Trains.com

Caboose Fatalities

7916 views
34 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 109 posts
Posted by txhighballer on Thursday, July 9, 2009 11:01 PM

Engineers are also not as air brake savvy these days as railroad management would rather have them use dynamic braking the majority of the time. "Power braking" is no longer the norm, which if you know what you are doing,can reduce slack quite a bit.  I've stopped 100 car plus grain trains with just the air and put her right where I wanted her the majority of the time, with the train stretched out. when I got ready to roll,nice easy start with a minimum of slack. It takes time and practice and the "want to" of doing it right.

  • Member since
    April 2008
  • 123 posts
Posted by Jerry Pier on Monday, July 6, 2009 1:17 PM

In view of this discussion of slack and its effects, some salient points:

1) There are two feet of slack in each car of a train (1 foot at each end). It is there because in the days of friction bearings, a locomotive could not overcome the high breakout friction of all the bearings in the train at once. Slack permittted picking up one car at a time. Roller bearings  don't have anywhere near this level of breakout friction but slack has not changed to the best of my knowledge. Some roads have experimented with four or five tightly coupled cars with a draft gear at each end of the unit. This reduces slack significantly but still lets the locomotive pickup one unit at a time. Works best for single commodity trains.

2) While the primary function of the air brake system is to stop the train, a critical secondary function is to control slack. This latter fuction comprises most of the complexity in the air brake control valve. As long as brake applications are contolled by brake pipe pressure reductions, this situation will remain. Transmission time of an incremental change of pressure in the brake pipe can not exceed the speed of sound (1100 ft/sec) but realistically doesn't exceed 900 ft/sec in emergency applications. Simple math says that the caboose of a 150 car train doesn't get the signal for a little more than 8 seconds and has moved 300 ft since the locomotive came to a dead stop.

3) Electronic brake is the ideal method of controlling slack but reducing it would still be desirable. I have not kept up with electronic freight brake (although I defined a workable system prior to 1980) but in typical railroad fashion, the final default likely is dumping the brake pipe.

This may be more than you ever wanted to know.

Jerry Pier

JERRY PIER
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, July 5, 2009 6:38 PM

TrainManTy

zardoz

Getting rid of the caboose made the engineer's job so (relatively) easy....

 

Yeah, FREDs are clamped to the couplers...they can't fall off!

More than one EOT has bit the dust, literally, by falling off the train.  Sometimes the EOT's can be found (sometimes working and sometimes not), sometimes they can't be located.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    August 2008
  • From: Calgary AB. Canada
  • 2,298 posts
Posted by AgentKid on Sunday, July 5, 2009 5:09 PM

AgentKid
A conductor I knew told me about a wreck he was in in the eighties. His caboose was flipped off the track by the impact with another train and completely rolled once. This was during the early days of US Space Shuttle flights and he and his son were watching it on the news. The conductor said he told his son that he floated inside the flipping caboose just like the astronauts floated in zero gravity before the caboose came to a stop. It went right around him once. Miraculously, he only suffered minor injuries and only missed a few days of work.

 

I reactivated this thread just to let you know that I received a call from my Mother yesterday telling me that the conductor mentioned above passed away on Friday at the age of 77. I guess being a conductor/test pilot didn't end up having too detrimental of an effect on him.

According to his obituary it sounded like he led a good and useful life.

It was while looking for his obituary that I came across the notice about the passing of Donald M. Bain I mentioned in the thread I started last night.

AgentKid

 

So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.

"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere"  CP Rail Public Timetable

"O. S. Irricana"

. . . __ . ______

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, March 12, 2009 11:24 AM

From the description above, it seems like it was a facing-point switch, so see the alternatives for that by zardoz above.  If the track they were lined for had cars in it, then that impact might have been as bad or worse than the emergency stop.  But if the track was empty, it's hard for me to see what the panic was.

As far as negotiating the switch itself - likely it was not any sharper than a No. 6 frog angle (approx. 9-1/2 degrees - approx. 48 ft. from Point of Switch to Point of Frog), and those are all good for at least 10 MPH.  More likely it was a No. 8 frog (approx.7-1/4 degrees - approx. 68 ft. from Point of Switch to Point of Frog), and those are good for 15 MPH, or maybe even a No. 10 (20 MPH).

If it was a trailing point switch - as zardoz says, go ahead and "run through" it rather than risk putting the train on the ground or injuring the crew as did happen.  Some switchstands had and have a "breakable crank" underneath or similar in the switch rods someplace - kind of like a "mechanical fuse", a deliberate weak point like a shear pin to make sure that's what breaks first and not something else more valuable or important.  This kind of thing isn't rare, and can normally be fixed easily enough by the track maintenance guys by just replacing the broken crank and adjusting the switch again - maybe 15 to 30 minutes and $50 to $100 once they're there, and the appropriate and requisite amount of complaining and cussing has been performed (and maybe a beer or two after work to settle up things).  Even if the switchstand didn't have a "run-through" crank, the worst that happens then is that the switch rods or the switch stand gets bent up or broken beyond repair and reuse.  In such cases, it might take a couple hours and maybe $500 to repair it.  I've never heard or seen that running through a trailing-point switch then derailed the train that did it - but to be clear, the switch is out of action until those repairs are made.  Because, if the train then reverses and backs up through a run-through switch, the switch points will then be out of position, and so the train will then "split" the switch, and then it's on the ground for sure.

- Paul North.

 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: Northeast
  • 746 posts
Posted by GraniteRailroader on Thursday, March 12, 2009 11:23 AM

Thumbs Up  Zardoz

Running through a switch in those circumstances really isn't a big deal in the big scheme of things. Switch rods can be replaced, and other linkages fixed as necessary as well.

The decision to dump the train is a hard one to make in those circumstances. You've got thousands of forces pulling you every which way even as you simply apply the brakes. Those forces increase many many times when you swipe the brake into emergency, as well as losing the ability to control your brakes. 

 

This space reserved for SpaceMouse's future presidential candidacy advertisements

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Thursday, March 12, 2009 10:59 AM

WIAR

At 10 MPH, does anyone think it would've been better for the engineer to not go into emergency stop, but rather slow down as much as possible and let the train plow-through the mis-lined switch?

Lots of variables:

Was it a facing or trailing point switch?

If facing point, where was the track lined to?
     a string of propane cars?
     a string of loaded coal cars?
     an empty track?

If trailing point,
     was it the type made such that a one-time run-thru would not seriously damage it?
     was the switch located where there was a strong likelyhood of the run-thru being observed?

How draconian is the railroad?
     do they dismiss someone for a 'minor' infraction?
     do they "look the other way" if no real damage was done?
     do they consider the previous record of the employee when deciding on punishment?

How experienced was the engineer? When faced with a lose-lose situation, one must be able to quickly decide which action would cause the greatest/least harm/damage.

To answer your question, I would have run thru the switch without hesitation, rather than injuring a coworker (been there, done that).

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Central New York
  • 335 posts
Posted by MJChittick on Thursday, March 12, 2009 12:41 AM

 

Mike

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 10:44 PM

Now here's a hypothetical question borne out of the facts of the case (and I don't expect everyone to read the Classic Trains article so I'll try to relate the necessary information here):

The train was, as I indicated before, composed of empty coal hoppers.  It was passing the yard at 10 MPH.  The crew in the lead locomotive initiated the emergency stop because they saw the switch for the yard entrance was lined for the yard tracks, rather than being lined and locked for the main (as per B&O operating rules).

The yard itself in WV was where coal from 3 different branch lines was collected for transfer to the mainline.  The branch lines to the mines reached the yard from the south, and this accident occurred while the train was approaching the south end (from the north).  Since this was a marshalling yard for coal, there was probably no other cars nearby carrying hazardous cargo.

At 10 MPH, does anyone think it would've been better for the engineer to not go into emergency stop, but rather slow down as much as possible and let the train plow-through the mis-lined switch?  Since the switch wasn't normally locked (this was a rules violation that was, unfortunately, common practice in the yard), at that speed, could the train have possibly forced its way through the switch and not derailed?  Had it derailed, the slack action would've probably done the same injuries to the caboose crew (or worse) anyway, and quite likely have blocked access to the yard.  But is there a chance the train could've remained railed?

 

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: Northeast
  • 746 posts
Posted by GraniteRailroader on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 10:00 PM

Tree hit upon a relevant point with 3" of slack. With modern "cushion frame" type cars, slack can be a real pain in the butt!

Had a cushion car give me a knuckle the other day. Big manifest train bunched up on a downhill grade, went to stretch it uphill so it wouldn't run out while I built air and a knuckle busted when the first 30 cushioned boxes got pulled. Figures it'd be pouring rain Banged Head

This space reserved for SpaceMouse's future presidential candidacy advertisements

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:01 PM

Depends on crew size, work to be done, where work is to be done, and why shack is there in the first place.

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    September 2008
  • 1,112 posts
Posted by aegrotatio on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 1:04 PM

When a caboose is used on NEC freight moves, does it have people in it or is it just there for visibility?

 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,020 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 11:56 AM

Aside from the "sudden stop at the bottom," that had to be rather surreal...

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
    August 2008
  • From: Calgary AB. Canada
  • 2,298 posts
Posted by AgentKid on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 11:51 AM

A conductor I knew told me about a wreck he was in in the eighties. His caboose was flipped off the track by the impact with another train and completely rolled once. This was during the early days of US Space Shuttle flights and he and his son were watching it on the news. The conductor said he told his son that he floated inside the flipping caboose just like the astronauts floated in zero gravity before the caboose came to a stop. It went right around him once. Miraculously, he only suffered minor injuries and only missed a few days of work.

AgentKid

 

So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.

"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere"  CP Rail Public Timetable

"O. S. Irricana"

. . . __ . ______

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Guelph, Ontario
  • 4,819 posts
Posted by Ulrich on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 10:46 AM

Finally...after 150 years. Thanks for restoring my faith in the human species...

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 10:19 AM

If I recall correctly, the publicity releases and advertsing for the last series of cabooses - like those with the "extended vision" cupolas by International Car Co. - touted that they did have seat belts intstalled.  I know it wasn't done "back in the day", but by the end of cabooses, seatbelts weren't unheard of, either.  I think if you get into the details, they also mentioned that the stoves were well-secured, corners were rounded, etc.

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 10:19 AM

Some roads did equip their cabooses with seat belts and included orders to USE them in the employee timetable, safety book of rules, etc.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Guelph, Ontario
  • 4,819 posts
Posted by Ulrich on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:52 AM

Well, they and the railroads had 150 years to come up with those ideas yet did not for some reason....there's no reason to believe that enlightenment would have occurred over the last 20 years. And equally surprising (to me)...it wasn't something that was pushed by the unions.

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Rockton, IL
  • 4,821 posts
Posted by jeaton on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:47 AM

Just a guess, but had the caboose remained as the end of train facility, no doubt the FRA would have mandated safety improvements such as with the anchoring of stoves, tables and seats.  Figure seats belts along with that.

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Guelph, Ontario
  • 4,819 posts
Posted by Ulrich on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:42 AM

Given the slack problem I'm surprised that cabeese weren't outfited with seatbelts  that would be required to be worn whenever the train is in motion. Was there a need for the tail end crew to be walking about while the train was in motion? Also highback seats would have been a good idea. Sometimes it seems as if nobody gave any thought to safety until about five years ago.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,020 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:04 AM

Seems like we discussed slack action a while back, but I'm not sure where. 

Just to sate my curiosity, I punched a few numbers into the ol' calculator and found that with a mere 3" of slack between cars (and it's more than that) some 25 feet of slack potentially exists in a 100 car train. 

Edit: Here it is.

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 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 8:48 AM

But it was not always, nor necessarily, poor train handling by an inept (or even an "ept") engineer.  Basically as trains became longer so did the slack distance..  That meant that cabooses were getting more of a jerk tug or a slam on short stops thus throwing crew members around and causing more frequent and more serious injuries.  Getting rid of the caboose was necessary to prevent these injuries but it also was a savings on rostering an extra car and toting around the extra weight.  Which raises an interesting question: if trains were shorter would it be propitious to have a caboose so that there were real "eyes" at both the head and hind ends of trains, that safety would be imporved in that matter, and that hind end work could be done without extra time and extra manpower (and owned or leased units) driving taxis or walking mile long trains?

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: Mile 7.5 Laggan Sub., Great White North
  • 4,201 posts
Posted by trainboyH16-44 on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 3:09 AM

Kootenay Central

When a train of empty cars stops suddenly at a lower speed, say, under 10 MPH, usually from an UDE, Undesired Emergency near the head end, the slack, no matter how little, will bunch rapidly from the now-stopped front of the train towards the rear, which will be still moving.

When all the slack ahead is closed up, the caboose, in effect, hits the stopped portion similar to making a joint on a cut of cars or locomotives which has the air set.

Run into a to-be-scrapped Caboose with units at even a slow speed and see the results!

Think of an automobile with passengers hitting a concrete wall, everything inside keeps moving, the reason for seat belts.

Unlike the interior of a modern auto, a Caboose is FULL of HARD SHARP UNYIELDING objects.

In a real bad jolt the water reservoirs, stove, cupboards etc within a Caboose can get torn loose from their mountings and become missles.

On modern cabooses the cupola windows were metal-framed and ran on rollers in tracks and would SLAM shut like a knife. Pity the Conductor or Tail End Man whose hand was on the window ledge.

In the following head on, the shorter train, to the left, with two units hit the heavy drag with four and full tonnage.

The Caboose on the short train stopped instantly. The Trainman was thrown the length of the caboose and out the front wooden door, sustaining severe head injuries.

I understand the stove came adrift, as well as almost everything else.

Slack action is worse on a train of empties, as the momentum of 'Loads' will bulldoze themselves ahead, whereas empties, being lighter, will just stop.

Normal slack action can toss crews from cupolas, but, can often be anticipated by knowing the road, the consist of the train, and, the Engineer.

Yes, a sudden stop can and will kill riders in a Caboose or Outfit Cars travelling with Gangs.

So will poor train handling or switching on the Engineer's part.

 

Where was this? I can guess early 70s somewhere along the southern mainline, but I can't recall a wreck like this... 

Go here for my rail shots! http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=9296

Building the CPR Kootenay division in N scale, blog here: http://kootenaymodelrailway.wordpress.com/

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:52 PM

TrainManTy

zardoz

Getting rid of the caboose made the engineer's job so (relatively) easy....

 

Yeah, FREDs are clamped to the couplers...they can't fall off!

Yes, they can.

Jeff 

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:16 PM

Bucyrus
but just using the independent (engine-only) brake at a very low speed can cause tremendous slack impact.

It can also put cars on the ground--Back in 1963, I was on the northbound Pelican in Birmingham, and while we were in the station, a Northern Alabama freight came in from Norris Yard, on its way to Sheffield. The watchman at the L&N crossing, just east of the station, swung the gate over the Southern track suddenly, and the engineer of the NA train hit the independent brake instead of the train brake, causing some cars to be derailed. We could not get past them, and had to back to North Birmingham and take another line over to Woodlawn Jct., where we got back on the main to Chattanooga. There were no injuries that I heard of.

Johnny

Johnny

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:09 PM

zardoz

Getting rid of the caboose made the engineer's job so (relatively) easy....

 

Yeah, FREDs are clamped to the couplers...they can't fall off!

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 7:32 PM

CShaveRR

And even if the person who caught the gauge during the correct few seconds of observation were able to yell out to hang on, it wouldn't prevent non-human objects--up to and including lighted stoves--from moving about and entrapping people.

Some engineers were so bad at train-handling that the guys in the caboose would ride with their backs against the leading bulkhead, so that when the slack ran in, they would already be braced against the wall.  Of course, that didn't help them against any non-human objects flying in their direction.  And it wasn't much protection against a slack run-out.

Getting rid of the caboose made the engineer's job so (relatively) easy....

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 7:15 PM

WIAR
When a train goes into e-stop, does the whistle sound automatically?  Could the unfortunate crewmen have had any time at all (maybe just a few seconds) to get a hold of something to brace for impact if they heard a steady whistle?

 

There is no whistle warning when a train goes into emergency, but it does make a loud, unmistakable sound that any trainman will recognize.  Every car dumps its share of the trainline air, and it sounds like a loud sneeze.  If you are riding on a train and you hear it, you should always hang on an anticipate trouble.  Your account says the train went into emergency to get the switch, but just using the independent (engine-only) brake at a very low speed can cause tremendous slack impact. 

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 6:55 PM
WIAR

When a train goes into e-stop, does the whistle sound automatically?  Could the unfortunate crewmen have had any time at all (maybe just a few seconds) to get a hold of something to brace for impact if they heard a steady whistle?  I guess with an impact so violent, even if they had grabbed onto something they may have just been torn loose from it anyway.

Not sure what whistle you might be referring to--some cabooses have one that is operated by the crew using air pressure from the trainline. If there's an emergency application, said pressure is zero. About the only warning you'd get is if you happened to be watching an air gauge at the time. And even if the person who caught the gauge during the correct few seconds of observation were able to yell out to hang on, it wouldn't prevent non-human objects--up to and including lighted stoves--from moving about and entrapping people.

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

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