Put yourself in the enginer's seat of that train if you have the qualifications to do so, then tell us from experience, not speculation, what you would have done in that situation.
Norm
Euclid It is all right there on the video that is publically available. It clearly shows the hospital bed set crosswise and centered on the track. It shows the trestle deck including walkways along the track. I shows people moving around in various ways on the trestle deck, handling equipment and other activities. It shows the panic that set in when they realized a train was coming. The only thing I am not sure of is the exact number of people. So I am estimating a dozen people. This ABC video contains the most coverage of the actual incident: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/video-shows-train-involved-death-midnight-rider-crewmember-29804691
It is all right there on the video that is publically available. It clearly shows the hospital bed set crosswise and centered on the track. It shows the trestle deck including walkways along the track. I shows people moving around in various ways on the trestle deck, handling equipment and other activities. It shows the panic that set in when they realized a train was coming. The only thing I am not sure of is the exact number of people. So I am estimating a dozen people.
This ABC video contains the most coverage of the actual incident:
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/video-shows-train-involved-death-midnight-rider-crewmember-29804691
You knew the bed was there, and you are looking for it on the video. The engineer did not know it was there, and was also busy operating a train.
An "expensive model collector"
Norm48327 That, considering none of us were there at the time is an unfair question. You are asking us to speculate, which you seem to be good at and coming up with your reasons for doing such. Put yourself in the enginer's seat of that train if you have the qualifications to do so, then tell us from experience, not speculation, what you would have done in that situation.
Well, as Don Oltmannd said, “It really isn’t that complicated.” If I were the engineer, I would have made an emergency application at some point before reaching the bridge. At some point, I would have seen several people. I doubt that I would have mistaken them for buzzards as the CSX engineer says he did. Upon first seeing them, I would have begun making a strong effort to assess what I was seeing.
According to the timeline given in the news article, the engineer saw the people on or near the bridge and tracks when he was about a half mile away. That is 2640 feet, to decide what action to take. The engineer decided to blow the horn. I might have done the same thing before applying any braking, but if there was no immediate response of people clearing away from the site, I would have made an emergency application.
If people were visible, I am sure the bed would have been visible, and the bed was clearly fouling the track, and it had been in that position for the entire time from when the engineer could first see the people. I assume that the engineer would have seen people fouling the track as they panicked and sought to remove the bed before running to get themselves clear of the track. It appears that this activity was clearly underway by the time when the train was about 1000 feet away.
For me, the observance of a large object across the track on a high bridge with perhaps a dozen people standing or moving near the bed, and possibly fouling the track, and certainly on the roadbed—all of that would have called for an emergency application.
Euclid For me, the observance of a large object across the track on a high bridge with perhaps a dozen people standing or moving near the bed, and possibly fouling the track, and certainly on the roadbed—all of that would have called for an emergency application.
Just thought I would ask this again, even though you will not answer it. Please tell us your experiance in the operation of a train, along with train handling...
n012944 Euclid For me, the observance of a large object across the track on a high bridge with perhaps a dozen people standing or moving near the bed, and possibly fouling the track, and certainly on the roadbed—all of that would have called for an emergency application. Just thought I would ask this again, even though you will not answer it. Please tell us your experiance in the operation of a train, along with train handling...
If you don’t think that what I say I would have done would have been the correct thing to do, well, so be it. It does no good to complain that I don’t have enough experience to say what I would have done. And incidentally, a lot of experienced people do the wrong thing sometimes.
I have enough experience to know that not every fully experienced engineer would agree on the proper course of action when facing an emergency situation like this. There is a certain risk to either course of action. It is far better to not go into emergency if events unfold in a way that shows it would not have been necessary. But the emergency function is there for a reason. It calls for decisiveness. A fret about whether it might derail the train seems to conflict with the call for decisiveness. When do you know for sure it won’t derail the train?
As this case is tried, I expect both opposing sides will have their experts full of experience to say each other is wrong. In the end, it will be up to the jury to decide which expert to believe. Of course nobody knows the outcome in advance, but, in hindsight, I’ll bet that CSX engineer wishes he had put that train into emergency before impact.
None of this logic will matter much when the jury sees the grieving family and the big corporation with lots of money.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
EuclidI have never worked as an engineer. But I have enough knowledge and experience to know what I would have done.
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.
Proverb 16:18.
In other words: I don't believe you for a second.
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
“Courage, self-reliance and decisiveness are the main traits that define a man.” ― Ogwo David Emenike
“Evil draws its power from indecision and concern for what other people think.” ― Pope Benedict XVI
Throw all the quotes you want at me - the fact remains you have zero experience as an engineer. So to pretend like you would know exactly what to do is laughable. Maybe even a bit pitiful?
Sometimes I think you are a paid shill by Kalmbach to bring in views for this site. But seeing how backwards some of this forum software is, I have my doubts.
Euclid I have never worked as an engineer. But I have enough knowledge and experience to know what I would have done........... ..........I have enough experience to know
..........I have enough experience to know
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
zugmann Throw all the quotes you want at me - the fact remains you have zero experience as an engineer. So to pretend like you would know exactly what to do is laughable. Maybe even a bit pitiful? Sometimes I think you are a paid shill by Kalmbach to bring in views for this site. But seeing how backwards some of this forum software is, I have my doubts.
All I said is what I would have done in that situation. I do know that. If you would have done something different, fine. I am just saying what I would have done.
Euclid zugmann Throw all the quotes you want at me - the fact remains you have zero experience as an engineer. So to pretend like you would know exactly what to do is laughable. Maybe even a bit pitiful? Sometimes I think you are a paid shill by Kalmbach to bring in views for this site. But seeing how backwards some of this forum software is, I have my doubts. All I said is what I would have done in that situation. I do know that. If you would have done something different, fine. I am just saying what I would have done.
It is possible to have an opinion about what one would do in a particular situation in life. However, there are situations in which without experience and relevant training, that opinion is about as worthless as mine (I never piloted a plane!) about what I would do as an airline pilot in an air emergency. The problem is one that has become horribly widespread in society and on here, where any John Doe's opinion is as good as an expert's.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I'm just curious how someone that openly admits to having no experince would have the "knowledge and experience" to know what to do. He has every right to say what he thinks he would have done (hindsight is always 20/20) but to be so damned sure about it? Baffling.
zugmann I'm just curious how someone that openly admits to having no experince would have the "knowledge and experience" to know what to do. He has every right to say what he thinks he would have done (hindsight is always 20/20) but to be so damned sure about it? Baffling.
I am also baffled at how long this discussion has gone on, especially considering that no matter what the Engineer did in this situation the train still would have hit the bed and people. At 50-60 MPH a train cannot stop before hitting anything the Engineer can see clearly, even if the brakes are put in emergency.
But since putting oneself into another's place without any experience seems to be in vogue, I will give it a try. I am not a psychologist or psychiatrist, but my diagnosis is that Euclid has trouble letting things go. Having not gotten the answer he wanted (a straight "yes" or "no") to a question he cannot forget it or admit that he could be wrong, and feels compelled to ask the question again and again.
Speaking of proverbs and sayings, isn't there one about doing the same thing over & over again and expecting a different result?
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Zug,
I have been wondering the same for years. Why can someone who claims to have experience but refuses to reveal his qualifiications can speak with authority on any rail related subject. Given his reluctance to provide his experience is the reason I constantly challenge Bucky to show us his qualifactions.
i'm still in the learning mode and have a long way to go to understand the realities of life as a conductor, engineer, or dispatcher. Your posts, and Balt ACD's have been informative. I deem those who stand near the tracks with camera in hand fomers. OTOH, there are those of us who have a definite interest.
SD70M-2Dude I am not a psychologist or psychiatrist, but my diagnosis is that Euclid has trouble letting things go. Having not gotten the answer he wanted (a straight "yes" or "no") to a question he cannot forget it or admit that he could be wrong, and feels compelled to ask the question again and again.
In layman's terms, good enough. I would add that it does not matter to him what your answer is. He disputes himself.
Murphy SidingKnowledge and experience in what?
MSTS? Trainz?
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...
Hey I am not disputing anything. I am only saying what I would have done. Do I need to be properly trained to say what I would have done? You guys seem awfully defensive that I won’t accept your hostility. If you would care to look at the news on this story, you will see that the whole legal theory of the plaintiff is centered on the actions of the engineer and the crews of other earlier trains exactly relative to what I have been talking about here. There is a lot more going on in this trial than what we have generally been led to believe by the reporting over the last couple years since the accident.
schlimmHowever, there are situations in which without experience and relevant training, that opinion is about as worthless as mine (I never piloted a plane!) about what I would do as an airline pilot in an air emergency.
Regarding your point about not knowing what to do in an air emergency, as Don Oltmannd said earlier, "This isn't that complicated."
schlimm SD70M-2Dude I am not a psychologist or psychiatrist, but my diagnosis is that Euclid has trouble letting things go. Having not gotten the answer he wanted (a straight "yes" or "no") to a question he cannot forget it or admit that he could be wrong, and feels compelled to ask the question again and again. In layman's terms, good enough. I would add that it does not matter to him what your answer is. He disputes himself.
oltmannd Euclid What would you have if confronted with that situation? Pretty much what the engineer did. Blow the horn, stop train after it hit the bed and the bed hit the people still on the bridge walkway. This really isn't that complicated.
Euclid What would you have if confronted with that situation?
Pretty much what the engineer did. Blow the horn, stop train after it hit the bed and the bed hit the people still on the bridge walkway. This really isn't that complicated.
Euclid schlimm However, there are situations in which without experience and relevant training, that opinion is about as worthless as mine (I never piloted a plane!) about what I would do as an airline pilot in an air emergency. Regarding your point about not knowing what to do in an air emergency, as Don Oltmannd said earlier, "This isn't that complicated."
schlimm However, there are situations in which without experience and relevant training, that opinion is about as worthless as mine (I never piloted a plane!) about what I would do as an airline pilot in an air emergency.
Murphy Siding oltmannd Euclid What would you have if confronted with that situation? Pretty much what the engineer did. Blow the horn, stop train after it hit the bed and the bed hit the people still on the bridge walkway. This really isn't that complicated. Here's the balance of the quote you're taking out of context. It is from someone with railroad experience and the answer imlpies you are wrong.
Here's the balance of the quote you're taking out of context. It is from someone with railroad experience and the answer imlpies you are wrong.
Thanks for clarifying Oltmann's comment.
EuclidHey I am not disputing anything. I am only saying what I would have done. Do I need to be properly trained to say what I would have done?
We all can have an opinion. As yours is not that of someone with relevant experience as a railroad engineer (or a tort lawyer), you should just have said it once and moved on.
schlimm Euclid Hey I am not disputing anything. I am only saying what I would have done. Do I need to be properly trained to say what I would have done? We all can have an opinion. As yours is not that of someone with relevant experience as a railroad engineer (or a tort lawyer), you should just have said it once and moved on.
Euclid Hey I am not disputing anything. I am only saying what I would have done. Do I need to be properly trained to say what I would have done?
Actually saying what I would have done is not an opinion. I said I would have done it and that is a fact. But in my opinion, it would have been the right thing to do. We can disagree about that, but opinions are allowed. As I said, we will hear dueling experts during this trial. They will have miles of credentials and yet they both can’t be right. The ones who will decide which one is right won't be qualified in the technical elements of the argument at all. The decision of the CSX engineer to not apply braking prior to impact will be a key element of the trial. We will see how it goes.
No one knows how they will react in a given situation until it is over. Then they only know how they reacted that time, not how they will react to a similar situation in the future.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
Euclid I have never worked as an engineer. But I have enough knowledge and experience to know what I would have done. Norm asked be what I would have done, and I told him.
I also have never worked as an engineer. But I have enough knowledge and experience from having worked over 30 years for the railroad, in the field and in the office, and talking with friends in the running trades, to know that I am in no way qualified to second guess an experienced engineer. True knowledge is knowing the difference between what you actually know and what is figments of the imagination.
I have no idea what I would have done; the consensus of those with more knowledge of the job than me is that the engineer acted appropriately given the specific situation. That is expert opinion, not armchair amateur speculation.
John
EuclidActually saying what I would have done is not an opinion. I said I would have done it and that is a fact. But in my opinion, it would have been the right thing to do. We can disagree about that, but opinions are allowed.
Case closed.
cx500 Euclid I have never worked as an engineer. But I have enough knowledge and experience to know what I would have done. Norm asked be what I would have done, and I told him. I also have never worked as an engineer. But I have enough knowledge and experience from having worked over 30 years for the railroad, in the field and in the office, and talking with friends in the running trades, to know that I am in no way qualified to second guess an experienced engineer. True knowledge is knowing the difference between what you actually know and what is figments of the imagination. I have no idea what I would have done; the consensus of those with more knowledge of the job than me is that the engineer acted appropriately given the specific situation. That is expert opinion, not armchair amateur speculation. John
On this point of whether to withhold dumping the air to avoid a possible derailment, there are expert opinions that diametrically disagree with the prevailing “expert opinion” here on the forum. So it is not just a disagreement between experts and “armchair amateur speculators with figments of the imagination,” as you say.
We discussed this in an earlier thread and I sought out some independent experts to get their take on it. I think it is a very interesting question, and I have explained why. Now the same question is the centerpiece of this high profile legal case involving the Midnight Rider film crew and CSX.
My experts told me that they are aware that certain railroaders say they would avoid going into emergency in many cases because they are not sure if it would do any good; and they don’t want to take a chance of derailing the train. Both experts told me that while they have heard many people express this philosophy, they know of few if any who have ever done it or admitted to doing it. They both told me that they instructed their engineers that if there is any doubt, make the emergency application. Don’t worry about derailing the train.
Here is the problem: If engineers are allowed to forego an emergency application because it might derail the train, they are likely to do just that unless they feel the impending emergency threatens their own safety. They will always be justified because nobody can prove that the emergency application would not have derailed the train. And yet the point of the emergency application is also to protect people other than the engineer and conductor. So withholding the emergency because it is more convenient would undermine the whole point of the emergency braking function and purpose.
This is not railroad rocket science that takes years of experience to understand. All it requires is some common sense perception of what looks like an impending emergency. Then is it just a matter of making the decision. It is nothing technically complicated.
Ordinary people of the jury are going to be listening to two opposing views on this topic from two different sets of experts just like your experts and my experts. Then those ordinary people of the jury will use their common sense to decide if the CSX engineer made the right choice. Those ordinary people will not be qualified locomotive engineers, and probably have never even thought about the topic before entering the trial. And whichever way they decide, there will never be 100% agreement on this topic.
EuclidThis is not railroad rocket science that takes years of experience to understand. All it requires is some common sense perception of what looks like an impending emergency. Then is it just a matter of making the decision. It is nothing technically complicated.
If you've seen the movie "Sully," currently on the premium movie channels, you'll realize that it's not an instantaneous "go/no go" decision. The last portion of the movie depicts the hearing where the cockpit voice recorder is first played publicly (presumably accurately). Several simulations were presented that showed that had the crew immediately headed for an airport, they would have made it.
But, they didn't immediately head for an airport. They took a moment to assess the situation, to try to remedy it, even grabbing the checklist. When that "human factor" was figured into the simulations, the simulator pilots were not able to make either available airport. (Sorry about the spoiler...)
And so it's going to be with the crew on the train - Is that something on the tracks? Is it going to move?" Is it going to move fast enough? Can we stop before we get there?
We do this every day when we drive. There's a pedestrian in the crosswalk. Are they going to be clear by the time I get there? We don't do a panic stop immediately when we see them - we take our foot off the gas, and if needed, put our foot on the brake. If they're still in our way, we'll stop. Of course, a driver can take evasive action (unless the traffic has us trapped).
Once again, there are myriad factors that must be considered, most of which we don't have available here.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.