It certainly follows that installation in dark territory costs much more.
Could you call it "twilight" territory now?
Johnny
Aviation has similar multi-level flight rules.
Visual Flight Rules and Instrument Flight Rules. If and when instrumentation and/or the on ground facilities that support IFR aren't operational - be that planned or accidental - VFR becomes the means of flight in the area affected.
The basic level of flight that every pilot learns from day one is VFR. Learning IFR is an entire course of learning and flight training.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Thinking some mroe about the problem. I should not have used the words "secure the train" in my sugestion, because that means handbreaks and the crew is not really leaving the train. Secondly, there are good reasons for at least one crew member to be in the cab at all times, one of the reasons for two-men mininum on the train. I think the problem of additional protection in a case where a signalled and/or train-controlled line is temporarily dark is the requirement that switch postions and two-line or multi-line crossing clearances be confirmed to the dispatcher by two crew members, not just one.
This requirement certainly would have prevented this latest tragedy.
And the tragedy did not occur in a case where it may most likely occur. That would be in a situation where crew members Never had experience in operating in dark territory. An electrified commuter line might be an example. With only one man on the front platform of the usual electric mu train. But the train does also have a conductor (and possibly other trainmen), and the same rule could apply.
What are the objections or limitations of such a rule? Again, to be applied only where signal and/or other safety protection is temporarily not working.
daveklepper After that train is entirely on the main, and the switch is restored, the train can slowly back down on the main to pick up the crewman to avoid his having to walk the length of the consist, since the train that past gives some assurance of a cear track.
You would have a train back up with no one observing the move? The lawyers would have a field day. Better to leave the switch lined for the siding and have the dispatcher have the next train ordered to stop and line it for their train. I have just posted this without seeing any posts since Tuesday.
It was stated earlier by someone that Amtrak operates in Dark Territory. Can those locations be listed please?
Electrolioner, you are correct. That is why I came up with the simple two-crew-member solution, instead. And one man can remain in the cab while the other checks. It is a simple solution that would have prevented the latest tragedy. If one crew member thinks he restored the switch but didn't, a remote possiblity but one that appeared to have happened, the other will catch the mistake. Again, you are correct, and that is why I thought some more about the problem.
Further thouoghts: Even without the two-man verification proposed for temporary dark territory, there is no way to avoid a crew member having to walk the length of the consists unless:
1. There is a three-man crew
Or
2. The responsibility for aligning and locking and reporting switch positions is the responsility of Both crews, Both the train in the siding and the train holding the main.
So my question now is the latter, the second above, the normal procedure on dark CSX lines? That would involve safe operation if every train had a crew who knew the location of all switches and then cotrolled the train to be prepared to stop and throw and lock the siwtches for their needs. If this was normal for CSX in dark territory, then perhaps the crew of the CSX freight expected the Amtrak train to stop with its crew responsible for restoring the siwtch to straight! Nobody told them they had to realign the switch, and they simply reported to the dispatcher that their train was in the clear!
Again, temporarily dark lines require more consideration of safety than regularly dark lines.
daveklepper2. The responsibility for aligning and locking and reporting switch positions is the responsibility of both crews, both the train in the siding and the train holding the main.
But this was accounted for in the formulation of, and the discussions regarding, EO 24 back toward the turn of the millennium. Making the train holding the main necessarily responsible for all switch positions makes something of a mockery out of the whole idea of TWC in the first place. Of course it is 'safe', but spiking the switches (and inherently requiring MOW presence and assistance, and additional representation on SPAF, for any intermediate switching moves) is safer still and avoids all the rigmarole in crawling along as if this were still 1845 and no one knew to telegraph ahead to check switch positions.
If you spend any time looking at what the CSX train was doing spotting its train, you will I think recognize why it couldn't 'shove back to pick up the conductor'.
An essential point to remember here is that the EO 24 procedures should have prevented this accident, and would have prevented it if executed as mandated. We have yet to see exactly what went wrong, and who might be involved, and I don't want to start 'assessing blame' the way we love to do here, but it's pretty clear that the mandated procedure to ensure switch positions before granting track authority was not correctly followed. And I continue to think that fixing that procedure to 'patch' where it may turn out to have failed is a far more important approach than defaulting to slow and uncertain operations, at least for railroads that want to have their cake and eat it too during signal suppressions.
Electroliner 1935 daveklepper After that train is entirely on the main, and the switch is restored, the train can slowly back down on the main to pick up the crewman to avoid his having to walk the length of the consist, since the train that past gives some assurance of a cear track. You would have a train back up with no one observing the move? The lawyers would have a field day. Better to leave the switch lined for the siding and have the dispatcher have the next train ordered to stop and line it for their train. I have just posted this without seeing any posts since Tuesday.
GCOR Rule 6.6 allows for unprotected back up movements under certain conditions. It used to be titled Backing up to pick up a crewmember but has been revised. The rule cited is basic GCOR, UP's rule has a bit more to it, but allows backing up without point protection. (I tried to copy UP's rule but it jumbles it up. To see it for yourself go here: https://www.up.com/ert/gcor.pdf
6.6 Back Up Movements
After obtaining permission from the train dispatcher, a train may back up on any main track or on any track where CTC is in effect under the following conditions:
1. The train dispatcher must verify the following within the same or overlapping limits: a. Another authority is not in effect unless conflicting movements are protected. b. A track bulletin Form B is not in effect. c. A main track is not removed from service by a track bulletin. d. Permission to leave a switch in the reverse position has not been granted.
2. The crew ensures movement will not: a. Exceed the limit of the train’s authority. b. Exceed the train’s length. c. Enter or foul a private or public crossing except as provided by Rule 6.32.1 (Providing Warning Over Road Crossings). d. Be made into or within yard limits, restricted limits, interlocking limits, drawbridges, railroad crossings at grade, or track bulletin Form B limits.
When movement is made under these conditions, restricted speed does not apply. Trains backing up under the provisions of this rule may pass signals indicating Stop and Proceed, without stopping.
Jeff
jeffhergert2. The crew ensures movement will not: a. Exceed the limit of the train’s authority. b. Exceed the train’s length. c. Enter or foul a private or public crossing except as provided by Rule 6.32.1 (Providing Warning Over Road Crossings). d. Be made into or within yard limits, restricted limits, interlocking limits, drawbridges, railroad crossings at grade, or track bulletin Form B limits. When movement is made under these conditions, restricted speed does not apply. Trains backing up under the provisions of this rule may pass signals indicating Stop and Proceed, without stopping. Jeff
Something seems wrong with this wording. Was not the freight train within a yard hence yard limits, and how is blindly backing up a train safe?
Electroliner 1935 jeffhergert 2. The crew ensures movement will not: a. Exceed the limit of the train’s authority. b. Exceed the train’s length. c. Enter or foul a private or public crossing except as provided by Rule 6.32.1 (Providing Warning Over Road Crossings). d. Be made into or within yard limits, restricted limits, interlocking limits, drawbridges, railroad crossings at grade, or track bulletin Form B limits. When movement is made under these conditions, restricted speed does not apply. Trains backing up under the provisions of this rule may pass signals indicating Stop and Proceed, without stopping. Jeff Something seems wrong with this wording. Was not the freight train within a yard hence yard limits, and how is blindly backing up a train safe?
jeffhergert 2. The crew ensures movement will not: a. Exceed the limit of the train’s authority. b. Exceed the train’s length. c. Enter or foul a private or public crossing except as provided by Rule 6.32.1 (Providing Warning Over Road Crossings). d. Be made into or within yard limits, restricted limits, interlocking limits, drawbridges, railroad crossings at grade, or track bulletin Form B limits. When movement is made under these conditions, restricted speed does not apply. Trains backing up under the provisions of this rule may pass signals indicating Stop and Proceed, without stopping. Jeff
Yard Limits are specified by the ETT. Just the existance of a yard does not create Yard Limits. In some cases Yard Limits are specified for a single track that has no yard anywhere within the limits of the single track.
I have not read the government regs dealing with PTC so what I say may be wrong. The feds mandated PTC without any funding. The railroads in concert with the signal companies had to design a uniform PTC system so trains could operate anywhere (Amtrak). This all takes time. Next all kinds of approvals from a myrid of agencies must be obtained before construction commences. Just look at BNSF getting approval from the Indian tribes and FCC to put a radio tower next to their track. Hopefully the system will be operational by year end.
Someone can check positively to see if Silica Siding involves Yard Limits; I can't do it on this Family Unfriendly Comments phone.
http://www.multimodalways.org/docs/railroads/companies/CSX/CSX%20ETTs/CSX%20Florence%20Div%20ETT%20%235%201-1-2008.pdf
Here is a PDF copy of the Florence Division ETT from 2008. The Columbia Sub starts on p.67. I do not know, of course, if there have been material changes in that area since then, and someone with a more recent or current ETT should consult it as a check and then comment on any significant difference that may exist.
Yard Limit rules are rarely made effective in territory that is NORMALLY CTC territory. I personally have not heard of Yard Limit Rules being placed in effect when Signal Suspensions happen in yard areas that are normally operated with CTC.
Saw this today frpm Railway Age.
https://www.railwayage.com/news/ptc-ignore-circus-heres-whats-really-going/
jeffhergert Saw this today frpm Railway Age. https://www.railwayage.com/news/ptc-ignore-circus-heres-whats-really-going/ Jeff
DeggestyThough, perhaps the congressman simply is insulated from the reality of what has been done by the railroads?
I think it depends on the filters you're looking through. Ie, if you haven't completed something, you must be sandbagging. Far be it for someone with an agenda to acknowledge any realities.
And I'd imagine some staffer put together his notes for him...
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...
Yes, Larry, you have two good points--ignorance of reality and and ignorance of how to learn the truth?
Deggesty Is telling lies to Congress a crime punishable by a prison sentence? Though, perhaps the congressman simply is insulated from the reality of what has been done by the railroads?
Is telling lies to Congress a crime punishable by a prison sentence? Though, perhaps the congressman simply is insulated from the reality of what has been done by the railroads?
It depends on who is telling the lies.
There is reality and then there is political reality. Usually they are not one and the same. Most politicians focus on and only worry about the political reality.
Thanks for posting, Jeff.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.