Misaligned Track Switches That Cause Wrecks

4626 views
165 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December, 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 18,280 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, February 12, 2018 9:51 PM

GraniteRailroader
This is starting to feel like Firehouse eh, Tree?

Yep.

 

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    December, 2017
  • 139 posts
Posted by LithoniaOperator on Monday, February 12, 2018 10:28 PM

It seems as if it’s possible that three CSX employees are involved: two on the train crew, plus the dispatcher. We don’t know yet what happened. It will likely be a long time before we do.

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 5,626 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, February 12, 2018 11:00 PM

Paul of Covington
Now I'm confused. I thought we had established that the "guest" road always paid.

Look at the dates.  The 'guest road always paid' was in common usage half a century ago, between relative railroad 'equals'. 

The Amtrak 'secret agreement' considerably postdates (Don Oltmann can give you precise date and circumstances) the original agreement established when the 'quasi-public' NRPC was formed in 1971.  It has the no-fault characteristics described.

As also noted, if other specific roads have established their own written agreements, those would be binding over the AAR principle.  And it's unlikely we are going to know the details in those.

  • Member since
    January, 2014
  • 4,611 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, February 13, 2018 7:40 AM

tree68

 

 
Euclid
What roles did they play?

 

I think that's been pretty well established.

 

I did not know that anything had been established as to who caused the disaster.  I recall that speculation has narrowed it down to one of two people.

My question you quoted above was regarding Randy's comment.  Notice that he includes two people as being the cause, rather than the cause being one of two people.  He said this:

"The Cayce wreck was cause by two CSX employees."

 

  • Member since
    December, 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 18,280 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, February 13, 2018 7:46 AM

Euclid
"The Cayce wreck was cause by two CSX employees."

And another poster suggested it was three.

Outside parties such as vandals and signal department employees notwithstanding, all three have been mentioned during the discussion.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    March, 2002
  • 9,251 posts
Posted by edblysard on Tuesday, February 13, 2018 7:49 AM
Yes, we noticed….most railroads require the conductor and the engineer to confirm via radio the switch has been lined back for main line use.
He may also have been referring to the conductor and whoever was dispatch that shift.
Anyway, your agenda today is?

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    June, 2004
  • From: roundhouse
  • 2,665 posts
Posted by Randy Stahl on Tuesday, February 13, 2018 7:51 AM

Only two people had the ability to handle that switch. Both crew members are responsible for making sure switches are normal before releasing thier authority.

I'd like to see thier names published because I don't want either of them working around me.

  • Member since
    January, 2014
  • 4,611 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, February 13, 2018 8:15 AM

tree68

 

 
Euclid
"The Cayce wreck was cause by two CSX employees."

 

And another poster suggested it was three.

Outside parties such as vandals and signal department employees notwithstanding, all three have been mentioned during the discussion.

 

The quote you attibute to me above was not stated by me.  It was stated by Randy.  It sounds like a statement of fact, so I asked Randy what role those two people played.

I was not sure which two people Randy was referring to and he did not say.  So I thought I would start by asking what role the two people played.

I think we are only left with the conclusion that the switch was locked and lined into the siding.

 

  • Member since
    December, 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 18,280 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:56 PM

Euclid
The quote you attibute to me above was not stated by me. {snip} I think we are only left with the conclusion that the switch was locked and lined into the siding. 

I usually don't screw up quotes like that - you're right.  It was Randy.

As I recall, that the switch was lined and locked for the siding has been established as fact.

As you note, the question is by whom.  That has also been discussed, and the conclusion of that discussion narrows it down to two people, barring "outside interference."

As also noted, the dispatcher may or may not hold a piece of this.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    January, 2014
  • 4,611 posts
Posted by Euclid on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 2:12 PM

Euclid
I think the point of the article is to open the door to the public interest of forcing an Amtrak host railroad to pay the damages sustained in an Amtrak wreck if the wreck is caused by the host railroad.  This could be driven by lawyers who want to take on this cause. 
 
The time may be right for the proposal because this Cayce wreck appears likely to have been caused by CSX.  The most convincing argument to persuade the public to support the cause is the safety of the traveling public.

Lawyers will argue that if CSX knew that they had to pay for damages in an Amtrak wreck that CSX caused, they would be more careful in the operations surrounding and governing the Amtrak train.  In the case of No. 91, maybe CSX would have spiked the switches or imposed restricted speed if they thought that was cheaper than taking the financial risk for damages if the train were wrecked because of a CSX mistake.   

 

I think this sums up the point I have been making as I said above:

http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/observation-tower/archive/2018/02/14/is-justice-served-by-no-fault-contracts.aspx

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 13,874 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 3:01 PM

tree68
As also noted, the dispatcher may or may not hold a piece of this.

Everything I have heard through 'back channels' say that the Dispatcher performed all the required functions to the letter of the Rule Book and common sense.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    December, 2017
  • 139 posts
Posted by LithoniaOperator on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 3:11 PM

BaltACD

 

 
tree68
As also noted, the dispatcher may or may not hold a piece of this.

 

Everything I have heard through 'back channels' say that the Dispatcher performed all the required functions to the letter of the Rule Book and common sense.

 

I hope this turns out to be true. I have always held dispatchers in very high regard. This is an awful situation however it happened, but it would comfort me some to know there was no mistake by the dispatcher.

  • Member since
    December, 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 18,280 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 4:08 PM

BaltACD

 

 
tree68
As also noted, the dispatcher may or may not hold a piece of this.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    May, 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 11,845 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 4:44 PM

Euclid
 
Euclid
I think the point of the article is to open the door to the public interest of forcing an Amtrak host railroad to pay the damages sustained in an Amtrak wreck if the wreck is caused by the host railroad.  This could be driven by lawyers who want to take on this cause. 
 
The time may be right for the proposal because this Cayce wreck appears likely to have been caused by CSX.  The most convincing argument to persuade the public to support the cause is the safety of the traveling public.

Lawyers will argue that if CSX knew that they had to pay for damages in an Amtrak wreck that CSX caused, they would be more careful in the operations surrounding and governing the Amtrak train.  In the case of No. 91, maybe CSX would have spiked the switches or imposed restricted speed if they thought that was cheaper than taking the financial risk for damages if the train were wrecked because of a CSX mistake.   

 

 

 

I think this sums up the point I have been making as I said above:

http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/observation-tower/archive/2018/02/14/is-justice-served-by-no-fault-contracts.aspx

 

Unrelated, I know, but isn't the photo in that blog reversed 180 degrees?Huh?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    January, 2014
  • 4,611 posts
Posted by Euclid on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 5:46 PM

Yes, the photo is backwards. 

  • Member since
    January, 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 10,939 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 7:13 PM

BaltACD

 

 
tree68
As also noted, the dispatcher may or may not hold a piece of this.

 

Everything I have heard through 'back channels' say that the Dispatcher performed all the required functions to the letter of the Rule Book and common sense.

 

I heard that the CSX dispatcher got the 'switch is normal and locked" from someone in the yard office, not the conductor.  The person quoted a news article in the Jax paper.  I haven't been able to find that.  Not good if true...

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy