Here is my manual for getting on and off of moving equipment:
The techniques for getting on and off moving equipment are described by the use of the terms, trailing and leading, which refer to the direction that the equipment is moving, and are defined as follows:
Leading is the direction the equipment is headed, and trailing is the direction opposite the direction that the equipment is headed.
When a person is to get on or off of moving equipment, they begin from a position of facing the centerline of the track, perpendicularly to the centerline, either standing alongside of the track intending to get on, or standing on the stirrup of a car or the steps of an engine intending to get off. In this starting position, one side of the person is facing the leading direction of the moving equipment, and the other side is facing the trailing direction of the moving equipment. Therefore, the right and left limbs of the person can be designated leading and trailing with respect to that direction of equipment travel.
GETTING ON MOVING EQUIPMENT:
Extend your trailing leg and place your trailing foot into the car stirrup or lowest engine step pocket, and reach with both arms to grab both railings of the engine steps or a rung of a car ladder. Your trailing foot will naturally be impacted by the trailing side of the stirrup or step pocket, and the force will tend to stand you up on your trailing leg. As it stands you up, place your leading foot into the step pocket or stirrup alongside of your trailing foot.
GETTING OFF MOVING EQUIPMENT METHOD #1:
Pivot your body on your trailing foot as you let go of the engine railing or car ladder rung with your leading hand. Continue pivoting until your entire body has rotated about 90 degrees, and is facing the direction of equipment travel, and your leading leg and foot are completely off of the engine step or car stirrup. As you pivot, bend the trailing leg to lower your body, and prepare to step onto the ground with your leading leg. When your leading foot hits the ground, let go of the engine railing or car ladder rung with your trailing hand, and bring your trailing leg forward to take the next step on the ground.
GETTING OFF MOVING EQUIPMENT METHOD #2:
Take your trailing leg off of the engine steps or car stirrup, and cross it over behind your leading leg. Bend your leading leg to lower your body, and prepare to step onto the ground with your trailing leg. When your trailing foot impacts the ground, the force will tend to rotate your body away from the equipment. As it does so, let the rotation disengage your leading foot from the engine steps or car stirrup, while at the same time, let go of the engine railing or car ladder rung with your leading hand. As this rotation on your trailing leg continues, bring your leading foot down to the ground to take the next step, and let go of the engine railing or car ladder rung with your trailing hand.
Yup.
23 17 46 11
[Edit: add what I intended to quote]
Here is a YouTube video of the incident. Unfortunately it does not show the actual moment when the supervisor got on the engine, so you cannot tell if it was leading or trailing foot first! Sorry about the idiocy narration, it is from one of those sensationalistic reality news TV shows.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apsKBo8-zak
I believe the newest contributor to our forums could have done better in narrating the event. One thing that struck me was the mention of the use of the throttle in stopping the train--was the brake not needed?
It is too bad that the man who stopped the train was unable to show his technique for boarding.
Johnny
DeggestyIt is too bad that the man who stopped the train was unable to show his technique for boarding.
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...
tree68 DeggestyIt is too bad that the man who stopped the train was unable to show his technique for boarding.Grab both handrails and hope to heck your foot hits the step...
The technique for boarding under those higher speed circumstance require that the person run alongside of the train to try to match the speed of the train or at least get close to matching it. Then you modulate your speed to allow the engine railings to draw alongside of you, and grab the railings with both hands at the same time. Only after your hands make the grip, do you pull yourself up with your arms so you can plant your feet on the bottom step.
To run alongside of the train, you need to have a good clear stretch alongside of the track with no obstructions or significant vegetation. A wide grade crossing would be ideal. If your speed is less than the train speed, grabbing the railings might yank you off of your feet rather than break your grip on the railings. If that happens, you need to be prepared to rely on your arm strength to control your body position and get your feet planted on the bottom step; and to make sure your feet do not get swept under the steps and under the wheels.
That guy in the video of the runaway CSX train that was going to try to get on really did not even try. I think it would have been very doable with the technique I described. The main point is that you do not plant your foot onto the bottom step as a first move like you do with normal speed boarding. That would break your leg.
Ok, here's the story on the CSX runaway.
Crew doubling over, conductor at the rear of the train, engineer stops to line a bad switch using the independent brake only, he is still pumping up the train line because they are going to couple up to another track and cut the air in.
That is normal, you don't waste air if you don't have to, it increases the time needed to pump up the next track.
As the engineer gets up from his seat he bumped the throttle with his hip, he did not realize this, exits the cab and goes to line the switch, at which point the locomotive begins to move, he tried to mount up but failed, (he was a pretty good sized fellow).
I believe the event recorder showed the throttle in notch 4.
The lead and track were on a downward grade, the train sped up, the brake shoes eventually wore away...I remember seeing photos of the brake head, they too were pretty tore up.
Long story short, the police and CSX tried pushing the fuel cut off button with a broom handle, missed, then they tried shooting the same switch, which only destroyed the switch.
Fuel cut off switches are momentary switches, they have to be held down for a second, the switch grounds out a relay in the fuel pump wiring, opening the relay and both shutting off the pump, which starves the engine of fuel and shutting off the injectors.
At one point, the had a pick up truck pacing the train and a officer tried to board, but couldn't.
Finally, one employee realized that the train would slow down some as it approached a grade crossing, as it was a slight up hill grade, we saw footage of him mounting, he takes three running steps, grabs the hand holds with both hands, takes a few more running steps and pulls himself up on the first step...because he was running he landed on his leading foot, but in this instance that matters little.
He enters the cab, closes the throttle, centered the reverser and used the train brake to stop.
Because if this instance, the FRA called for a rule that required either a crew member be in the cab of a locomotive in "run" at all times, a crew member must be in the cab if the engineer leaves the cab, or, if the engineer is alone, before he may leave the locomotive he must set the independent brake fully, do a 20 psi brake pipe or train line reduction, isolate the locomotive, set the generator switch to off, tie the locomotive hand brake.
This same rule requires all locomotives in a consist be isolated, with hand brakes tied, when a crew leaves the consist un attended.
Oddly enough, with in a month of this incident, CSX had a light locomotive , a GP38 yard motor run away also, although that one was because the crew failed to tie the hand brake down, left the locomotive held in place by the independent brake only, and went home.
The locomotive died, the compressor of course shut off, and the faulty independent bled down, the locomotive was also on a slight grade, and it rolled something like 3 or 4 miles through several switches and several grade crossings, ended up out on a main where it dropped a signal, which alerted the dispatcher.
It stopped on its own on a flat area, up against a switch lined against it.
It was determined that this locomotive was also due its 92 day FRA inspection the following day, which would have caught the worn out independent brake valve.
Talk about bad coincidence.
WSOR 3801 We do it all the time. We do a lot of switching, so stopping for every mount-dismount would cost too much time, and we would only get one days work done, instead of 1.5 or 2. There is a fairly big passage in the safety manual on the proper method (trailing foot). If you don't feel comfortable, or there is snow-ice-bad footing, it is perfectly fine to stop the move.
We do it all the time. We do a lot of switching, so stopping for every mount-dismount would cost too much time, and we would only get one days work done, instead of 1.5 or 2. There is a fairly big passage in the safety manual on the proper method (trailing foot). If you don't feel comfortable, or there is snow-ice-bad footing, it is perfectly fine to stop the move.
Hope you are being paid for 1.5 or 2 days work...
A job ain't worth destroying your body over. And if you get hurt, no RR is going to stand behind you.
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
edblysard As the engineer gets up from his seat he bumped the throttle with his hip, he did not realize this, exits the cab and goes to line the switch, at which point the locomotive begins to move, he tried to mount up but failed, (he was a pretty good sized fellow).
I had sort or heard the details of how that runaway happened, but it left some lingering questions. I could see how the engineer could have bumped the throttle as he got up to exit the unit. But why was he not immediately alerted to the error upon hearing the engine rev up to throttle notch #4? I know there is a little lag time between the throttle movement and the engine response, but still, the engineer could have hardly even gotten out of the cab before the engine revved up.
I guess the reverser was left in the power position because, with the throttle in idle, the engineer saw no reason to place the reverser in neutral. But, considering the sound of the engine revving up when it should not have been, I don’t get how the engineer could have not suspected that something was amiss.
Well, that's the official version....
My guess, and only a guess, would be the engineer realized he was about to run through a switch, slapped the throttle closed or so he thought, hit the independent, then bailed out and ran to line the switch ahead of the move....and didn't make it in time.
But the first version is what is in the FRA report as what the engineer told them.
Yes, the official version sounds a little fishy.
I think if I was going to get off the unit like that, I'd give myself "3 step," in which case the engine might have revved up, but it wouldn't have gone anywhere.
I'll sign on with the "sounds fishy" crowd, though.
All right you guys. Check out the Pentrex video "Working on the Santa Fe" , a series of ATSF training and promo films. The second film is about yard safety, and has a long session on mounting and dismounting correctly, including showing what happens if you do not do it correctly.
Phil
Timber Head Eastern Railroad "THE Railroad Through the Sierras"
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
Why wouldn't the dynamic do anything, Coburn? If he had the speed down and good dynamic, it should have brought it right down. Was it equipped with extended range dynamic? I don't know. I've never understood how he slapped it into eight notch power, thinking he'd put it in dynamic.
I've always thought he wasn't really paying attention and then, there it was, switch lined against him. Whoops, he thought he could save the situation but what would have been a run-through switch, became a nationwide story. It sucked to be him THAT day.
We can armchair quarterback this thing all day... but unless any of us were there - our guesses hold no merit.
zugmann We can armchair quarterback this thing all day... but unless any of us were there - our guesses hold no merit.
I am not guessing what happened. But I can readily determine that none of explanations of what happened that I have heard seem plausible. Was this incident blamed on the engineer? If so, what rules were violated?
Bucyrus zugmann We can armchair quarterback this thing all day... but unless any of us were there - our guesses hold no merit. I am not guessing what happened. But I can readily determine that none of explanations of what happened that I have heard seem plausible. Was this incident blamed on the engineer? If so, what rules were violated?
Well, then you are guessing at the plausability at the explanation given. Second-guessing, if you will. You say the engineer should have heard the engines throttle up. But I've seen many engineers deaf as a post.
Anyone ever see a link to a FRA report?
zugmann Bucyrus zugmann We can armchair quarterback this thing all day... but unless any of us were there - our guesses hold no merit. I am not guessing what happened. But I can readily determine that none of explanations of what happened that I have heard seem plausible. Was this incident blamed on the engineer? If so, what rules were violated? Well, then you are guessing at the plausability at the explanation given. Second-guessing, if you will. You say the engineer should have heard the engines throttle up. But I've seen many engineers deaf as a post. Anyone ever see a link to a FRA report?
I am just saying that for me the explanation is not plausible. However, if the official explanation disclosed that the engineer was deaf, then it may be plausible, depending on the rest of the facts. Maybe the FRA report contains an explanation that I would find thoroughly plausible.
One thing I would like to know is whether the locomotive was stopped before the engineer got off of it. If it was stopped, and the engineer inadvertently opened the thottle to notch #8 as he got out of his seat, I would think the locomotive would have begun moving before the engineer hit the ground. That certainly should have alerted him that something was wrong.
It seems implausible that the engineer could have gotten so far away from the locomotive before it began to move that the locomotive was able to gain so much speed that the engineer could not have gotten back on.
"GETTING OFF MOVING EQUIPMENT METHOD #2:
Take your trailing leg off of the engine steps or car stirrup, and cross it over behind your leading leg. Bend your leading leg to lower your body, and prepare to step onto the ground with your trailing leg. When your trailing foot impacts the ground, the force will tend to rotate your body away from the equipment. As it does so, let the rotation disengage your leading foot from the engine steps or car stirrup, while at the same time, let go of the engine railing or car ladder rung with your leading hand. As this rotation on your trailing leg continues, bring your leading foot down to the ground to take the next step, and let go of the engine railing or car ladder rung with your trailing hand."
This was the way I was taught on both the CNW and BN, I wouldn't want to try the Method 1 described.
I enjoyed getting on and off moving equipment (except at night when trying to board a locomotive run by a hot-shot engineer in a pitch black yard; I wouldn't get on, the engine went by, engineer eventually stopped). It's like riding a bicycle, once you learn you never forget how (although after 15 or so years I would need some practice before getting on or off at 10 MPH again).
Kurt Hayek
ValleyX Why wouldn't the dynamic do anything, Coburn? If he had the speed down and good dynamic, it should have brought it right down. Was it equipped with extended range dynamic? I don't know. I've never understood how he slapped it into eight notch power, thinking he'd put it in dynamic. I've always thought he wasn't really paying attention and then, there it was, switch lined against him. Whoops, he thought he could save the situation but what would have been a run-through switch, became a nationwide story. It sucked to be him THAT day.
How old was this engineer? One of the newer guys that thinks the big handle will bite?
zugmann How old was this engineer? One of the newer guys that thinks the big handle will bite?
Guess he just got fixated on the switch and lost all perspective. A few small mistakes can lead to some really, really big ones...
Of course maybe if certain carriers wouldn't freak out over a simple run-through switch...
CN's GOI still has a whole section about entraining and detraining moving equipment. They permit it up to 4mph.
On the negative side, CN is probably the only railroad that will discipline an employee for stopping a movement to get on or off - delay to assignment.
10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ...
zugmann Guess he just got fixated on the switch and lost all perspective. [snip]
I understand that when this happens to pilots, the aviation industry refers to it as '' 'head-in-the-cockpit' syndrome''.
- Paul North.
Paul_D_North_Jr - 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year'' - isn't there an ''Hours of Service Law'' up north ?
- 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year'' - isn't there an ''Hours of Service Law'' up north ?
No, we have rather archaic work-rest rules compared to the US HOS rules.Our rest clauses are negotiated between the union and the company and varies through different collective agreements. For example an employee working under the BC Rail agreement can take unlimited rest after a shift/trip, whereas a CN employee on the mainline can only take 14 hrs after a yard shift, 24 after a road trip, or 48 hrs after making 1075 miles.
The work-rest rules allow for 8 hrs rest after working 12 hrs.
And in single sub service you can book up to 8 hours rest after 10.
Also, in Canada you can work two back to back road tours ( go off duty and immediately go back on duty ... as long as the first one is not over 10 hours) for a total continous operational time of 18 hours. Working 18 hours straight is a looooong time.
In yard service you can do two back to back 8 hour shifts for a total of 16 hours continous.
You are also allowed 16 hours continuous in work train service.
I guess it depends on the kind of control stand in the engine in question. Older ones have one like this:
The throttle lever does power and dynamic. Selector in the upper right to switch between. Still should have felt going up through the notches though.
To alleviate such problems, most Dash-2s and newer have separate levers, like this:
The knobs are turned different, go the opposite way, etc. Easy to tell apart.
Mike WSOR engineer | HO scale since 1988 | Visit our club www.WCGandyDancers.com
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.