Trains.com

BNSF Arizona Collision on Transcon, One Dead

12245 views
228 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 228 posts
Posted by RDG467 on Friday, June 8, 2018 10:59 AM

The rear of the rail train has a modified semi-truck with an attached crane and rail threading equipment to drop CWR along the ROW.  The frame can be seen in an aerial view taken by KTAR-TV.

 

I got lucky enough to see one in action in San Diego last year. The motorists at the blocked crossings probably didn't feel the same way.....

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 228 posts
Posted by RDG467 on Friday, June 8, 2018 11:01 AM

And, the Bullhead City Bee newspaper has an on-the-ground pic on their FB page.

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Friday, June 8, 2018 1:37 PM

ALL:

The Bullhead City Bee photograph is excellent! It looks like the BNSF 4283 will be scrapped, due to the damage to the front, cab, and frame. I await the NTSB report.

Ed Burns

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 228 posts
Posted by RDG467 on Friday, June 8, 2018 2:01 PM

The one-piece fender & hood section of the semi (which I believe is aluminum) was 'collected' by the front handrails of the lead unit as the semi was sent flying over the cab during the collision. My prayers go out to the family of that Herzog employee.....

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Friday, June 8, 2018 2:29 PM
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, June 8, 2018 3:30 PM

NP Eddie
ALL:

The Bullhead City Bee photograph is excellent! It looks like the BNSF 4283 will be scrapped, due to the damage to the front, cab, and frame. I await the NTSB report.

Ed Burns

Unless there is significant damage we can't see in the photo (and the photo shows very little of the engine) the locomotive is easily repairable.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2012
  • 310 posts
Posted by Cotton Belt MP104 on Friday, June 8, 2018 5:58 PM

I have been looking and not found anything on the Trains Newswire about the BNSF/Herzog crash.  Of course they can not cover each and every rail accident, but it would seem that this one should be covered. Just wondering if I missed it? endmrw0608181758

The ONE the ONLY/ Paragould, Arkansas/ Est. 1883 / formerly called The Crossing/ a portmanteau/ JW Paramore (Cotton Belt RR) Jay Gould (MoPac)/crossed at our town/ None other, NOWHERE in the world
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Sunny (mostly) San Diego
  • 1,920 posts
Posted by ChuckCobleigh on Friday, June 8, 2018 8:12 PM

CB, I guess this needed a flaming tank car to become newsworthy anywhere but Arizona.  Apparently this afternoon a BNSF stack/piggyback train went on the ground near Medill MO taking both tracks out of service and apparently forcing a reroute of ATK #3 somehow.  Tough week for ATK managers, it would seem.

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Friday, June 8, 2018 11:17 PM

ChuckCobleigh

CB, I guess this needed a flaming tank car to become newsworthy anywhere but Arizona.  Apparently this afternoon a BNSF stack/piggyback train went on the ground near Medill MO taking both tracks out of service and apparently forcing a reroute of ATK #3 somehow.  Tough week for ATK managers, it would seem.

 

   Judging from the photo [linked by a previous poster].  The Herzog truck-tractor was definitely the point of impact..It was the Herzog employee who was killed, and another seriously injured.   It is apparently their practice to use the Herzog T/T to pull the CWR train, and the on-board crane steers the rails off the train to the point where it is placed trackside(?).        When this Herzog train has been operating in this area, placing rails; there are generally, other workers standing or walking, along the various cars, moving, and removing the blocks used to stabelize the rails when the train is in-transit(?).       So it was certainly lucky that there were no more injuries to the MOW workers with the CWR train.

The traffic in this area has certainly seen a reduction; in both directions, since this was first reported.[ Generally, through here, normal, about 60 trains, a day. ]

 

 


 

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Saturday, June 9, 2018 7:57 AM

Which train had the right to be there?

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, June 9, 2018 8:04 AM

This all leads to one BIG question.  Was the Herzog equipment operating as a Train or as a piece of MofW equipment.  Different sets of rules goven the operation of the different characters of operation.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Saturday, June 9, 2018 12:04 PM

Looks like the rules are unclear or in conflict, depending on who is using the trackage.

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, June 9, 2018 2:16 PM

charlie hebdo
Looks like the rules are unclear or in conflict, depending on who is using the trackage.

The rules for train operation and MofW operations are clear - the operations are not supposed to be on the same track EXCEPT under the directions of the MofW employee in charge.

The days of MofW operating on a 'Track Car Lineup' protecting themselves against trains are long, long gone.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Saturday, June 9, 2018 3:49 PM

BaltACD
 
charlie hebdo
Looks like the rules are unclear or in conflict, depending on who is using the trackage.

 

The rules for train operation and MofW operations are clear - the operations are not supposed to be on the same track EXCEPT under the directions of the MofW employee in charge.

The days of MofW operating on a 'Track Car Lineup' protecting themselves against trains are long, long gone.

 

When MOW and trains are operating on the same track under the directions of the MOW emplyee in charge, what does that emoplyee do to make sure the conflicting operations stay clear of each other?

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, June 9, 2018 4:17 PM

Euclid
When MOW and trains are operating on the same track under the directions of the MOW emplyee in charge, what does that emoplyee do to make sure the conflicting operations stay clear of each other?

Under the rules that I operated with.  When MofW has the Authority to occupy a segment of track, they hold EXCLUSIVE authority to that track segment.  MofW personnel may verbally authorize 'work trains' with specific operating instructions to enter the limits MofW occupies; Such as 'Proceed at Restricted Speed to MP A640 and STOP and await further instructions".  Dispatchers have no authority on the track segment after it has been given to MofW with the exception of authorizing trains past Absolute Stop signals (normally authority limits do not include absolute signals); Dispatchers will normall contact the MofW employee in charge to make sure such a move will not interfere with MofW operations.

Trains are never pulled by highway style trucks; only MofW equipment.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    April 2016
  • 1,447 posts
Posted by Shadow the Cats owner on Sunday, June 10, 2018 8:29 AM

The odds of the BNSF scrapping a less than 2 year old ES44C4 locomotive slim to none that has minor damage.  The only damage that would get her scrapped would be a broken frame.

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Sunday, June 10, 2018 12:34 PM

Balt:

Point well taken. The photo doesnot show all the damage to the 4283, however a three years old X-GN GE was scrapped at Sheridan, Wyoming in 1971 the result of running into the rear of coal hoppers. They were not going at restricted speed in yard limits--Rule 93.

Ed Burns

Ed Burns

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, June 11, 2018 10:47 AM

[quote user="Shadow the Cats owner"]

The odds of the BNSF scrapping a less than 2 year old ES44C4 locomotive slim to none that has minor damage.  The only damage that would get her scrapped would be a broken frame.

 

[/quote above]

Or a bent frame

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Monday, June 11, 2018 11:42 AM

mudchicken
Chico's grapevine is hearing that a relief crew on a stack train had a situational awareness issue that cost a work train and a track department contract operator dearly. (Human error either with the train crew or the DS having a train flag an absolute signal)

Why would a stack train be in the same block as a mow crew?  I've run plenty of locals on track owned by MOW foremen (pretty common where I am, actually), and I've run some trains where MOW had the track out for work adjacent to the right-of-way, but for a stack train and rail train to be working the same stretch? 

Something went wrong.

 

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

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, June 11, 2018 3:05 PM

zugmann

 

 
mudchicken
Chico's grapevine is hearing that a relief crew on a stack train had a situational awareness issue that cost a work train and a track department contract operator dearly. (Human error either with the train crew or the DS having a train flag an absolute signal)

 

Why would a stack train be in the same block as a mow crew?  I've run plenty of locals on track owned by MOW foremen (pretty common where I am, actually), and I've run some trains where MOW had the track out for work adjacent to the right-of-way, but for a stack train and rail train to be working the same stretch? 

Something went wrong.

 

 

Again with the euphemism "lack of situational awareness."  Translates to an engineer not paying attention to where he is and what he supposed to be doing.  Goofing off?

But this human error sounds more like what Zug is saying.  Something went very wrong to put them on the same stretch.

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Monday, June 11, 2018 3:40 PM

charlie hebdo

 

 
zugmann

 

 
mudchicken
Chico's grapevine is hearing that a relief crew on a stack train had a situational awareness issue that cost a work train and a track department contract operator dearly. (Human error either with the train crew or the DS having a train flag an absolute signal)

 

Why would a stack train be in the same block as a mow crew?  I've run plenty of locals on track owned by MOW foremen (pretty common where I am, actually), and I've run some trains where MOW had the track out for work adjacent to the right-of-way, but for a stack train and rail train to be working the same stretch? 

"Something went wrong."

 

 

 

 

Again with the euphemism "lack of situational awareness."  Translates to an engineer "not paying attention" to where he is and what he supposed to be doing.  "Goofing off?"

But this human error sounds more like what Zug is saying. " Something went very wrong" to put them on the same stretch.

 

 As just a bystander, and casual reader, while not wanting to put words in another's mouth... It seems,  each of the Posters were simply [and professsionally(?)]. Not trying to assign blame, but to use terms to euphamistically, describe what sadly took place in Arizona on that isolated stretch of track.

         There are other descriptive terms(aronyms) that come out of a military life, and its' cynicism; descriptors, used most commonly there, and occasionally, in professional and civilian lives.  

          I give you, starting at a low level of happenstance: SNAFU, SUSFU, FUBAR,FUBU, followed closely by the term BOHICA. While from Naval Services TARFU.  Huh?   Leaving the individual reader to put their meanings together. Whistling

 

 


 

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Monday, June 11, 2018 3:50 PM

I guess we would have to go back to Chico's grapevine and ask to know their source for hearing that a relief crew on a stack train had a situational awareness issue. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, June 11, 2018 3:59 PM

charlie hebdo
Again with the euphemism "lack of situational awareness."  Translates to an engineer not paying attention to where he is and what he supposed to be doing.  Goofing off?

A common finding in firefighter line of duty deaths is - lack of situational awareness.  Sometimes that does fall directly on the firefighters in question.  But sometimes it's a matter of simply not being able to see/sense the "big picture."  If you and your team are inside a building trying to put a fire out, you don't have time to step outside and see how the over all effort is going - that's the job of the command officers.  And you certainly aren't goofing off.

Firefighters are known to reply to an order to back out of a building with "we've almost got it chief - five more minutes" not knowing that the whole building is now lit up.  They are situationally aware of their direct surroundings - but only their direct surroundings.

There were two tracks in the pictures I saw of the scene.  Clearly the IM was on the wrong one.  Or the MOW crew was.  The question is why, and who knew.

As to whether the crew was goofing off - we don't have enough information.  What was the sight distance?   If the IM had been placed on the wrong track, the engineer may have been secure in his belief that he "owned" the track and was running accordingly.  

 

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
    June 2007
  • 228 posts
Posted by RDG467 on Monday, June 11, 2018 3:59 PM

The rail train I saw had 4 GE's on the head end. The Hertzog truck on the rear would grab a stick with the crane and feed it to the rail threader. Then, they'd spool out enough rail to almost hit the ground & radio the head end to pull fwd. Essentially, they pulled the train out from under the rail and dropped it 1 foot or so from the edge of the ties. 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, June 11, 2018 4:25 PM

Seems as if FACTS have not been escaping the Arizona desert heat.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Monday, June 11, 2018 5:08 PM

RDG467

The rail train I saw had 4 GE's on the head end. The Hertzog truck on the rear would grab a stick with the crane and feed it to the rail threader. Then, they'd spool out enough rail to almost hit the ground & radio the head end to pull fwd. Essentially, they pulled the train out from under the rail and dropped it 1 foot or so from the edge of the ties. 

That makes more sense.  In the past CN used to assign a second locomotive and Locomotive Engineer to the tail end of rail trains for the same purpose.

While that practice ended because of cost cuts, there was at least one incident where a string broke free and smashed into the locomotive cab, killing the Engineer.  On the rail trains I have worked in recent years the string is first anchored to the track (by bolting it to the current rail), and the train then pulled ahead slowly.

I can easily see a large Brandt-type truck being used for the same purpose. 

Why the stack train was not moving at restricted speed and properly protecting against the worktrain is a whole other issue.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, June 11, 2018 6:11 PM

SD70Dude
Why the stack train was not moving at restricted speed and properly protecting against the worktrain is a whole other issue.

Why a 'through' stack train was on the same track as a 'work train' dropping rail is the BIGGER QUESTION.  There was a BIG mistake made somewhere.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Monday, June 11, 2018 6:49 PM

On another site, BNSF person said he heard that Herzog was shoving east, the stack train going west running on a restricting signal.  He thought from pictures he saw that they met in a curve.  Not much discussion on the other site about it.

Jeff 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Monday, June 11, 2018 7:31 PM

zugmann
 
mudchicken
Chico's grapevine is hearing that a relief crew on a stack train had a situational awareness issue that cost a work train and a track department contract operator dearly. (Human error either with the train crew or the DS having a train flag an absolute signal)

 

Why would a stack train be in the same block as a mow crew?  I've run plenty of locals on track owned by MOW foremen (pretty common where I am, actually), and I've run some trains where MOW had the track out for work adjacent to the right-of-way, but for a stack train and rail train to be working the same stretch? 

Something went wrong.

 

 

Thank you.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: US
  • 591 posts
Posted by petitnj on Tuesday, June 12, 2018 7:12 AM

When are we gonna stop with the euphamisms like "situational awareness" and admit that the stack crew was asleep and woke up just in time to see a red signal? They couldn't stop. I hate to raise the ire of the group, but fatigue continues to be challenge and no added rules nor training will help.

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