Somewhere I read that the engineer dumped the air around 5-10 seconds before impact, so we know that he did realize he was going to hit before actual impact. But we don't know what was happening just prior to that.
I understand that he has passed two signals without responding. If the vision problem was off and on, the more signals he failed to respond to, the less probable it would be that he was experiencing a vision failure.
Would the engineer know that he was meeting that opposing train by other communication?
zugmann Color position lights give you the best of both worlds. And no moving parts.
Color position lights give you the best of both worlds.
And no moving parts.
CPL and position light signals have been attractive to the fan community primarily because they were different. There may be relatively less moving parts than on a semaphore or a single-bulb searchlight signal but there is more wiring and more bulbs to maintain. A maintainer would be the person to know how much work is required to keep the various signals operating properly.
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
MP173 I am not a railroader so you folks can jump all over me for this, but here goes. It appears there is a trend of trains running signals. This UP accident, the CSX accident in NW Indiana and also a similar CSX incident in Chicago last year. Is there an issue of authority in the cab regarding engineers and conductors? Why, with two people in the cab are signals being missed and accidents occurring. I have read extensively the CSX NW Indiana investigation and there is indications that the conductor was aware of the restricting signal, yet the train struck the stopped train at a speed in excess of 40mph. Even if the engineer in the UP accident is color blind, isn't the conductor to be calling signals and confirming these indications to the engineer? I know there is discussion about sleep and perhaps that is a problem. But at some point in time the conductor should be questioning the engineer, particularly if his LIFE IS AT STAKE. Shouldn't he (she)? Also read the Conrail UP 1999 accident report...visability can be an issue at low light. There are times when I cross a track at grade crossing and looking into the field of view with the sun behind signals, it is very difficult to read a color. But, shouldn't safety be the ongoing theme?Ed
I am not a railroader so you folks can jump all over me for this, but here goes.
It appears there is a trend of trains running signals. This UP accident, the CSX accident in NW Indiana and also a similar CSX incident in Chicago last year.
Is there an issue of authority in the cab regarding engineers and conductors? Why, with two people in the cab are signals being missed and accidents occurring. I have read extensively the CSX NW Indiana investigation and there is indications that the conductor was aware of the restricting signal, yet the train struck the stopped train at a speed in excess of 40mph.
Even if the engineer in the UP accident is color blind, isn't the conductor to be calling signals and confirming these indications to the engineer?
I know there is discussion about sleep and perhaps that is a problem. But at some point in time the conductor should be questioning the engineer, particularly if his LIFE IS AT STAKE. Shouldn't he (she)?
Also read the Conrail UP 1999 accident report...visability can be an issue at low light. There are times when I cross a track at grade crossing and looking into the field of view with the sun behind signals, it is very difficult to read a color. But, shouldn't safety be the ongoing theme?Ed
JUST a question thrown out for comments:
" Are Semaphore Signals the answer to mistakes in color aspects?"
a video link for Semaphore Signals: http://www.youtube.com/channel/HCIKLuV0NSbb8
desertdog Bucyrus I am perplexed as to how a doctor could determine that an engineer might not be able to interpret signals, and yet the engineer was allowed by the company to continue in service. I share your perplexity. John Timm
Bucyrus I am perplexed as to how a doctor could determine that an engineer might not be able to interpret signals, and yet the engineer was allowed by the company to continue in service.
I am perplexed as to how a doctor could determine that an engineer might not be able to interpret signals, and yet the engineer was allowed by the company to continue in service.
I share your perplexity.
John Timm
Well, desist in your perplexity. He knew that if the railroad knew he would be taken out of service. He wants to work. It is normal for a man to conceal his infirmities, after all they are not manly. Obviously he also passed his vision tests for a driver's license, so LION thinks his vision was not all that bad.
Color on paper and color of lights are of course two different things. And what is colored light other than white light with a filter in front of it. What tricks the eye can play on such things the LION does not know. Him does know that looking at a white paper with the right eye lends a greenish tint, while looking with the left eye lends a reddish tint, at least to the eye of this lion.
LION was looking out of dining room window this morning, him thinks he might not be able to distinguish a semaphore at one mile. Well, is no semaphore in back yard, but him cannot see clearly the cross beams on power poles at one mile. Him looks at mile markers on interstate, sometimes him can see them only 1/4 mile away (depending on terrain). Mile markers are same size as semaphore blade but are down in the weeds and not up on a mast.
LION thinks they should go to cab signals.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Bucyrus zardoz Bucyrus That is a very good question. The engineer may have missed a signal or two, but the conductor is the backup brains. What was his excuse? Sleeping? That is the 600 pound gorilla in the livingroom. Maybe the NTSB thought they would lose credibilty by once again blaming the crash on sleep disorders. Maybe they wanted to spice it up with a new cause so they came up with vision.
zardoz Bucyrus That is a very good question. The engineer may have missed a signal or two, but the conductor is the backup brains. What was his excuse? Sleeping?
Bucyrus That is a very good question. The engineer may have missed a signal or two, but the conductor is the backup brains. What was his excuse?
That is a very good question. The engineer may have missed a signal or two, but the conductor is the backup brains. What was his excuse?
That is the 600 pound gorilla in the livingroom. Maybe the NTSB thought they would lose credibilty by once again blaming the crash on sleep disorders. Maybe they wanted to spice it up with a new cause so they came up with vision.
After reading the link to another NTSB report that desertdog posted, maybe they do deserve to lose a little credibility. In that report they repeatedly say the UP train passed an Approach Restricting on the last signal before the home/absolute signal at the interlocking. That the engineer failed to slow to 30 mph or less prepared to stop at the next signal. That's not what an Approach Restricting indicates. Approach Restricting is prepared to pass the next signal at restricted speed, not exceeding 15 mph. I think they meant to use Approach. Still, that's an oversight I wouldn't expect from an agency like this.
A few months ago I had to renew my engineer's license. It's renewed every 3 years. The physical portion, for now, is a hearing and vision test, the vision portion including a color recognition portion. (I don't see a doctor for the recerts, the tests are given by nurses/technicians. The results are sent to the RR medical dept.) The color portion of the vision test consists of looking at a book with colored bubble like designs and reading the number hidden within. One page has a "path" you have to follow with your finger and a page where you aren't supposed to see anything. There's a couple different versions of the test that are allowable (one has more plates than the other) and how many you can miss depends on which test is used. I passed 100%. If someone fails this portion, they are taken by a company officer out into the field to a signal location to view actual signals.
I suppose that with color light signals, especially simple single headed ones, it might be possible to "fake" it. Our color lights are in a green on top/yellow in middle/red on bottom arrangement. (This allowed me once to recognize a broken out red lens because I realized the bottom light was lit up, but wasn't red.) I wonder if this is why the engineer kept working and maybe "hiding" his vision deterioration, depending on viewing the position of the light on the signal head. The signals the UP replaced most likely would also have been a color light signal. Either original RI GRS triangular color lights or more standard vertical color lights from SSW/SP days. (RI also used searchlight type signals, but I believe the Golden State route had the GRS signals.) In either case, the position of each color on the head is standard.
I can understand those who work or have been around position light type signals think they are best. But I would say that most railroads replaced semaphores with some kind of color signal, either individual lights or searchlight styles. I wouldn't agree that the style of signal itself is a factor, although sometimes signal placement or signal heads that aren't "aimed" right (or have slightly moved) can be an issue.
Jeff
Depending on how the test is administered, it can be relatively easy to fake color recognition on a signal test by remembering the position of the various lights or color samples on the background when the color test is given.
In a similar vein, my late father used to tell the story of how he was able to fake a depth perception test in order to qualify for pilot training in WWII. Of course, when he had to make his first landing in the Stearman trainer, he bounced it pretty badly and washed out of pilot training in favor of navigator school. He later completed 32 combat missions with the 306th Bomb Group.
Happy Birthday, Dad.
BaltACD Yes they have. And in my opinion, those that have been using color light signals continue to leave themselves more open to misinterpertation of what the signals are displaying. This especially comes into play in urban areas, where there are a multiplicity of background light sources that display green, yellow and red single light sources - that CAN be mistaken for a wayside signal. Observation from my time in riding trains - Signal personnel don't care about what the background of a signal installation is (especially at night, when they have only been to the location in daylight). Picking signal indications out of the urban light forest at night is a exercise in looking for the RIGHT TREE in the forest. Color light signals are accepted in the industry. I don't control the industry. My opinion is that color light signals are not the safest of the possible signal types.
Yes they have. And in my opinion, those that have been using color light signals continue to leave themselves more open to misinterpertation of what the signals are displaying.
This especially comes into play in urban areas, where there are a multiplicity of background light sources that display green, yellow and red single light sources - that CAN be mistaken for a wayside signal. Observation from my time in riding trains - Signal personnel don't care about what the background of a signal installation is (especially at night, when they have only been to the location in daylight). Picking signal indications out of the urban light forest at night is a exercise in looking for the RIGHT TREE in the forest.
Color light signals are accepted in the industry. I don't control the industry. My opinion is that color light signals are not the safest of the possible signal types.
Best signals I ever had to deal with were Amtrak's LED color position signal. No confusion about those at all. Even with a light coating of snow on them (a downside of LED's not generating much heat), you could still see the color shining through (esp at night, maybe in daylight it's a different story?)
That being said, I'd love to see a Pennsy all-amber position signal retrofitted with amber LEDs.
BucyrusRailroads have always been sticklers for refusing color blindness.
Which is why this NTSB story seems so peculiar to me. It just seems so odd that UP would continue to let this man work, if in fact they were properly doing their routine follow up vision tests.
I worked with a fellow who hired on to the CPR as a brakeman in Winnipeg in the '70's. He was in fact colour blind, but with the assistance of a relative also employed by the company, got hired anyway. A few years after he hired out there was a seasonal shift in business and men were needed at Revelstoke, BC. After a couple of months out there they tested him with an unfamiliar, to him, colour blindness test and when he failed, was fired promptly and an investigation was launched into how he was hired in the first place.
In the it's an ill wind that blows no good category he became a consultant in corporate fiscal matters, where I met him, and retired from a very successful career a couple of years ago.
Bruce
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
Yes, the color is the only indication. Also at night the three-color signals lose their relationship of the unlit colors to the illuminated lense. Railroads have always been sitcklers for refusing color blindness.
diningcarMaybe the NTSB is using this explanation to further the case for PTC to a naive public.
I don't know if it is PTC, but I sure to do think the NTSB is positioning itself to drop another very big shoe in its' final report. I don't recall ever seeing such a preliminary cause being cited in any NTSB or TSB (in Canada) report.
At night of course, semaphore signals become single lens single colour signals. There is merit in considering both colour position signals and three colour three lens signals. The later being the type of signals every one sees when they drive.
BaltACD Bucyrus But haven't color light signals been standard on many railroads for a long time? Had the color light signals where this wreck took place been recently installed to replace color-position-light signals or position-light signals? Yes they have. And in my opinion, those that have been using color light signals continue to leave themselves more open to misinterpertation of what the signals are displaying. This especially comes into play in urban areas, where there are a multiplicity of background light sources that display green, yellow and red single light sources - that CAN be mistaken for a wayside signal. Observation from my time in riding trains - Signal personnel don't care about what the background of a signal installation is (especially at night, when they have only been to the location in daylight). Picking signal indications out of the urban light forest at night is a exercise in looking for the RIGHT TREE in the forest. Color light signals are accepted in the industry. I don't control the industry. My opinion is that color light signals are not the safest of the possible signal types.
Bucyrus But haven't color light signals been standard on many railroads for a long time? Had the color light signals where this wreck took place been recently installed to replace color-position-light signals or position-light signals?
But haven't color light signals been standard on many railroads for a long time? Had the color light signals where this wreck took place been recently installed to replace color-position-light signals or position-light signals?
Norm48327 Just an opinion, but if the engineer knew he was having color vision problems why did he not disqualify himself from operating trains? If the conductor saw the stop indication and knew it was close why did he not hit the emergency stop button? Like an airline pilot monitoring while the other is flying it was his responsibility to stay on top of things.
Just an opinion, but if the engineer knew he was having color vision problems why did he not disqualify himself from operating trains? If the conductor saw the stop indication and knew it was close why did he not hit the emergency stop button? Like an airline pilot monitoring while the other is flying it was his responsibility to stay on top of things.
Norm
Bucyrus Difficulty in seeing a signal cannot possibly be an excuse. It is up to the engineer to know where the signal is, to see it well enough to comply with its indication, and to comply with its indication. If he cannot see it well enough to comply with its indication, it is considered to be a stop signal, and he must not pass it.
Difficulty in seeing a signal cannot possibly be an excuse. It is up to the engineer to know where the signal is, to see it well enough to comply with its indication, and to comply with its indication. If he cannot see it well enough to comply with its indication, it is considered to be a stop signal, and he must not pass it.
Found the following AP {Associated Press] story at this link:
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/doctor-driver-okla-train-wreck-had-bad-eyes
"NTSB: Bad eyesight likely caused Okla. train crash"
Despite his failing vision, the engineer continued driving freight trains and was guiding one of the ones that collided June 24, 2012, near town of Goodwell, killing him and two other railroad workers and causing about $15 million in damage..."
How does a man with this kind of condition continue to pass a Railroad Medical Physical?
The bigger question is: How many others might be afflicted with a similar condition? Makes you wonder what kind of a NTSB Ruling will come out of this..."The Caifornia Crash" several years back brought PTC to the industry. Will the results of this current finding bring on some more arcane, and onerous rule-making?
Difficulty in seeing a signal cannot possibly be an excuse. It is up to the engineer to know where the signal is, to see it well enough to understand its indication, and to comply with its indication. If he cannot see it well enough to understand its indication, it is considered to be a stop signal, and he must not pass it.
BaltACDColor light signals are accepted in the industry. I don't control the industry. My opinion is that color light signals are not the safest of the possible signal types.
Cab Signals, anyone?
My nephew is fully color blind. As a kid he could not see a day-glow orange ball on the grass.
Yet looking at a black and white TV set, he could properly identify foot ball jersey colors even from teams he did not know. He was able to interpret shades of gray and their relation to or rather there appearance to him as colors.
All well and good, this does not apply to an adult who could see colors all of his life and now could not tell colors anymore. He would never have developed the same skill.
As to this case... THE CONDUCTOR WAS NOT ALSO COLOR BLIND WAS HE? What was he doing?
LION wants to know that one!
Not exactly the same situation, but close:
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/fulltext/RAB0202.html
NP RedThis is a little confusing because this link clearly shows a curve that would affect the line of sight but when I look at it on my regular google, it looks straight as a string. Both are from Google. What gives?
Did you know that the towers of the Verazano Narrow's Bridge are perfectly plum vertical, yet the tops of the towers are an inch further apart than the bottoms? Well, it turns out that the Earth is curved. Round actually, and over the distance of this tangent track we have to take into account the Earth that it is sitting on. It is in fact a hill, or more properly a vertical curve.
From our dining room window we can see about 12 miles, but from the ground outside of our window you cannot see more than three miles. Someone earlier in this thread asked about seeing smoke from steam engines, and yes you can and do. That is how World War - I battleships knew where to find the enemy battleships. Her in North Dakota, we can see the vapor from the power plant 40 miles away, and in the right atmospheric conditions we can even see the stacks. Sometimes (about once a year) we can see vapor plumes from plants over 80 miles away. But smoke on the horizon is just that, and give you no clue as to the spatial relationship of things other than "It is over there."
Maybe the final report will be clear and objective, but this preliminary news seems really squishy, raising far more questions than it answers.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Where was the conductor? Did the conductor know of his cab partner's problem? If he did then he should have been much more alert, but even if he did not he also has the responsibility to see and call out the signal aspects.
The crew had just come on duty at Dalhart about 35 miles from the collision and should have been rested. This seems to need more explaination to the public who are unaware that the second person in the cab has a responsibility. Maybe the NTSB is using this explaination to further the case for PTC to a naive public.
Bucyrus Is this the most current information? As I understand it, the engineer knew that his vision was varying from day to day, and could therefore recognize when it was at its poorest state. Also, as I understand it, the engineer could not disinguish red from green at times. What I wonder is whether the engineer routinely passed signals while realizing that he could not tell their aspect. That would be much different than failing to interpret the aspect of signals being passed, but not being aware of the failure. The latter would be an accident. The former would be a crime.
Is this the most current information? As I understand it, the engineer knew that his vision was varying from day to day, and could therefore recognize when it was at its poorest state. Also, as I understand it, the engineer could not disinguish red from green at times.
What I wonder is whether the engineer routinely passed signals while realizing that he could not tell their aspect.
That would be much different than failing to interpret the aspect of signals being passed, but not being aware of the failure.
The latter would be an accident. The former would be a crime.
James
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.