Dispatcher error can almost be ruled out from the get-go--there are fail-safe mechanisims (or whatever the electronic equivalent to the old mechanical interlockings is) to prevent such routing conflicts.A new signal system makes a signal failure a lot more likely than normal--sometimes the bugs take a while to manifest themselves.I'm guessing human error on the part of one of the operating crews. Which one? The one that either (a) went into the side of the other train that was already occupying the siding switch, or (b), if clear of the switch, the train heading the direction that permitted it to be beyond the switch at the point of collision. This says nothing about other factors leading up to the collision, but I think these are reasonable assumptions, given the description of the tracks.
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
wanswheel https://www.facebook.com/MCFR.FB/photos
https://www.facebook.com/MCFR.FB/photos
Deggesty wrote the following post [in part] 8 minutes ago:
Sam, you meant "signaled" and not "singled," did you not? This is on the former Seaboard's main, which had CTC all the way into Miami.
Man failure--ignoring a signal?
Johnny: The only reference I had was the photos, and I am not familiar with the specifics of the area...Sort of looked like it might have been single track(?) but bi-directional traffic would seem to indicate 'signaling' for both directions(?) Possibly a passing track of some sort(?). With both trains on the same track, Somebody, 'smooched the pooch', big time! I am too far away to even guess a reason. The only real observation I would make is that the 'reporter' seemed to be disappointed there was not a big fire.
Apparently somebody got into the site early and got some very close and detailed photographs.
samfp1943 ChuckCobleigh This is on the morning Newswire, but here is another link to the story: http://www.clickorlando.com/traffic/trains-collide-derail-in-marion-county-causing-3000-gallon-fuel-leak WOW! At least two of the crewmen involved who were reported injured, but refusing medical treatment; could possibly, be considered to be more or less OK. But, that would beg the question, with two trains involved, posters here would expect that there are two more crew members who may or may not be injured(?). The main thrust of the reportage of the linked article seems to be that there were 15,000 gal. of diesel fuel leaked ( possibly one, or maybe, two of the on-board engine fuel tanks were punctured ?) The area photos seem to indicate that the track in the area is singled, possibly used in bi-directional running? It will be interesting to see how the 'details shake-out' as the story develops.
ChuckCobleigh This is on the morning Newswire, but here is another link to the story: http://www.clickorlando.com/traffic/trains-collide-derail-in-marion-county-causing-3000-gallon-fuel-leak
This is on the morning Newswire, but here is another link to the story:
http://www.clickorlando.com/traffic/trains-collide-derail-in-marion-county-causing-3000-gallon-fuel-leak
WOW! At least two of the crewmen involved who were reported injured, but refusing medical treatment; could possibly, be considered to be more or less OK. But, that would beg the question, with two trains involved, posters here would expect that there are two more crew members who may or may not be injured(?).
The main thrust of the reportage of the linked article seems to be that there were 15,000 gal. of diesel fuel leaked ( possibly one, or maybe, two of the on-board engine fuel tanks were punctured ?)
The area photos seem to indicate that the track in the area is singled, possibly used in bi-directional running?
It will be interesting to see how the 'details shake-out' as the story develops.
Johnny
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.