Linked @ https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/three-hurt-as-rail-gAt dinner tomightrinder-collides-with-stopped-csx-train/
Unusual! ~ At dinner tonight, the wife asked me if I had seen the above linked story on TRAINS wesite? Nope, and apparently it had slid under their radar??
The accident happend early on Sunday AM in area of Spencer Ma.
"
By | February 21, 2022
"Injuries in Massachusetts incident described as non-life-threatening"
FTA: "SPENCER, Mass. — Three people were injured when a Loram rail grinder collided with a stopped CSX freight train early Sunday morning, requiring some of the injured to be freed by first responders.
WCVB-TV reports a CSX statement indicated the accident occurred about 1:30 a.m. Spencer Fire and Emergency Services wrote on Facebook the three injured parties were transported to UMass Memorial Medical Center in Worcester, Mass., with non-life-threatening injuries..."
Apparently, this weekend was not as peaceful as it seemed? This story was carried by a TRAINS Newswire by-line, but was not 'published' in the NEWSWIRE section?
Don't understand how this could have happend with my knowledge of how CSX rules apply to trains and MofW Equipment. The Rail Grinder would have been operating on a Track Car Authority which cannot be issued into a track segment that is occupied by a 'Train' - the CADS software will not permit a Train Dispatcher to issue such a authority.
The fact that it happened means there are any number of other critical details that we are not being advised of.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
At 1:30 AM. Somebody dozed off?
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
How fast does a rail grinder go? I would have thought it could stop soon enough.
Still in training.
Lithonia OperatorHow fast does a rail grinder go? I would have thought it could stop soon enough.
When grinding, a rail grinder will operate at less than 10 MPH, much less if a heavy grind is required on a particular segment of track. In some cases the machine will back up and make multiple passes over specific segments if the segment's profile is bad enough.
When 'tramming' (not grinding) I believe the equipment is restricted to 30 MPH. The equipment is required to have qualified MofW personnel for the territory on board that has knowledge of the physical characteristics and other MofW operating parameters for the specific territory.
Despite being a relatively large piece of equipment, am I correct in assuming that a rail grinder would NOT need to be equipped with PTC because it is considered MOW equipment? Does anyone know if equipment such as this can be detected by track circuits? Many high-rail and track maintenance machines are designed such they cannot be detected.
Do those rail grinders move from one location to another on rails without doing grinding operation? If so, how fast do they travel during those moves? When moving during grinding operations, it is hard to imagine that they would not be able to stop almost instantly
Two fascinating things about this:
1) When the LORAM train is operating, the front is lit like a Christmas tree; it lights up everything around it like a fire or a steel-mill pour. That tells me it was likely tramming at the time of the accident -- the question then suggesting why the CSX train was where it was.
2) Look at the displayed URL for the Trains story -- it can't possibly work, but it does. I think I know how this happened... he typed a bit more into the displayed URL tag while leaving the functional URL intact... but it is amusing to see.
Balt:
My first reaction....
(1) Where was the M/W EIC in all of this?
(2) Was there a conductor pilot involved and where were they?
(3) Who was outside of their limits? (and which end of the stopped train was involved?)
mudchickenBalt: My first reaction.... (1) Where was the M/W EIC in all of this? (2) Was there a conductor pilot involved and where were they? (3) Who was outside of their limits? (and which end of the stopped train was involved?)
All questions I also have.
Why did'nt the dispatcher warn the Loram train that they were approching a stooped train?
caldreamerWhy did'nt the dispatcher warn the Loram train that they were approching a stooped train?
Not enough information has been presented to understand what ACTUALLY happened.
CSX MofW Track Authorities CAN NOT be issued with a Train in a track segment, therefore no warnings should be required.
BaltACDCSX MofW Track Authorities CAN NOT be issued with a Train in a track segment, therefore no warnings should be required.
Interesting. Two rulebooks I run under allowed for MOW to follow a train.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmann BaltACD CSX MofW Track Authorities CAN NOT be issued with a Train in a track segment, therefore no warnings should be required. Interesting. Two rulebooks I run under allowed for MOW to follow a train.
BaltACD CSX MofW Track Authorities CAN NOT be issued with a Train in a track segment, therefore no warnings should be required.
Thanks for jogging my memory Zug -
A MofW Authority can be issued FOLLOWING a train that is moving in a SPECIFIED direction. The MofW Authority that is issued will also be issued in the same SPECIFIED direction. A part of the MofW Authority will also STATE 'A99125 'Specified Direction' ahead at Mile Post **.* where the asterisks represent the mile post that the Dispatcher as ascertained by asking the train their location at the time the authority is being issued.
As in all MofW Authorities - the person in the field must REPEAT the authority to the Dispatcher who checks it against the authority as issued on his CADS computer screen. Once completed the Dispatcher will make the Authority Effective at the time he specifies from his computer displayed clock.
The MofW Authority cannot have its issued direction changed so long as a preceeeding train is within the limits of the Authority. If there are NO trains within the limits of a MofW Authority the Authority may be authorized for movement in both directions or for the authority to be changed from one direction to its opposite direction.
The NORAC Form D has a line for "trains and track cars ahead."
We deal with rules for OOS track and two trains, but that wouldn't apply in this case. What might apply is that the following train must operate at restricted speed as long as the leading train is within the OOS track.
NORAC Rule 805 states that track cars following a train must operate at restricted speed.
Somebody wasn't paying attention...
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...
Our CTC rules allow for a foreman to get a 'follow up TOP' (Track Occupancy Permit) and put on right behind a train.
Our OCS (dark territory) rules do not let a foreman get a clearance if a train already has a clearance there. But if the foreman gets a clearance first then a train can get a clearance through the same limits with a 'protect against' order. Multiple trains can also have clearances over the same limits, again with 'protect againsts'.
Grinders and test cars sometimes operate as track units under the protection of a foreman, and sometimes as trains with a conductor pilot.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Saw the thread title and first thought of the Rochelle incident a few years ago when the Loram equipment fouled the diamonds and peeled some containers on BNSF.
They had an EC1 to operate at restricted speed with a train ahead, which is typical. They werent grinding and hit the rear of Q426 at 20 MPH. Train was 7000 feet long so the head end felt noting.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.