Backing Up After Running a Red Signal

[greyhounds]

A good way to get people killed.  He's lucky there wasn't a following train on his block.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transportation/985990,CST-NWS-CTA04.article

When did they quit training these guys?

[AntonioFP45]

Running a red signal is very serious. 

Isn't the procedure to stop and immedietly notify the conductor or dispatcher in the event a motorman or engineer runs a red signal?   

[n012944]

Running a red signal is very serious. 

Isn't the procedure to stop and immedietly notify the conductor or dispatcher in the event a motorman or engineer runs a red signal?   

Yes, but one has to remember that for the most part, getting past a red will put you on the street.  Some people think that if they back up they will not get caught, and I am sure that some get away with it.  This time they did not.

[KCSfan]

The only acceptable excuse for running a red signal is if it drops right in front of you and the train can't be stopped short of the signal. This isn't too serious if it's a stop and proceed at restricted speed block signal but the dispatcher should be notified immediately and the event investigated. It's a different matter if it's an absolute and the train has fouled a switch or interlocked crossing by the time it gets stopped which could result in a catastrophy. Once again the first action to take is to notify the dispatcher immediately so he can alert and stop any conflicting trains. Backing up should never be attempted unless and until such a move is authorized by the dispatcher!

Without any more info it's impossible to tell exactly why the CTA train derailed. My first guess would be that it stopped while on a switch that was realigned with the train on it. If this was the case when it backed up the rear cars would be going on one track and the lead cars on an adjacent one.

Mark

[Railway Man]

Those of you like me in the "real train" business may be as appalled as I was to learn what constitutes operating rules and enforcement in the transit business.  At one large, big-city, light-rail line I have done some coordination work with, their enforcement of a red signal (absolute stop) indication is as follows:

1. 1st offense, warning
2. 2nd offense, retraining for a week
3. 3rd offense, back to driving a bus.

I about fell over when they told me this.

RWM

[AntonioFP45]

Those of you like me in the "real train" business may be as appalled as I was to learn what constitutes operating rules and enforcement in the transit business.  At one large, big-city, light-rail line I have done some coordination work with, their enforcement of a red signal (absolute stop) indication is as follows:

1. 1st offense, warning
2. 2nd offense, retraining for a week
3. 3rd offense, back to driving a bus.

I about fell over when they told me this.

RWM

It can be mind boggling, but unlike most Class 1 railroads, taxpayer funded transit systems are far more political and bueracratic. There seems to be an emphasis on (or fear of) "political correctness" .  As seen over the years, the way management, the union, and the lawyers hammer it out:  The transit employer is supposed to make genuine, resonable efforts to give employees that committ safety violations reasonable opportunities to get their act together.  The exceptions would be something flagrant, like reporting for duty intoxicated. I was a union steward (ATU) at a transit bus system and witnessed a few "abuses" here and there. 

Some of the infractions that are generally "smoothed over" in transit systems would likely not tolerated on a typical Class 1 railroads.  I can imagine that for transit employees going to work for a Class 1 would notice the differences quickly.

 

[Railway Man]

In my opinion it has less to do with civil-service or government ownership and more to do with the culture of transit operations vs. the culture of railroad operations.  Government-run railroads that I have worked with do not have a transit-like culture but look just like a privately owned railroad.

I think the difference in culture between railroads and transit in part is due to differences in the technology.  Transit operations have high braking horsepower, very short trains, and usually consistent headways between trains, so running a red signal is less likely to result in a collision. 

Rules infractions of the magnitude of an authority excursion (which is what running a red signal is) have zero tolerance at the large railroads and the well-run short lines I have worked for and with, regardless of ownership.  I've seen some privately owned short lines with some alarmingly loose conceptions of the rules.

RWM

[AntonioFP45]

Excellent points, Railway Man.

Re: Culture.  To expand on your point.  From what I've seen, read, and from my own personal experiences with U.S transit, there seems to be a "generalized" mindset with many transit managers and workers that, because it's not a "for profit $" company, the performance standards and even some of the safety standards (non-life threatening) are adhered to or viewed with a casual attitude because if something does happen the company is not going to be bankrupted.  The taxpayers will just continue to "kick in" the funding (inspite of budge cutbacks).

Wheras, in a U.S Class I or Class II "for profit" railroad the mindset seems to be:  "You better watch yourself closely, don't bend the rules or do something stupid that will get the company in big trouble. You may lose your job or at least be suspended."  and "Remember, a few lawsuits and you can forget about raises and even face furloughs!".   That was the mentality of the SCL railroad way back in the 1970s.  That type of thinking hasn't changed much in 3 decades.  

 

[daveklepper]

Regarding culture, most modern light rail systems grew out of bus operations, and the attitudes of most bus drivers are simply they are just driving a very large automobile.   Then moving to rail does not change the culture much.   But is should.

One very notable exception is the New York City Transit Authority, where everyone is extremely safety consious.  But then it is simply one of three member of a rail family that also includes the LIRR and Metro North, and they do talk to each other.   LIRR inhereted the PRR's stress on safety, and Metro North the NYCentral's.   But PATH is also safety conscious.   Working for them on sound systems in 1995, I witnessed a safety drill at WTC.   On 9 September 01, horrified as I was watching the TV, I was certain all PATH passengers and employees were safe. and they were.

Why should automatic stop equipment be universaly applied to heavy rail and not also to all off-street, grade separated high speed light rail ?

[Amtrak77]

***! and to think I want a job working for CTA, now I know why they didn't take my application?

[G Mack]

I remember reading somewhere, years ago, that the Long Island Railroad had one of, if not the toughest, testing programs for it's operating crews. Anyone else know if this is true?

Gregory

[paulsafety]

Wasn't the Amtrak tradgedy at Chase, MD, ultimately the result of running a red signal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase,_Maryland_rail_wreck

I remember the reports when that happened -- really tragic stuff.  I wonder if this accident had a direct or lasting effect on increasing screenings, testing, qualification, re-training, Automatic Train Stop (ATS), etc.

Paul F.

[AntonioFP45]

Yes, Paul.  The "Collision at Gunpow", as it's often referred, did have an effect on the commercial transportation industry.  Ricky Gates was the locomotive engineer responsible for the crash.  He's a forum member and has made posts regarding the crash.  He has been remorseful and has to live with the tragedy for the rest of his life. 

Within a few months the transit system that I worked for enacted random drug testing for all operations and fleet maintenance employees (ironically administrative and management staff were exempt...what hypocrites).  The ATU union on the national level actually fought against random drug screenings because at that time the accuracy of blood and urine tests were still in question.  Nationwide some cases came up in which drug screen readings indicated substance abuse when in fact the substance may have been cough drops or other pefectly legal consumables.   

Though a loyal union member (and later a union steward) I was in favor of it because I knew of a number of employees that smoked marijuana regularly and/or drank alcohol products heavily.  It angered me that these people were inconsiderate enough to endanger the traveling public, whether they repaired vehicles or operated them. 

It's funny, but I remember afterwards how some people bragged about how easy it was to beat drug tests.  This infuriated me even more!  IMHO, you have got to be really low to continue to abuse your body and mental faculties and endanger the safety of coworkers and the public.  These jerks have no business behind the wheel of a bus, the throttle of a locomotive, or operating the tools to repair them.

     

[paulsafety]

Yes, Paul.  The "Collision at Gunpow", as it's often referred, did have an effect on the commercial transportation industry.  Ricky Gates was the locomotive engineer responsible for the crash.  He's a forum member and has made posts regarding the crash.  He has been remorseful and has to live with the tragedy for the rest of his life. 

Within a few months the transit system that I worked for enacted random drug testing for all operations and fleet maintenance employees (ironically administrative and management staff were exempt...what hypocrites).  The ATU union on the national level actually fought against random drug screenings because at that time the accuracy of blood and urine tests were still in question.  Nationwide some cases came up in which drug screen readings indicated substance abuse when in fact the substance may have been cough drops or other pefectly legal consumables.   

Though a loyal union member (and later a union steward) I was in favor of it because I knew of a number of employees that smoked marijuana regularly and/or drank alcohol products heavily.  It angered me that these people were inconsiderate enough to endanger the traveling public, whether they repaired vehicles or operated them. 

It's funny, but I remember afterwards how some people bragged about how easy it was to beat drug tests.  This infuriated me even more!  IMHO, you have got to be really low to continue to abuse your body and mental faculties and endanger the safety of coworkers and the public.  These jerks have no business behind the wheel of a bus, the throttle of a locomotive, or operating the tools to repair them.

Thanks for the additional insight.  To be clear, I'm not trying to judge Mr. Gates at this late date -- I can't imagine the pain he or the other families have had to deal with considering the aftermath of the accident.

It's good to learn from mistakes, though.  That's the point, isn't it?  It just seems that if transit systems are having a new round of problems of running red signals, maybe it's time to hit the panic button before something much worse than the CTA derailment described in the initial post happens.

I remember 1986 -- wasn't it was the first year all of the nation's truckers had to submit to substance abuse testing?  It was a bit chaotic as labs were opening up all over "to cash in" on testing.  Things have gotten better (I think).

Again, thanks for the insight.

Paul F.

[gardendance]

Does anybody know if this is correct? My understanding of the Gunpow crash was that in addition to running the stop signal, the freight locomotives were over the speed limit for an engine move. I'm assuming that locomotives with cars get a higher speed limit because they get to use the cars brakes as well as the locomotive brakes.

And those locomotives, maybe all freights on the North East Corridor at the time, did not have any automatic stopper when running a red light, however passenger trains did, and one of the reforms from that crash was to put the auto stop on freights.

[erikem]

I seem to recall that the warning whistle had been taped over.

[AntonioFP45]

Take a look at these clips:

Part 1 http://youtube.com/watch?v=MR27QuhRz6U  

Part 2 http://youtube.com/watch?v=tKltDawsrrA&feature=related