1. "Flooding happens."
from the Rockford resident's post: "As a Rockford, IL resident, I will say that you do have most of the facts straight--the washout happened about an hour before the train got to the crossing. There were severe thunderstorms that passed through the area, dropping a large amount of rain in a short time. A retention pond from a nearby subdivision filled up and then failed, sending a large amount of water down toward the parallel Union Pacific and Canadian National tracks at the Mulford Road crossing.
This exact spot had been the site of washouts--just like this one--that occured back in 2006 and then around 2000. The potential for a problem at this site was well known to the railroad and to local officials, because it had happened before.
Local residents informed the police, who did come out to the crossing and filmed the washout with his dashboard camera, showing the culvert washed out and the tracks suspended for about 20 feet just west of the Mulford Road crossing. The deputy was the one who called the CN to warn them of the situation, but the call went to Montreal and it took them too long to get in touch with the dispatchers in Homewood, IL. I think he called about 20 minutes before the train got there, but I haven't read the final report. The officer left the scene before the train got there (the Freeport Sub only runs one scheduled freight each direction daily) so it wasn't like there are frequent trains on the line."
So pretty clearly, the problem at this site was known and had happened twice before in the previous 11 years. Yet nothing was done by CN to remediate. My point is that CN was negligent and incompetent in this case, which caused a dangerous accident which could have injured or killed the train crew and which did kill a totally innocent bystander.
2. Purposefulness is not the point. I doubt if most/any accidents are purposeful. For 17 minutes, Montreal could not get through. That is unacceptable.
3. I also hope CN has figured out its problems and installed a hotline, and hope someone isn't too busy to answer in the future. I accept that a hotline could work, but at the time of the accident, the CN had not, even though other railroads have such a plan. So it isn't a case of my judgment being clouded. Asking tough questions after an avoidable accident is a rational response in order to solve the problem, not making excuses as you seem to do.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Root Cause analysis - Incompetent owner of the retention pond - if ANY communities storm water retention pond has failed at least 3 times in 9 years there is incompetent design, construction and maintenance of said pond. Community would be better served with no retention pond at all than one that repeatedly fails.
There are locations that due to known waterways and geographical formations are flood prone areas. A area that is 'supposedly' protected by a retention pond is 'by design' not a flood prone area - repeated failures of the pond are not CN's responsibility - they are the responsibility of community that owns the pond.
CN screwed the pooch in communicating the wash out.
The Community that owned the pond screwed the pooch by causing the wash out.
schlimm 1. "Flooding happens." from the Rockford resident's post: "As a Rockford, IL resident, I will say that you do have most of the facts straight--the washout happened about an hour before the train got to the crossing. There were severe thunderstorms that passed through the area, dropping a large amount of rain in a short time. A retention pond from a nearby subdivision filled up and then failed, sending a large amount of water down toward the parallel Union Pacific and Canadian National tracks at the Mulford Road crossing. This exact spot had been the site of washouts--just like this one--that occured back in 2006 and then around 2000. The potential for a problem at this site was well known to the railroad and to local officials, because it had happened before.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
schlimm \not making excuses as you seem to do.
\not making excuses as you seem to do.
Excuses? I am pretty sure I have made my feelings on this case well known. If not please allow me to. The fact that the CN had no way to contact the dispatch center from the police center other than a bell line is unacceptable, and was one of the main causes of the accident. I would hope that the person who came up with that system is looking for work elsewhere. However you seem to be on a witch hunt, coming to strange and inaccurate conclusions, passing blame, and ignoring input of people who do this for a living. Judging from your post history you seem to dislike the CN, and it is showing in your posts.
An "expensive model collector"
I have read a lot of posts regarding the communication - or lack there of - between the CN police in Montreal and the dispatching center in Homewood, IL. There is another possible communication issue that nobody else has presented here. Montreal is in Quebec Canada. There are two primary languages: english and french (or french Canadian). I haven't read anything that would suggest that there was any kind of language barrier for this incident but what if the person answering the phone in Montreal only speaks french? It just adds a unqiue twist to an emergency hotline - having to cover two languages - that the big four US railroads don't have to contend with unless they also take spanish speaking calls.
I wouldn't say that party / person / whoever is responsible for the retention pond that has flooding issues is incompetent. Maybe lazy because all the responsible party (or parties) needs to do is hire somebody to fix it. Easier said than done because that requires money and there could be issues with who pays what. Call in the lawyers. The initial NTSB report was critical of CN for knowing about the situation but not having a plan in place to contend with the potential flooding - ie. flood warnings, slow orders, etc.
Please don't misjudge railfans in the Chicago area for not liking the CN when they are probably just frustrated with them. Myself included. There are certain towns and non-railfans (NIMBY's) in the Chicago area who are opposed to everything that CN has done in this area recently (read purchase of the EJE). Right now, it's hard to defend and explain the actions of this railroad to those people. In the last week the NTSB has come down hard on CN for not having an effective safety communication plan in place and Amtrak has filed a complaint for the tardiness of its' trains on two lines in the Chicago area. That includes a 99% late rate on southern Illinois / New Orleans trains.
CC
Nicely summed up, although I the record doesn't suggest language was a problem, just busy signals and not answering in Homewood. It is quite true that CN (former IC and EJ&E) has become disliked in the Chicago area. I don't see any evidence that other lines share this problem. Perhaps there are actual reasons for the public's view of CN, not some imputed prejudice.
This reminds me of an Amtrak wreck in Intercession City, Fl back in the 1990s. A heavy haul move got hung up on a grade crossing with a large power plant generator sitting crosswise on the SCL mainline. As an escort, they had highway patrol cruisers with all the flashing lights and flares that could have easily flagged any approaching trains. And yet they instead chose to spend 15 minutes trying to call the railroad company without any result.
Not familiar with Rockford, weary from looking thru this conversation for an inspired turn of suggestion like mine, I suggest that:
Assuming there was an operative form of some kind of Automatic Block Signal system, the responsibility lies at the police academy. If there are more than a few trains a week thru this outpost in the outlands, the patrol vehicles must be equipped with battery jumper cables that can connect over about a 6' span. To stop trains the lawmen need to know is to jumper the rails, which would throw red signals to all the winds. Approaching the jumper, trains would approach "prepared to stop within half the range of vision short of....." law-officer gesticulating frantically...."any object or person waving on or near the track....is a signal to stop."
Worry a lot if your local lawfolks don"t know the above procedure.
With highest respect for the NTSB, if omitting this procedure by local law enforcement wasn't considered to be a causal factor when the law was notified an hour prior to the event, I'm worried, very worried.
rasslands, the law enforcement forces
This was very bad on the part of CN. If they had that long to notify the crew and didn't do it, that is criminal negligence. I agree with someone citing Kate Shelley, she risked her life to save others. With cell phones and instant access today, someone should have let the crew know, it's a wonder they were not killed too.
In the old days, it would have been easier to understand, it was not so simple to pass along a warning, but not today.
I've read all the posts and CN should have had a better emergency system set up for communicating a problem, especially in an area that was known for flooding.
It should have only taken a minute or two to get a message through, with today's instant communication. Not like the old days, and someone mentioned Kate Shelley. She did what she had to do to let the crew of the train know and saved lives.
The policeman who discovered the problem should have tried to flag down the train, or certainly put out a fusee, I would assume they all carry flares but maybe not.
This is just a tragedy that did not need to happen. I'm sure the crew were not happy with CN, they were lucky they survived.
Human nature being what it is as well as corporate thought processes being what they are.
The history of rule and procedural improvements in the rail industry is one that is written in blood every step of the way. Every employee/organization believes they are doing the right thing until a incident happens that demonstrates to all involved that what they thought was correct - wasn't. When that happens corrective actions/procedures have to be formulated and implemented.
The previously mentioned Intercession City incident on CSX was one of the incidents that caused that carrier to totally rethink how it interfaced with the public in emergency situations and it set up a infrastructure to be able to handle those situations knowledgeably, effectively and swiftly. Is it perfect? No system is perfect.
The hardest task for railroad and non-railroad people to accomplish is to come to the correct mutual understanding of where HERE is.
Should the CN Rockford incident have happened? No! Will or has CN implemented changed procedures? Only those on CN know.
BaltACD Should the CN Rockford incident have happened? No! Will or has CN implemented changed procedures? Only those on CN know.
If CN or any other railroad existed in their own private domains that did not continuously border the rest of the world, the above would be fine. But it is the public's right to have some certain knowledge that safer procedures are being implemented. It is not enough for only those on CN to know.
schlimm BaltACD: Should the CN Rockford incident have happened? No! Will or has CN implemented changed procedures? Only those on CN know. If CN or any other railroad existed in their own private domains that did not continuously border the rest of the world, the above would be fine. But it is the public's right to have some certain knowledge that safer procedures are being implemented. It is not enough for only those on CN to know.
BaltACD: Should the CN Rockford incident have happened? No! Will or has CN implemented changed procedures? Only those on CN know.
Flood Rockford again and find out. Corporations can feed the public anything they WANT to hear, the proof is in their actual response.
I would say that if there is a public safety interest in some aspect of a railroad’s interaction with the public, then it needs to be addressed through regulation from the public sector in order to make sure it gets done.
Other than vehicles stalled on grade crossings, I can’t think of too many incidents where the public has found an impediment to the safe passage of a train, and needed to contact the railroad to warn them about it.
Also, there ought to be some consideration of how the police officer should have reacted when he found the washout. For all the officer knew, a train may have been only a couple minutes away, which would have called for very quick action to prevent the probability of accidental death.
jeffhergert beaulieu: As far as I am aware all the railroads do it the same way, just that the others have better internal procedures. And better communications systems. Back when I was still a conductor, our dispatcher notified us that a person had called our RMCC (the phone number on the signal boxes) and reported our train had a container on a yellow flat car with the doors open and spilling it's contents. When notified we were about 25 miles from the place where the person had seen this. At least 25 minutes, probably a few more, would have elapsed from the initial spotting to the info getting to us. Allow maybe 10 minutes in case the person didn't have a cell phone and had to find a land line still leaves15+ minutes from the railroad receiving the call and the info getting to the crew (us). I inspected our train and found a yellow flat car with a load of sheet steel, a few of which had shifted forward out over the couplers. We didn't have any COFC in our train to begin with. That means that somewhere along the line the report changed a bit. Someone misunderstood what the problem was. Either the person reporting or the person taking the call. (I've always felt the person reporting was someone I knew who was a retired railroader, but not from the CNW or UP. He's passed on and I never remembered to ask him. I know he could tell the difference between a container losing it's load and a shifted load, but I'm not sure the person answering the phone at RMCC could. Just because a person works for a railroad doesn't mean they are familiar with railroading in the field.) In the CN case, I would like to know what was said by the civilian police to the railroad police, and what they said to the dispatcher's office. I can't imagine that there could be any misunderstanding about a washout, but you never know. About having the CN police in Montreal contacting directly any trains that may be close to the affected area, how would they do that? Of course by radio, but what I mean is that the CN is a big railroad. I'm guessing that like the UP, they would have multiple channels assigned across the system. Even if they use just one, to contact a train in a certain area you are going to have to know which base station/tower to use. (Not to mention like previously posted, you need to know if there is a train in that area.) The logistics to do all that probably could be worked out, but I bet the time involved wouldn't be any quicker. I've read what the NTSB has so far said and some of the other reports provided. So far more information seems to come from news reports than the NTSB. I haven't seen everything but it almost looks (to me) that the NTSB has come to it's conclusions and now will only consider facts that support that conclusion. Jeff
beaulieu: As far as I am aware all the railroads do it the same way, just that the others have better internal procedures. And better communications systems.
As far as I am aware all the railroads do it the same way, just that the others have better internal procedures. And better communications systems.
Back when I was still a conductor, our dispatcher notified us that a person had called our RMCC (the phone number on the signal boxes) and reported our train had a container on a yellow flat car with the doors open and spilling it's contents. When notified we were about 25 miles from the place where the person had seen this. At least 25 minutes, probably a few more, would have elapsed from the initial spotting to the info getting to us. Allow maybe 10 minutes in case the person didn't have a cell phone and had to find a land line still leaves15+ minutes from the railroad receiving the call and the info getting to the crew (us).
I inspected our train and found a yellow flat car with a load of sheet steel, a few of which had shifted forward out over the couplers. We didn't have any COFC in our train to begin with. That means that somewhere along the line the report changed a bit. Someone misunderstood what the problem was. Either the person reporting or the person taking the call. (I've always felt the person reporting was someone I knew who was a retired railroader, but not from the CNW or UP. He's passed on and I never remembered to ask him. I know he could tell the difference between a container losing it's load and a shifted load, but I'm not sure the person answering the phone at RMCC could. Just because a person works for a railroad doesn't mean they are familiar with railroading in the field.) In the CN case, I would like to know what was said by the civilian police to the railroad police, and what they said to the dispatcher's office. I can't imagine that there could be any misunderstanding about a washout, but you never know.
About having the CN police in Montreal contacting directly any trains that may be close to the affected area, how would they do that? Of course by radio, but what I mean is that the CN is a big railroad. I'm guessing that like the UP, they would have multiple channels assigned across the system. Even if they use just one, to contact a train in a certain area you are going to have to know which base station/tower to use. (Not to mention like previously posted, you need to know if there is a train in that area.) The logistics to do all that probably could be worked out, but I bet the time involved wouldn't be any quicker.
I've read what the NTSB has so far said and some of the other reports provided. So far more information seems to come from news reports than the NTSB. I haven't seen everything but it almost looks (to me) that the NTSB has come to it's conclusions and now will only consider facts that support that conclusion.
Jeff
As with a number of others here I have been following this Thread as it wound through many levels:
This quote from Mudchicken in June of 2009 pretty much sums it up:
There is enough hyperbole, hysteria and hearsay floating around here to choke a horse.
It will be interesting to watch the outcome of the NTSB and FRA investigations when the facts can be scrutinized, especially where the digital and tape records from Homewood and the Sheriff's Office (plus a few more locations come into play)....It will also be interesting to see if the overly centralized DS center and staff workload comes into play along with how many bogus calls did the CN have to deal with along with the other calls. From experience, I know all too well that for every legitimate call, you get a pile of garbage calls to go with them. Every railroad MOW and signal supervisor has spent nights chasing phantom calls (this includes calls and over-reaction from emergency services people too).
So here we are almost three years later and still trying to figure out who and where 'the ball was dropped'. Still waiting for the NTSB Report(?).
There is and has been a lot of discussion here referencing this derailment; and on this previous Thread:
http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/p/155883/1719860.aspx#1719860
"Re: CN and 21 Minutes: Is it enough?"
"...I read the story today about the sheriff's office calling CN 21 minutes before the derailment on the Iowa division, to warn the railroad of the washout. Unfortunately, nothing was done, the train derailed, an ethanol car exploded, and a motorist died.
Initially, sorrow goes out for the motorist.
Putting on my non-human attorney's hat, I am just wincing thinking about the liability here. Any time you have a tragic death caused by major industry, you are dealing with a pretty strong claim to begin with. Throw in facts that make it look entirely preventable to average Joe Jurror . . . oh man..."
It would seem the one sure thing that will happen is somewhere there will be another derailment and possibly injuries (hopefully, not) but the important thing is to try and learn from this incident and create a system that will pre vent future incidents.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.