive a copy of a train order) and, assuming they weren't asleep, would take action when they noticed they weren't slowing to stop where they should. Either getting on the radio or pulling the air.
Jeff
NorthWest Yes, they did! Running 'wrong main' was often the fastest way to get passenger trains over the road as it allowed several slower freight trains to be passed at a time. These, of course, are the most critical types of trains.
Yes, they did! Running 'wrong main' was often the fastest way to get passenger trains over the road as it allowed several slower freight trains to be passed at a time. These, of course, are the most critical types of trains.
And how many head-ons between a passenger train on the the wrong main and a freight (or another passenger train) ocurred?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
wanswheel jeffrey-wimberly Had a visit from one of the reps at the Hanger clinic today. They're in the process of making not one but two prosthetic legs for me. A new one for the left leg and a re-sized replacement for the right leg. I learned today that I will have a new TV to watch by Monday. Most of my time consists of boredom. It would be better if I had something to on. If anybody has a project to contribute you can send it to Jeffrey Wimberly, C\O Rosepine Retirement & Rehabilitation Center 18364 Johnny B Hall Memorial Hwy, Rosepine, LA 70659 http://www.labbymemorial.com/home/index.cfm/obituaries/view/fh_id/10166/id/2866216
There are a few members still on here (and a few who are not) who should be ashamed of their attitudes toward him.
Jeff, was not the standard form of address: "C&E train #__ at ___"? I have long had the impression that both train and engine crews knew what orders affected them. I do not have my collection of train orders here, but I recall that all were addressed to "C&E."
In the orders themselves, the numbers of the engines powering the trains were given. If a train were double-headed, only the number of the engine on the point was given (I think); if it should be come necessary to exchange such engines, the DS had to issue new orders to replace any that were so affected.
Johnny
schlimm n012944: I suggest you read some histories of what railroads did to modify double track mains. As to this crash, just use your noodle and try reasoning it out. Two trains cannot collide head on if the two tracks are strictly for one-way traffic, as they once were in many areas of the US.
n012944: I suggest you read some histories of what railroads did to modify double track mains. As to this crash, just use your noodle and try reasoning it out. Two trains cannot collide head on if the two tracks are strictly for one-way traffic, as they once were in many areas of the US.
so you're lecturing a railroad operations professional on operations. As you asked someone else on another thread what's your expertise?
An example of how 251 running is not as safe as some on this site would like everyone to believe.
https://alongtherails.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/the-cobden-distaster/
BTW, this head on accident happened on the Illinois Central, I "researched it"....
An "expensive model collector"
schlimm The "wrong way track" was only used for pick ups, set outs and maintenace, not rgular operations.
The "wrong way track" was only used for pick ups, set outs and maintenace, not rgular operations.
You really should research some railroad operations before making such a statement. Might I suggest the IC's main south out of Chicago before it was single tracked?
n012944 schlimm The "wrong way track" was only used for pick ups, set outs and maintenace, not rgular operations. You really should research some railroad operations before making such a statement. Might I suggest the IC's main south out of Chicago before it was single tracked?
Why don't you do some research before making such a statement?
schlimm n012944 schlimm The "wrong way track" was only used for pick ups, set outs and maintenace, not rgular operations. You really should research some railroad operations before making such a statement. Might I suggest the IC's main south out of Chicago before it was single tracked? Why don't you do some research before making such a statement?
I have, thanks. But since you seem to be the expert, tell me how the IC ran 100 mph passenger and 60 mph freight on a 2 main ABS railroad, without running against the current?
Or are you just going to continue your pattern of redirecting questions instead of answering them?
Buslist schlimm n012944: I suggest you read some histories of what railroads did to modify double track mains. As to this crash, just use your noodle and try reasoning it out. Two trains cannot collide head on if the two tracks are strictly for one-way traffic, as they once were in many areas of the US. so you're lecturing a railroad operations professional on operations. As you asked someone else on another thread what's your expertise?
Don't hold your breath on him answering that question.
Deggesty Jeff, was not the standard form of address: "C&E train #__ at ___"? I have long had the impression that both train and engine crews knew what orders affected them. I do not have my collection of train orders here, but I recall that all were addressed to "C&E." In the orders themselves, the numbers of the engines powering the trains were given. If a train were double-headed, only the number of the engine on the point was given (I think); if it should be come necessary to exchange such engines, the DS had to issue new orders to replace any that were so affected.
Yes, the address in a train order would be "To C&E ...". In modern GCOR the address in track warrants/track bulletins is just to the train, for example "To UP 1234." The conductor and engineer both have to have a copy, but it's not specifically addressed to them. I do see "To C&E" some times on messages that appear on the conductor's work order.
Some railroads would list both engines of a double-header. "No 5 engs 123 and 456 coupled." That seems to be more from the steam era, especially the first part of the 20th century.
jeffhergertSome railroads would list both engines of a double-header. "No 5 engs 123 and 456 coupled."
Inasmuch as all of our trains are extras, we get "C&E Extra 1234 at Podunk" as the addressee.
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...
jeffhergertSome railroads would list both engines of a double-header. "No 5 engs 123 and 456 coupled." That seems to be more from the steam era, especially the first part of the 20th century.
I would suspect that it might apply to engines with separate crews, and one way to check this would be to see how situations with incompatible diesels operated together were handled. (I am thinking of that clip on the Long Branch where there is an EMD leading one of the Baldwin passenger Sharks). A rational application of rule would be to note the situation where multiple independent crews were controlling the power (as distinctly opposed to MU), and it would then be further rational to issue the orders relative to the engines (as an extension of issuing the order to 'the train') and to indicate how they are positioned in the consist.
DeggestyJeff, was not the standard form of address: "C&E train #__ at ___"? I have long had the impression that both train and engine crews knew what orders affected them. I do not have my collection of train orders here, but I recall that all were addressed to "C&E."
Generally Rules 204 and 206 outlined addresses. Orders to trains were addressed to the "C&E" and the ID of the train. For regular trains, that would be the train number, some roads added the engine number:
C&E No 101 or C&E No 101 Eng 1234
Orders addressed to a schedule (No 101 ) applied to all sections of the schedule. Orders addressed to a section only applied to the section:
C&E Second 101 or C&E Second 101 Eng 1234
Extras were identified by engine number and direction.
C&E Extra 1234 West
Work extras (which have no direction) are just addressed by engine number:
C&E Work Extra 1234
The C&E is necessary because the orders could be addressed to other employees (such as yardmasters or operators).
In the orders themselves, the numbers of the engines powering the trains were given. If a train were double-headed, only the number of the engine on the point was given (I think); if it should be come necessary to exchange such engines, the DS had to issue new orders to replace any that were so affected. [/quote]
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
tree68We get that if we've got a "both ways" Form D and two engines. That way, either can lead. Otherwise, a new Form D would have to be issued for travel with other than the cited engine. Inasmuch as all of our trains are extras, we get "C&E Extra 1234 at Podunk" as the addressee.
In GCOR there are no regular trains so there are no extras, everything is just a train. Authorities are addressed to an engine and direction : UP 1234 West.
There is no requirement that the addressed engine be the lead engine.
The UTU @ LaJunta has obtained a garden bench as a memorial for Lara Taylor. A gold engrave w/ date of birth & death has been added. This bench, as a tribute to a fallen member and former La Junta trainperson, will be placed at the Amtrak depot which also serves as the BNSF depot in LaJunta. Just like the local chairman stated he hopes he never has to again put up a memorial for a fallen coworker
Overmod We have assuredly not forgotten the dead, or the tremendous miracle that is the fourth person surviving a 100mph+ mutual impact.
n012944 schlimm:Why don't you do some research before making such a statement? n012944: I have, thanks. But since you seem to be the expert, tell me how the IC ran 100 mph passenger and 60 mph freight on a 2 main ABS railroad, without running against the current? Or are you just going to continue your pattern of redirecting questions instead of answering them?
n012944: I have, thanks. But since you seem to be the expert, tell me how the IC ran 100 mph passenger and 60 mph freight on a 2 main ABS railroad, without running against the current? Or are you just going to continue your pattern of redirecting questions instead of answering them?
Just wait. I have never pretended to be an expert. I am trying to get hold of an old friend who dispatched on the 2 main IC/ICG. That is research by consulting with someone with first-hand, expert knowledge. I may also reach a former UP/CNW dispatcher for more expert knowledge on an older period on those lines.
[added] I found a 1972 IC employee TT. Running against trffic on a second main was permitted, but it sounds quite involved, i.e., not your usual, everyday practice. As I recall, the IC had a 3rd main in some stretches north of Kankakee and the TT shows 5 long (for that time) sidings 79-206 cars with engine) between Kankakee and Champaign, 8 south of CHA to Centralia. By 1972, the speed limit north of Champaign for passenger trains was 79, freight 60. South of Champaign was still a 100 mph speedway to Branch Jct. near Centralia.
http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/railway/trainord.htm
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
The NTSB posted a summary of the BNSF accident
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/dca16fr008-preliminary.aspx
n012944 The NTSB posted a summary of the BNSF accident http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/dca16fr008-preliminary.aspx
EB did not comply with signal indications. 8:30 AM heading into the sun. Excuse? Reason? Red Herring?
dehusman tree68 We get that if we've got a "both ways" Form D and two engines. That way, either can lead. Otherwise, a new Form D would have to be issued for travel with other than the cited engine. Inasmuch as all of our trains are extras, we get "C&E Extra 1234 at Podunk" as the addressee. In GCOR there are no regular trains so there are no extras, everything is just a train. Authorities are addressed to an engine and direction : UP 1234 West. There is no requirement that the addressed engine be the lead engine.
tree68 We get that if we've got a "both ways" Form D and two engines. That way, either can lead. Otherwise, a new Form D would have to be issued for travel with other than the cited engine. Inasmuch as all of our trains are extras, we get "C&E Extra 1234 at Podunk" as the addressee.
BaltACD http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/railway/trainord.htm
The first section, describing train orders, should inform all interested in working of train orders.
Incidentally, I never saw a Form 31 order--and I have clearance cards stating that there were no orders given with them; however if the ETT states that a clearance card was to be given at a certain point, no train could proceed past that point without having received a clearance card by both C&E.
Deggesty BaltACD http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/railway/trainord.htm Balt, well posted. When I first looked at the site, I thought, "I am not going to read all this"--and then saw that the far greater portion of it is a listing of accidents. The first section, describing train orders, should inform all interested in working of train orders. Incidentally, I never saw a Form 31 order--and I have clearance cards stating that there were no orders given with them; however if the ETT states that a clearance card was to be given at a certain point, no train could proceed past that point without having received a clearance card by both C&E.
Balt, well posted. When I first looked at the site, I thought, "I am not going to read all this"--and then saw that the far greater portion of it is a listing of accidents.
The general way of thinking of the distinctions between 19 and 31 orders is that form 19's instructions become effective at a distance from the point at which they are delivered. 31 orders are effective at the point of delivery or at a distance that would not permit picking up the orders on the fly, reading them and complying with their instructions. Trains must be stopped to receive 31 orders and on some carriers they had to be signed for by the crew that received them.
On my carrier for a operator to deliver train orders, the orders had to be acconted for, by TO number as well as any 'messages' that would be delivered with the orders (messages were instructions for such things as pickups and setoffs and any engine moves that were to be made during the trip). The 'Clearance Form A' (as it was known on my carrier) also had fields that, when used, coveyed authority with other methods of operation.
In my personal experience, trains were operated against the current of traffic 'mostly' between interlockings. The exchange between Dispatcher and Operator would be something like this -
DI - Station A - 19 East copy 3OPA - Yellow TO signal displayed, ready to copyDI - Station B - 31 West copy 3OPB - Red TO Signal displayed; WB Signal to #1 blocked at Stop, ready to copyDI - A address to T&E Extra 4431 East; B address to Westward Trains Extra 4431 East has right over opposing trains on #1 track A to B. XYZ where XYZ are the initials of the Dispatcher issuing the order.Each operator repeats the order to the Dispatcher who underlines each word repeated in the Train Order Book. When BOTH operators have repeated the order correctly the Dispatcher will issue a COMPLETE time which the operators will inscribe on the Order in the appropriate place.
After the orders have been completed, the order along with Clearance Form A with the order number inscribed can be delivered to Extra 4431 East at A and the interlocking set for the train's movement East on #1 track which is signaled for Westbound traffic only. Operator at B will keep is WB Signal for #1 track blocked at Stop until after Extra 4431 East's markers have cleared #1 track and the interlocking. Since TO's are defined as remaining in effect until, they are fulfilled, superceeded or annulled, with the observation of Extra 4431 East's markers Clear of #1 track - the order has been fulfilled. The Red TO Board may be taken down and the block may be removed from the WB signal to #1 track at B. If Extra 4431 East had Cleared #1 track at some point between A & B and was not going to make any further movement from that point. Extra 4431 East would report his train Clear at the point - when that information is reported to the Dispatcher, he will then issue a TO to the Operator at B for the Operator at B and for Extra 4431 East at the clearance point. Order will state 'Order No 999 (or appropriate number) is annulled. The Operator at B will give the Order to Extra 4431 East and underline his copy of the order as Extra 4431 East repeats it, Opr B will then repeat the order to the Dispatcher who will issue a Complete time, which Opr B will write on his copy of the order and also transmit the Complete time to Extra 4431 East. With the completed annullment, Opr B can take down the Red TO Board and remove the blocking from the WB Signal to #1 track.
19 Orders were written on Green flimsy paper.31 Orders were written on Yellow flimsy paper.
Balt, after reading the procedure for a Form 31 order you outlined, I recalled an article in Trains many years ago--"Flip Two Switches, Push One Button" (as I recall), which described how much simpler CTC operates.
Deggesty Balt, after reading the procedure for a Form 31 order you outlined, I recalled an article in Trains many years ago--"Flip Two Switches, Push One Button" (as I recall), which described how much simpler CTC operates.
Nowadays it's not switches and buttons - it's mouse clicks on computer screen(s). Even creating Track Warrents is a matter of mouse clicks on the computer screen(s).
Yes, the system has been improved. Back then, you fed the computer cards you had punched, and the computer would punch cards with its response.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.