http://www.trains.com/trn/default.aspx?c=a&id=5426
Since when did things start going this far? I thought at worst the engineer would get fired. Now they're going to start doing this stuff, too? I assume freights will be under attack just as well? That if any non-engineer person so much as touches any of the controls, that they and the train crew face jail time? How did things get this bad?
I can't believe the engineer could be that much of a bonehead. Most of us in our various jobs could face jail time for doing the wrong thing.
Believe it. We spent a substantial portion of our rules class on "human factors" and the fact that we can be criminally charged for certain things. My days as a volunteer on a tourist railroad would end immediately if I got nailed with a $7,500 person fine (never mind what the railroad could get hit with).
It is apparently obvious to the feds that simply having rules isn't enough - there has to be some teeth there...
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...
If engineers had let people run the choo-choo on occasion (usually freights), and the trains never wrecked, why is this suddenly becoming a big issue now? From what I understand, railroads and the general public are making a big deal of even letting anyone in the cab anymore. I don't hear complaints about truckers letting people in. Why the double standards?
Passengers who ride along is one thing...passengers who drive the train..quite another. no double standard..a trucker who lets a passenger drive would be in serious trouble if caught..but that wasn't always the case. Now everyhting is blown out of proportion... Go read my thread on where I admitted to tresspassing on railroad property.. I was painted as the anti christ in that one. Back in the day you could bend the rules and do things so long as you were responsible..those days are GONE!..
Of sure, a passenger train flying along at speeds often about 100 MPH, of course I can understand the public not being happy about that. But some frieght trains, slower moving, slower to respond to changes, slower to get out fo any control, and not anything as near sensitive as fast-start, fast-stop high speed passenger trains...I still don't get it. The passenger bit is like a trucker letting you run it, but I'd think the friehg tjob is more like running a truck in your back yard.
And I remember that thread where you really got blasted for being on railroad property. It's sad indeed that things have become like this. : (
I'll give you three reasons, Chatsworth, Boston and Washington, DC.
All within a year.
Reality TV is to reality, what Professional Wrestling is to Professional Brain Surgery.
I can't see the article, so am I to assume that this is the NY incident with the engineer allowing a passenger to operate a passenger train for twenty five miles with 400 aboard?
BNSF & DMIR 4Ever I can't see the article, so am I to assume that this is the NY incident with the engineer allowing a passenger to operate a passenger train for twenty five miles with 400 aboard?
Yes. Here's the text of the article:
Mike
Thank you, kind sir.
Now that I'm sure of the story being discussed, now I pose the question of why is anyone surprised at this? The engineer lets someone with no experience operate the train over grade grossing and a total of twenty five miles. Honestly, reckless endangerment is quite tame compared to what he could and should be charged with.
Sad state of affairs.
Kootenay Central Things were different back then. Most things done then we would not do, now., no matter what.
Things were different back then. Most things done then we would not do, now., no matter what.
A friend and fellow volunteer at the heritage railway I work on used to drive switchers around his local yard in the 1960s, when he was a secondary school pupil. This was a country junction in Scotland and his father was a local British Railways driver (engineer), and after school he would go down to the yard to operate the little 0-6-0 yard locomotive under supervision, both by his father and by the other local drivers. He became fairly proficient at it. One day, another driver who had a reputation as a drinker decided that my friend was sufficiently competent to switch the yard unsupervised whilst he retired to the shunters’ cabin for further refreshment. The rest of the switching took place without incident, and my friend was very pleased with himself, so off he went home to tell his father all about it. His father was altogether less pleased, and that was the end of my friend’s career as an unofficial apprentice driver.
The usual American mass hysteria has of course taken over. We've had a rash of transit accidents which have caught the public eye via an inept media. True, these have been accident which have cause death and damage, but it is something gruesome to attach our attention to for now. That said, with the transit system under such scrutiny, it is not very smart to invite trouble by allowing a non employee into the cab much less let him operate the equipment and doing so in apparent open view to the riding public. There are probably plenty of things to say about the quality of today's engineers compared to those of yesterday in comparing experience, education, and abilities, But that won't do because today's system of life and work is different than that of even 20 years ago; the whole work situation is so different i.e., career vs.a job; the level and types of skills needed are different. And believe me, drugs and alcohol play a big part in today's work envirnonment with new ways being found to get around the tests and screenings by employees, employers, and screening companies themselves. So we are, in the end, discussing individual responsiblity and all these accidents have led to a lack of it. Those who are on drugs, alcohol, cell phones, or some other way not paying attention to the job at hand. It's got to be taken more seriously by employer and employee as well as governement and unions.
I have had so many cab rides in my life, I should be the one to talk! But, I learned not to be distractive to my hosts. There were always at least two in the cab engineer and fireman plus head man. And things were less formal and people less uptight. It was a different time and even the circumstances were different.
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.
Having a person in cab is just violation of Company rules. letting a person operate a locomotive is a federal crime however.
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/49cfr240_07.html
I agree with some of the posts here: Why this is even being debated surprises me. They should be charged - this was (if proven in court) a gross violation of safety rules and the law. Were there an accident, and I was one of the survivors in a hospital bed with X number of broken bones and my life changed forever as a result, I sure as hell would want justice to be done. I wouldn't listen to someone's argument that because this sort of thing (i.e. unauthorized persons at the control) had occurred many times before and nothing bad happened, it was allowed to continue for that reason. No. This needs to be prosecuted vigorously to hopefully dissuade others from trying the same thing.
I don't know all the facts, and I certainly don't know New York law. But I'm not sure the charges against the passenger will end up sticking. We'll have to see. The engineer, of course, is in deep doo doo.
tree68 Believe it. We spent a substantial portion of our rules class on "human factors" and the fact that we can be criminally charged for certain things. My days as a volunteer on a tourist railroad would end immediately if I got nailed with a $7,500 person fine (never mind what the railroad could get hit with). It is apparently obvious to the feds that simply having rules isn't enough - there has to be some teeth there...
Interestingly, the federal rules in question (the Part 240 engineer ciertification rules) don't apply to non-general system tourist railroads. That's why they can legally have "take the throttle" programs
I have read a lot of flak and little fact on this topic...it seems very emotional. I would like to know who the pedestrian was. Was he a railroad engineer on a busman's holiday? Was he a teenage prodigy? Just a rialfan? Just a friend? Facts are not being presented, just a lot of judgement.
So, would it be OK to let my friend drive a Greyhound bus full of passengers for 25 or so miles? How about a 737?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding So, would it be OK to let my friend drive a Greyhound bus full of passengers for 25 or so miles? How about a 737?
Don't forget that great headline from The Onion a while back, about the Make A Wish kid's dream to fly an airliner going tragically wrong.
It would be a stupid thing to do, of course, and you should be punished to the fullest extent. However, we all know the rules of the road, or at least should. And if the person has a CDL license of anykind, he might be qualified enough that it would not be that big a deal in the long run. But an engineer must know his rules, his signals, his topogaphy, his geography, his speed limits, his curves, his guide posts (peronal points he uses for his own guidence), his train (and its composition), his engine (if applicable), the idiocyrancies of the railroad and the train, and a few hundred other things to operate a train over a given piece of railroad. Definitely that is plenty more than what a complete stranger, or even close friend, probably would know. The comparison is not entirely equal is what I am trying to say, but definitely the action would be just as stupid but probably not quite as dangerous.
I don't know about being not quite as dangerous. A bus, or 737 could run into just about anything a train could. Think about it from a liability standpoint. Be it a bus, train or airplane. having a non authorised person at the controls could easily result in a mutli-million dollar lawsuit if there were an accident.
The issue here isn't one of skill. For all we know the "civilian" is a card carrying engineer on another railroad (probably not, or it likely would have come out by now). The "civilian" bus driver may have more OTR hours in a bus than the company driver, and the "civilian" pilot might fly the same plane for another airline. In each case, the passengers are in good hands, but...
I was watching some YouTube video about Ross Rowland recently, in which he said he was hostling locomotives alone on a Class 1, at a major terminal, at age 10. He obviously had the skill, he just shouldn't have been doing it.
The problem here is that an completely unauthorized person was operating the train - one that was carrying passengers. Pure and simple. Both that person, and the engineer who allowed it should pay a penalty here.
There are days when I wish the instructing engineer would take over for the student, but at least the student has a card...
Murphy Siding I don't know about being not quite as dangerous. A bus, or 737 could run into just about anything a train could. Think about it from a liability standpoint. Be it a bus, train or airplane. having a non authorised person at the controls could easily result in a mutli-million dollar lawsuit if there were an accident.
My point was more that it is more likely a person behind the wheel of a bus would have a CDL license, be familiar with driving big vehicle, and be familiar with driving rules and skills than one would running a train or a plane. And the liability standpoint is the main reason why I claimed it to be a stupid thing to do.
That's a pretty weak argument Murph. As long as the engineer is watching, there really one certain thing a civilian could do that would adversely affect the passengers, aside from going into emergency, but if the engineer is there, why would he do that? A bus guy oculd swerve into a ditch, and a pilot could bring it into a nose dive.
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
BNSF & DMIR 4Ever Thank you, kind sir. Now that I'm sure of the story being discussed, now I pose the question of why is anyone surprised at this? The engineer lets someone with no experience operate the train over grade grossing and a total of twenty five miles. Honestly, reckless endangerment is quite tame compared to what he could and should be charged with.
To this bnsf & something else 4 ever Wair and henry6 You three have decided to be the judge jury and prosecuter for this case with the sky is falling attitude and even henry talking about being in the cab before, Well I must say 1 thing here and my post will probley get edited to say something totally diferant from what i mean but here it goes.
Nothing happened but the do gooders decided to start yelling and comming out of the woodwork with im going to protect you no matter if you need it or not. Now lets step back and look at something when you started driving a car you had never been behind the wheel before but you passed a test that stated you knew some rules and a few signals and signs, a leagle driver sat beside you and off you go. several blocks and probely a few miles . and guess what years later you treated your kids to the knowledge and your exsperance . when a pilot goes toscchool for flying the first time he gets in there he knows nothing but has a exsperanced pilot right there. guess what whe i went to run engines I had nothing more than a paper stating im allowed to operate a engine supervised, now I supervise , this man who ran this engine was not left alone the engineer was right there all moves directed by him just like every engineer does with students out here, the big differance is the man was not a employee of that railroad, would i be scared NO and for good reason that man running was very cautious and doing exactly what the engineer wanted... when he wanted it and how we wanted it. Ive had students who after passing a rules test thought they new more than me would not listen and had the conductor replacing knuckels. trust me in the fact that you guys are barking up a tree that dont need it. calm down dont have a heart attack, and use your head, that engineer gave a man a dream come true, with comments like these I would not blame railroad employees for treating you guys like treaspassers and vandals, just to save thier buts regaurdless if you was doing wrong or not.
< I edited out a few *colorfull* comments by wabash 1, but left everything else intact for content. -Norris user/moderator >
Thank you. Norris, for removing the obscene name calling.
I will defend myself by saying I am not judging the individual; I don't condone what he did and I don't defend him. The only "facts" we have are what Newsday has published followed by a whole list of accusations and assumptions from some employees, former employees, and railfans. We all have discussed our feelings and how we view what happened by what has been said here. The railroad, the engineer, his guest, none of the parties' lawyers nor any union has weighed in with any facts or testimoney. The discussion has just been a wild, railfan, crackerbarrel, chewing the rag session. You have your opinion and observations, the rest of us have ours.
It's a New World, after 911 ! Most railroad men love there work and like to show what they do to interested rail fans. Ten years ago "cab rides" were possible. Not today.
Everybody is watching, someone in the cab??? Who is he? A terrorist? A mad man with a gun? Most passenger railroads since 911 have "One Person in the Cab" rules. Crew members or the public should report violations. In the Long Island case, other crew members may be in trouble for not reporting it.
The Lawyers for the Railroad will have nightmares. What would the cost be to the railroad if that rider was involved in an accident? What happends if the rider slipped while climbing up into the cab? If the train is wrecked and the rider is injured or killed, what cost? Did he go through the railroad's Safety Training? Did he sign a Liability Release before climbing into the cab?
The government's case, was this passenger in the Engineer's Seat a licensed operator? Was the assigned Engineer classed as an Instructor Engineer? Would conversation in the cab be considered a distraction like a Cell Phone would. (never talk to the Engineer with the train in motion)
Grade Crossings??? This is where accidents happen. Seven years ago I had the opportunity to operate a Steam Locomotive on a Tourist Rairoad. The Licensed Instructor standing behind me on the deck plate said "You've got eight miles of track and 5 grade crossings, don't hit anything". It makes you think!
It's A New World.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
If 9-11 were the first and only reason. Actually, security has been pushed by insurance companies and liablity lawyers for years before. Some railroads are actually running scared of passenger service lest there be a liabilty claim for a late train, an inconvenience of anykind, an injury even if caused by one's own negligence. And the list of reasons go on. And it is not just railroads, either. Security was tightening up all around the business and manufacturing world. We are just so close to the railroad scene that's what we know best.
henry6 Thank you. Norris, for removing the obscene name calling. I will defend myself by saying I am not judging the individual; I don't condone what he did and I don't defend him. The only "facts" we have are what Newsday has published followed by a whole list of accusations and assumptions from some employees, former employees, and railfans. We all have discussed our feelings and how we view what happened by what has been said here. The railroad, the engineer, his guest, none of the parties' lawyers nor any union has weighed in with any facts or testimoney. The discussion has just been a wild, railfan, crackerbarrel, chewing the rag session. You have your opinion and observations, the rest of us have ours.
what was edited out was not vulgar nor was it name calling it was a condition. and as conditons go it must be true if it hurt your feelings. But also even before this you was putting the noose around his neck, WAIR is the main person who put the man in front of the fireing squad and pulled the trigger. Amtrak trains its engineers and yes they get on the engine and run it at high speed over crossings and pull into stations, with permits which is a paper said you made it past the paperwork stage.
I dont care If someone has a opinion and in the opinion says the guy should hang, but dont come out here and make it seem like the engineer got someone from the touring car to run the engine while he went to the HEAD for 25 miles, I can say that the man was never left alone , Heck Ill even go as far to say that I would not even attempt to run that engine with out that man in the cab. my engineer certificate says i can run that train but i wont do it. I guess the easiest way for me to say it is dont come out here trashing my profession or a brother engineer or conductor ragging him out with out another brother engineer or conductor objecting.(edited to clean up the language -Norris user/moderator)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.