EuclidNote that it says nothing about a need to confirm that there is an obstruction.
Yes, but.... Yes, but....
Folks, ol' Bucky's not going to be satisfied until someone tells him that when in doubt the engineer should ALWAYS dump the train.
Of course, that means he's never going to be satisfied, because no one is ever going to tell him that.
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...
Euclid BaltACD Euclid BaltACD Euclid dehusman What if there is not time to slow to restricted speed with a service application before "passing the location" ? Why wouldn't this apply? 103.8 Emergency Brake Applications When conditions warrant, use an emergency brake application without hesitation if any condition occurs in which there is doubt that service applications can control train speed… Emergency braking generates uncontrolled and uncontrollable slack action within the train making the medicine worse than the disease. Emergency braking has its place in the tools available for the engineers use - it is rarely the first choice of a tool to use. You need to put up a picture hanging hook on the wall - is your first choice to use a 10 pound sledge hammer? Your persisting rants indicate that you must use the sledge hammer for anything that needs hammering - big or little - to you it doesn't matter. What should an engineer do if a service application will not slow him to restricted speed before passing the disabled train? Has the disabled train reported that HE has the adjacent track blocked? From the rule: “When a train or engine is stopped by an emergency application… If an adjacent main track or controlled siding may be obstructed,…” Note that it says nothing about a need to confirm that there is an obstruction.
BaltACD Euclid BaltACD Euclid dehusman What if there is not time to slow to restricted speed with a service application before "passing the location" ? Why wouldn't this apply? 103.8 Emergency Brake Applications When conditions warrant, use an emergency brake application without hesitation if any condition occurs in which there is doubt that service applications can control train speed… Emergency braking generates uncontrolled and uncontrollable slack action within the train making the medicine worse than the disease. Emergency braking has its place in the tools available for the engineers use - it is rarely the first choice of a tool to use. You need to put up a picture hanging hook on the wall - is your first choice to use a 10 pound sledge hammer? Your persisting rants indicate that you must use the sledge hammer for anything that needs hammering - big or little - to you it doesn't matter. What should an engineer do if a service application will not slow him to restricted speed before passing the disabled train? Has the disabled train reported that HE has the adjacent track blocked?
Euclid BaltACD Euclid dehusman What if there is not time to slow to restricted speed with a service application before "passing the location" ? Why wouldn't this apply? 103.8 Emergency Brake Applications When conditions warrant, use an emergency brake application without hesitation if any condition occurs in which there is doubt that service applications can control train speed… Emergency braking generates uncontrolled and uncontrollable slack action within the train making the medicine worse than the disease. Emergency braking has its place in the tools available for the engineers use - it is rarely the first choice of a tool to use. You need to put up a picture hanging hook on the wall - is your first choice to use a 10 pound sledge hammer? Your persisting rants indicate that you must use the sledge hammer for anything that needs hammering - big or little - to you it doesn't matter. What should an engineer do if a service application will not slow him to restricted speed before passing the disabled train?
BaltACD Euclid dehusman What if there is not time to slow to restricted speed with a service application before "passing the location" ? Why wouldn't this apply? 103.8 Emergency Brake Applications When conditions warrant, use an emergency brake application without hesitation if any condition occurs in which there is doubt that service applications can control train speed… Emergency braking generates uncontrolled and uncontrollable slack action within the train making the medicine worse than the disease. Emergency braking has its place in the tools available for the engineers use - it is rarely the first choice of a tool to use. You need to put up a picture hanging hook on the wall - is your first choice to use a 10 pound sledge hammer? Your persisting rants indicate that you must use the sledge hammer for anything that needs hammering - big or little - to you it doesn't matter.
Euclid dehusman What if there is not time to slow to restricted speed with a service application before "passing the location" ? Why wouldn't this apply? 103.8 Emergency Brake Applications When conditions warrant, use an emergency brake application without hesitation if any condition occurs in which there is doubt that service applications can control train speed…
dehusman
What if there is not time to slow to restricted speed with a service application before "passing the location" ?
Why wouldn't this apply?
103.8 Emergency Brake Applications
When conditions warrant, use an emergency brake application without hesitation if any condition occurs in which there is doubt that service applications can control train speed…
Emergency braking generates uncontrolled and uncontrollable slack action within the train making the medicine worse than the disease. Emergency braking has its place in the tools available for the engineers use - it is rarely the first choice of a tool to use.
You need to put up a picture hanging hook on the wall - is your first choice to use a 10 pound sledge hammer? Your persisting rants indicate that you must use the sledge hammer for anything that needs hammering - big or little - to you it doesn't matter.
What should an engineer do if a service application will not slow him to restricted speed before passing the disabled train?
Has the disabled train reported that HE has the adjacent track blocked?
From the rule:
“When a train or engine is stopped by an emergency application…
If an adjacent main track or controlled siding may be obstructed,…”
Note that it says nothing about a need to confirm that there is an obstruction.
Note that there is nothing about the need to confirm the existence unicorns either. You’re suggesting that it also covers an adjacent main track or controlled siding that the engineer imagines or hallucinates being obstructed. Surely this would also fall into your category of things that engineers must focus their ESP powers on. It is unclear how the rules call out dealing with those types of issues, but I bet if you paraphrased the rules, took some things out of context and added your wisdom, you could probably make the rules match your imagination. What do the rules specifically say about unicorns?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy SidingWhat do the rules specifically say about unicorns?
Ask this crew?
Sorry...
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
EuclidWhy wouldn't this apply? 103.8 Emergency Brake Applications When conditions warrant, use an emergency brake application without hesitation if any condition occurs in which there is doubt that service applications can control train speed…
The next time you are running a train as an engineer and a UDE is reported on train that you are bout to pass, feel free to plug it.
I can easily see the thread where the grain train went UDE, but didn't derail and oil train did plug it and something bad happened, Bucky spending billions of electrons argueing why the engineer SHOULDN'T have plugged it since its "so dangerous" to put a train in emergency.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Well, I must say that after listening to all this knowledge, it is pretty clear to me how it all is supposed to work:
Rule calls for immediate radio warning and red fusee display because mainline track may be fouled.
Collision may be imminent.
Stopping distance too short for service application.
Distance too short to slow to restricted speed with service application.
Not enough time to learn whether fouling exists.
Must treat as an unplanned stop because fouling may not exist.
May not make an emergency application unless fouling is known to exist.
Engineer always has the option to dump the air if he feels it is justified, but it is never justified because it is too dangerous.
Unplanned stop rule prohibits emergency application because it would be poor train handling if fouling does not exist.
Engineer sees that track is fouled, but too late to stop with emergency application.
Train strikes fouling car, derails, and catches fire.
Engineer is lucky train did not derail from trying to stop it before it hit the fouling car.
Euclid Well, I must say that after listening to all this knowledge, it is pretty clear to me how it all is supposed to work: Rule calls for immediate radio warning and red fusee display because mainline track may be fouled. Collision may be imminent.
EuclidStopping distance too short for service application.
In this case, pretty much. It was never mentioned in the report, but the oil train engineer may have initiated a full service application upon notification of the grain train UDE.
EuclidDistance too short to slow to restricted speed with service application.
EuclidNot enough time to learn whether fouling exists.
EuclidMust treat as an unplanned stop because fouling may not exist.
EuclidMay not make an emergency application unless fouling is known to exist.
EuclidEngineer always has the option to dump the air if he feels it is justified, but it is never justified because it is too dangerous.
EuclidUnplanned stop rule prohibits emergency application because it would be poor train handling if fouling does not exist.
Again, the use of an emergency application would be discouraged, not prohibited.
EuclidEngineer sees that track is fouled, but too late to stop with emergency application.
EuclidTrain strikes fouling car, derails, and catches fire.
EuclidEngineer is lucky train did not derail from trying to stop it before it hit the fouling car.
Would the end result have been any different?
As I've noted before, this incident was a "perfect storm."
Had the oil train been, say, 3 miles away when the grain train derailed, there would have been ample time to properly slow the oil train to restricted speed. In fact, it's very possible that by the time the oil train reached the head end of the grain train, it would have been known that the adjacent track had been fouled.
Okay, fair enough. Here are some thoughts about the Unplanned Stop rule.
I don’t understand what actions the unplanned stop rule imposes on the oil train.
I understand the Unplanned Stop rule to be offering a procedure for stopping without using an emergency application. How can this rule apply to the oil train without requiring the engineer to follow the procedure that does not use an emergency application?
In other words if the oil train is governed by a rule that prescribes not using an emergency application, then how is it possible that the engineer is free to use an emergency application if he wants to?
Or-- is this rule just an option that applies to the oil train, but only applies as an option? If that is so, it sounds like the rule is just an operating procedure that may or may not be used. So the rule would be that the engineer has that choice offered by the rule.
So then when it says “the following procedure must be followed,” it means that it must be followed only if the engineer chooses to stop as quickly as possible without making an emergency application.
You are really overthinking this.
The engineer is to use whatever procedure/technique is required at the moment. If that's a simple brake application (or a full service) that's what he'll use. If an emergency application is required, that's what he'll use. It's all very dynamic.
It's really not as complicated as you seem to be intent on making it.
Stop under full control - service application.
Stop faster, but under control - full service application.
Stop as fast as possible - emergency application.
The requirement may change at a moments notice. If it does, the engineer will make the needed adjustments.
Euclid Rule calls for immediate radio warning and red fusee display because mainline track may be fouled.
Essentially true, although red fusee wouldn't be placed until after the train is stopped.
.... or it may not be immiment. Whether or not there is a collison is at this point unkown to the crews.
Stopping distance too short for service application. Distance too short to slow to restricted speed with service application.
Since no stop is as of yet required, the first statement is not really a true statement. The second statement is closer to the truth. The oil train could not slow to restricted speed prior to passing the head end of the grain train based on when they recieved the emergency call, regardless of how they applied the brakes.
True, but the only way they "have enough time to learn whether fouling exists" is if there is enough time for the grain train crew to walk the train.
No, the unplanned stop rule applies to when you have to make an unplanned stop and don't want to apply the emergency brakes. Up until the oil train crew saw the grain cars fouling their tracks they were not planning to make a stop and werenot attempting stop and were not required to stop. They were required to reduce speed and proceed at restricted speed.
No. The enginner may plug it any time he feels the need. Teh conductor can plug it any time he feels that the engineer is not handling the train safely or there is a need.
Absolutely, positively NO. I hope you are being sarcastic. No one has said this (except you) anywhere in theis thread and many others have stated many times that the engineer can dump the air whenever he feels its necessary.
Absolutely not. It provide the enginner with instruction on how to stop when the engineer has to make an unplanned stop and he doesn't want to put teh train in emergency. Technically the only train that made an unplanned stop was the grain train and it went UDE so the unplanned stop rule doesn't apply. The oil train was intentionally put in emergency.
Engineer sees that track is fouled, but too late to stop with emergency application. Train strikes fouling car, derails, and catches fire.
True.
Total supposition.
Based on the fact that several hundred trains go UDE every day across the US and only a tiny fraction of them derail, the probabiliity that it was going to derail is very, very small.
What you don't seem to be able to understand is the difference between putting a train in emergency when there is not a known risk and putting the train in emergency when there is a known risk. If there is not a KNOWN risk, then putting a train in emergency might be considered by some as reckless. The probability that the grain train went UDE and was not derailed is many time better than the probability that it went UDE and was derailed. On the other hand when there was a known risk, the derailed cars, then plugging the train is a minimal risk because any way it plays out its going to be bad.
As I have said before you are judging their actions knowing how the end of the story. The actual crews didn't have that luxury.
dehusmanTechnically the only train that made an unplanned stop was the grain train and it went UDE so the unplanned stop rule doesn't apply.
dehusmanBased on the fact that several hundred trains go UDE every day across the US and only a tiny fraction of them derail, the probabiliity that it was going to derail is very, very small. What you don't seem to be able to understand is the difference between putting a train in emergency when there is not a known risk and putting the train in emergency when there is a known risk. If there is not a KNOWN risk, then putting a train in emergency might be considered by some as reckless.
Dave,
What you quoted from me above was my charaterization of what I have read here by others. Some of it I agree with and some I don't. I was being sarcastic where you noted.
Actually I agree that the risk of derailing the train from an emergency application is not that great, as you suggest. I think making an emergency application in this case would have been a wise move against the risk of there being fouling equipment. That would have been my choice even without knowing the outcome as I do now. But if it is only up to the engineer's discretion, so be it.
I do understand the difference between a known risk and not a known risk. But the Rule 6.23 does call for an immediate response even if the risk is not known. So why worry about the disctintion?
To the point about the Unplanned Stop rule. This was introduced into this discussion by the dispatcher in Indiana who posted a couple pages back. The point he made was that the rule applied to the oil train, and thus it would prove to me that an emergency application would have been against the rule. It was in response to me suggesting that an emergency application should have been made because the train was unable to slow to restricted speed by the point where it was required. His statement is why I concluded that the Unplanned Stop rule prohibited the engineer from dumping the air.
Larry also confirmed that the Unplanned Stop rule applied to the oil train, but in his latest post above, he seems to have withdrawn that conclusion. I have questioned the requirement for the unplanned stop rule like you have based on the fact that there was no stop planned if the train was supposed to run at restricted speed. And if that were the case, there would have been no reason for an emergency application unless a fouling was discovered. So I conclude that Unplanned Stop rule had no application to the oil train. There would be no point to applying that rule. The situation was compeletely covered by the call for restricted speed, if it could have been implemented in time.
Euclid To the point about the Unplanned Stop rule. This was introduced into this discussion by the dispatcher in Indiana who posted a couple pages back. The point he made was that the rule applied to the oil train, and thus it would prove to me that an emergency application would have been against the rule. It was in response to me suggesting that an emergency application should have been made because the train was unable to slow to restricted speed by the point where it was required. His statement is why I concluded that the Unplanned Stop rule prohibited the engineer from dumping the air.
Then you concluded wrong. That is not the first time from what I have seen from your posts under both user names. I would point out why, but I really feel as though it would be a waste of time with you.
An "expensive model collector"
Well if it applies, what did it require of the oil train? Does it prohibit an emergency application or not?
As long as the second guessing is going on here....
I will mention one thing about the accident that did surprise me personally. "We're all over the place".........."We are on fire here". What kind of emergency radio procedure training is that?
Understand we are talking about humans under shock from a recent derailment but shouldn't they be just a little more composed in an emergency? Shouldn't they be better trained in emergency radio procedure as to limiting the radio transmissions to just facts that immediately need to be known by the larger rail network?
Just curious. Just seems to me there needs to probably be a little more training in this area maybe via simulator or simulations?
I think the opposing train that derailed did OK with first declaring an emergency then warning the oncomming train they did not know the cause yet and there could be cars derailed in their path............that part worked OK.
That crew was lucky to be alive at all. I think they did a pretty good job considering.
No, I wouldn't have dumped the train until I knew a crash was coming.. Had I been the engineer the outcome would have been the same.
Randy
23 17 46 11
Euclid Well if it applies, what did it require of the oil train? Does it prohibit an emergency application or not?
Talk about hung up on something.
An emergency application is NEVER prohibited. It may not be the preferred option, but it is never prohibited. Several people have told you this. Several times. PLEASE - Cross that off your list.
The unplanned stop rule is a train handling rule. Just because the word "stop" is there doesn't mean the engineer's actions have to result in a stop. If the situation changes, he can stop stopping and continue on his way. Or go on into emergency.
So, given the situation in question, the engineer of the oil train would possibly have started with a service application (he was probably reaching for the brake handle as he heard the grain train traffic, but that's a supposition, not necessarily fact), followed in short order by the emergency application when the obstruction was spotted. All we know about is the emergency application.
Like I said, you're overthinking this.
I agree with Ed and Randy, I would not take any exception with the oil train crew's actions after the collision. I could only hope I would have as much presence of mind after that type of an accident.
edblysard Not to be too blunt, but how many times have you been in the cab of a locomotive that slammed into a loaded grain car at 42 mph? Locomotives are heavy, really really heavy, and that one is bounced and tossed around like a kids toy….the fact they both lived with little injury is almost impossible to believe, the fact that the engineer can speak on the radio under a scream is even more amazing! And he managed to give the dispatcher all the info needed…”We are all over the place” and “We’re on fire here” added to “We’re a KEY train” lets the dispatcher know the train is derailed with cars scattered, it is on fire, and it is hauling hazardous material…that he can form a coherent sentence is amazing in the first place, that he remembers to tell the conductor to bring the portable or hand held radio with them shows that, scared as he is, he can still think and function. Overall, not bad, not bad at all. 23/17/46/11
CMStPnP I think your significantly dumbing down the ability of a railroad crew to compose themselves in an emergency.
I think it has a lot to do with experience, too. And the intensity of the moment.
dehusman Euclid Well if it applies, what did it require of the oil train? Does it prohibit an emergency application or not? Based on the fact that many people have answered this question many times already in the course of this discussion (including me), if you haven't figured out the answer there is really no point in trying to answer it again.
Yes. You, ed, tree, zugmann and others have made rich, factual comments. The NTSB final report will tell the tale, too. But this is not about facts. It is about Bucky and his obsessive style. Endless.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
tree68 Euclid Well if it applies, what did it require of the oil train? Does it prohibit an emergency application or not?
It has never been on my list.
From the start, I have never believed that an emergency application was prohibited. In fact, I said I thought the best choice would have been to make an emergency application.
My statement that an emergency application was prohibited was only my summation of your point that indicated to me that it was prohibited. Both you and the dispatcher from Indiana brought up the Unplanned Stop rule in order to prove to me that I had to be wrong about preferring an emergency application. The point was to show me that an emergency application, as I preferred, would have been illegal due to the Unplanned Stop rule. Of course that is not true.
So I don't have to cross it off of my list because it has NEVER been on my list.
I have asked you, Dave H, and the dispatcher from Indiana to clarify this implication that the Unplanned Stop rule imposed conditions on the oil train. Dave said the rule did not even apply. You refused to respond to my question about it in the 8th post from the top of this page. The dispatcher from Indiana also refused to answer.
CMStPnP As long as the second guessing is going on here.... I will mention one thing about the accident that did surprise me personally. "We're all over the place".........."We are on fire here". What kind of emergency radio procedure training is that? Understand we are talking about humans under shock from a recent derailment but shouldn't they be just a little more composed in an emergency? Shouldn't they be better trained in emergency radio procedure as to limiting the radio transmissions to just facts that immediately need to be known by the larger rail network? Just curious. Just seems to me there needs to probably be a little more training in this area maybe via simulator or simulations? I think the opposing train that derailed did OK with first declaring an emergency then warning the oncomming train they did not know the cause yet and there could be cars derailed in their path............that part worked OK.
I agree with the railroad guys on this one. Considering the fact that they'd just literally ridden out a train wreck and were probably in shock, I feel the crew kept it together quite admirably. Most of us would be so freaked out we’d be screaming into the radio in that high pitched voice that comes over us when are in shock, our senses are overwhelmed and our blood pressure is off the charts. I understand the comparison with the airline pilots under stress, but it’s probably not a fair comparison. Would they have been that together if the airplane had smacked into a derailed grain car and then crashed into a ditch to slide on another couple hundred feet before catching fire? Maybe, maybe not. I would guess that in the case of a derailment or accident that the dispatcher takes on a very important role in calmly finding out what’s going on and what the next step should be.
Euclid tree68 Euclid Well if it applies, what did it require of the oil train? Does it prohibit an emergency application or not? It has never been on my list. From the start, I have never believed that an emergency application was prohibited. In fact, I said I thought the best choice would have been to make an emergency application. My statement that an emergency application was prohibited was only my summation of your point that indicated to me that it was prohibited. Both you and the dispatcher from Indiana brought up the Unplanned Stop rule in order to prove to me that I had to be wrong about preferring an emergency application. The point was to show me that an emergency application, as I preferred, would have been illegal due to the Unplanned Stop rule. Of course that is not true. So I don't have to cross it off of my list because it has NEVER been on my list. I have asked you, Dave H, and the dispatcher from Indiana to clarify this implication that the Unplanned Stop rule imposed conditions on the oil train. Dave said the rule did not even apply. You refused to respond to my question about it in the 8th post from the top of this page. The dispatcher from Indiana also refused to answer.
Euclid I have asked you, Dave H, and the dispatcher from Indiana to clarify this implication that the Unplanned Stop rule imposed conditions on the oil train. Dave said the rule did not even apply. You refused to respond to my question about it in the 8th post from the top of this page. The dispatcher from Indiana also refused to answer.
It has been answered, then reasked by you with slightly different wording, reanswered, and so on. Quite frankly some of us are sick of answering the same question over and over.
Now since we are talking about questions that posters have refused to answer, what is your railroading background again?
edblysard And he managed to give the dispatcher all the info needed…”We are all over the place” and “We’re on fire here” added to “We’re a KEY train” lets the dispatcher know the train is derailed with cars scattered, it is on fire, and it is hauling hazardous material…that he can form a coherent sentence is amazing in the first place, that he remembers to tell the conductor to bring the portable or hand held radio with them shows that, scared as he is, he can still think and function. Overall, not bad, not bad at all.
Agreed. The information that was given out was all that was needed for a dispatcher to get the proper people headed in that direction.
CMStPnP edblysard Not to be too blunt, but how many times have you been in the cab of a locomotive that slammed into a loaded grain car at 42 mph? Locomotives are heavy, really really heavy, and that one is bounced and tossed around like a kids toy….the fact they both lived with little injury is almost impossible to believe, the fact that the engineer can speak on the radio under a scream is even more amazing! And he managed to give the dispatcher all the info needed…”We are all over the place” and “We’re on fire here” added to “We’re a KEY train” lets the dispatcher know the train is derailed with cars scattered, it is on fire, and it is hauling hazardous material…that he can form a coherent sentence is amazing in the first place, that he remembers to tell the conductor to bring the portable or hand held radio with them shows that, scared as he is, he can still think and function. Overall, not bad, not bad at all. 23/17/46/11 ....And yet we have the example of Airline stewardesses and Airline Pilots that do better after an airplane crash...........because they are better trained in that area? I think your significantly dumbing down the ability of a railroad crew to compose themselves in an emergency. It's something we ask most 17-18 year olds to do when they enlist in the Military and request a Medevac during an intense firefight. I don't think it is too much to ask of railroad crew training.
n012944It has been answered, then reasked by you with slightly different wording, reanswered, and so on. Quite frankly some of us are sick of answering the same question over and over.
That has been Bucky's standard procedure for years. Keep moving the goal posts so no one can discover where he wants the conversation to go. It's a troll's standard maneuver.
n012944Now since we are talking about questions that posters have refused to answer, what is your railroading background again?
Hey, I wish you luck getting that question answered. I can't enumerate how many times the troll has been asked what his qualifications are only to have the question totally ignored. Based on his unwillingness to give even a remote hint of his background in railroading it's an extremely safe bet he has absolutley none except for what he has read on line, and the veracity of some of that is in serious doubt.
Norm
edblysardHow often do we get to hear airline pilots talking to Air Traffic Control AFTER the accident?
Not frequently, but if we're lucky there are tapes of the communications preceding the accident. Three things are constantly drummed into pilot's heads during training. They are "Aviate, Navigate, Communicate". IOW, fly the plane, determine where you are and your best options for landing or other corrective action, Communicate your situation to ATC along with your intentions.
Thanks to continuous training, you will almost never hear a pilot go into the panic mode. They manage to keep their cool. Remember "Houston, We have a problem"? That astronaut was in dire straits yet a calm head prevailed. Not everyone can maintain that cool simply because they have not been trained to do so. Some simply go into panic mode from square one. You can't expect everyone to be so well trained.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.