Lithonia OperatorPersonalities play a role. Imagine a young recruit who's paired with a seasoned engineer and conductor who are not friendly, and have made it clear they aren't that interested in any input from the trainee.
Usually the engineer trainee is a going to already have been a seasoned conductor. And in my expereinces (from both roles as trainer and trainee), when there's a trainee, most guys and gals are extra-vigilant to be following the proper ways to do stuff.
At least with us, if a engineer doesn't want a trainee, he can usually ask to not have one. (sometimes there's special circumstances like a RFE giving the trainee a ride or whatnot).
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
243129 Why would the trainee be placed with someone who is obviously not proficient in his craft?
Why would the trainee be placed with someone who is obviously not proficient in his craft?
I'll play. How do you determine proficiency? You know, before the fact.
Murphy Siding BaltACD Psychot Murphy Siding jeffhergert There was a rear ender at Bradford, IA about 10 or 12 years ago. The engr had been in my engineer's class. As I recall, they hit the rear end in the high 20s/low 30s mph. By listening to radio conversations they thought the train ahead of them was farther away. They didn't realize there was another train inbetween them and the train they heard on the radio. No one was seriously injured in the incident. The engr, condr and a new-hire student making his first trip were fired. The engr got his job back on a technicality that I no longer remember. He didn't last long, getting into trouble again. The second time he quit before being fired. He went to work, the OP will like this, for Amtrak but in train service. Jeff Why would the new hire student get fired over that? Wouldn't he or she just have been along for the ride, observing? It seems to me that the new hire would have had the potential to be a very safe engineer, having been through that accident. That does seem incredibly unfair. Good, Bad or indifferent - Railroads tend to assess discipline to the Entire Crew involved in a incident. The 'logic' being that any of the crew members had the 'authority' and ability to have prevented the incident from happening. A Engineer operating his train at the upper limit of Restricting Speed, the other members of the crew knew or should have known that the train was being operated IN EXCESS of one half the range of vision for the territory that they could see, therefore they all take the fall. Compliance with the rules is the obligation of EVERY crew member, even trainees as even trainees have had to pass a rules test BEFORE they begin the on job training part of their training. I see where they're coming from, but doesn't the guy in the driver's seat pretty much call the shots? If the conductors says you're going too fast and the engineer says you're not, who prevails?**I kind of imagine it's similar to the rule my wife and I have about driving. Whoever has a steering wheel in front of them gets to drive and whoever doesn't gets to shut the hell up.
BaltACD Psychot Murphy Siding jeffhergert There was a rear ender at Bradford, IA about 10 or 12 years ago. The engr had been in my engineer's class. As I recall, they hit the rear end in the high 20s/low 30s mph. By listening to radio conversations they thought the train ahead of them was farther away. They didn't realize there was another train inbetween them and the train they heard on the radio. No one was seriously injured in the incident. The engr, condr and a new-hire student making his first trip were fired. The engr got his job back on a technicality that I no longer remember. He didn't last long, getting into trouble again. The second time he quit before being fired. He went to work, the OP will like this, for Amtrak but in train service. Jeff Why would the new hire student get fired over that? Wouldn't he or she just have been along for the ride, observing? It seems to me that the new hire would have had the potential to be a very safe engineer, having been through that accident. That does seem incredibly unfair. Good, Bad or indifferent - Railroads tend to assess discipline to the Entire Crew involved in a incident. The 'logic' being that any of the crew members had the 'authority' and ability to have prevented the incident from happening. A Engineer operating his train at the upper limit of Restricting Speed, the other members of the crew knew or should have known that the train was being operated IN EXCESS of one half the range of vision for the territory that they could see, therefore they all take the fall. Compliance with the rules is the obligation of EVERY crew member, even trainees as even trainees have had to pass a rules test BEFORE they begin the on job training part of their training.
Psychot Murphy Siding jeffhergert There was a rear ender at Bradford, IA about 10 or 12 years ago. The engr had been in my engineer's class. As I recall, they hit the rear end in the high 20s/low 30s mph. By listening to radio conversations they thought the train ahead of them was farther away. They didn't realize there was another train inbetween them and the train they heard on the radio. No one was seriously injured in the incident. The engr, condr and a new-hire student making his first trip were fired. The engr got his job back on a technicality that I no longer remember. He didn't last long, getting into trouble again. The second time he quit before being fired. He went to work, the OP will like this, for Amtrak but in train service. Jeff Why would the new hire student get fired over that? Wouldn't he or she just have been along for the ride, observing? It seems to me that the new hire would have had the potential to be a very safe engineer, having been through that accident. That does seem incredibly unfair.
Murphy Siding jeffhergert There was a rear ender at Bradford, IA about 10 or 12 years ago. The engr had been in my engineer's class. As I recall, they hit the rear end in the high 20s/low 30s mph. By listening to radio conversations they thought the train ahead of them was farther away. They didn't realize there was another train inbetween them and the train they heard on the radio. No one was seriously injured in the incident. The engr, condr and a new-hire student making his first trip were fired. The engr got his job back on a technicality that I no longer remember. He didn't last long, getting into trouble again. The second time he quit before being fired. He went to work, the OP will like this, for Amtrak but in train service. Jeff Why would the new hire student get fired over that? Wouldn't he or she just have been along for the ride, observing? It seems to me that the new hire would have had the potential to be a very safe engineer, having been through that accident.
jeffhergert There was a rear ender at Bradford, IA about 10 or 12 years ago. The engr had been in my engineer's class. As I recall, they hit the rear end in the high 20s/low 30s mph. By listening to radio conversations they thought the train ahead of them was farther away. They didn't realize there was another train inbetween them and the train they heard on the radio. No one was seriously injured in the incident. The engr, condr and a new-hire student making his first trip were fired. The engr got his job back on a technicality that I no longer remember. He didn't last long, getting into trouble again. The second time he quit before being fired. He went to work, the OP will like this, for Amtrak but in train service. Jeff
There was a rear ender at Bradford, IA about 10 or 12 years ago. The engr had been in my engineer's class. As I recall, they hit the rear end in the high 20s/low 30s mph. By listening to radio conversations they thought the train ahead of them was farther away. They didn't realize there was another train inbetween them and the train they heard on the radio.
No one was seriously injured in the incident. The engr, condr and a new-hire student making his first trip were fired. The engr got his job back on a technicality that I no longer remember. He didn't last long, getting into trouble again. The second time he quit before being fired. He went to work, the OP will like this, for Amtrak but in train service.
Jeff
Why would the new hire student get fired over that? Wouldn't he or she just have been along for the ride, observing? It seems to me that the new hire would have had the potential to be a very safe engineer, having been through that accident.
That does seem incredibly unfair.
Good, Bad or indifferent - Railroads tend to assess discipline to the Entire Crew involved in a incident. The 'logic' being that any of the crew members had the 'authority' and ability to have prevented the incident from happening.
A Engineer operating his train at the upper limit of Restricting Speed, the other members of the crew knew or should have known that the train was being operated IN EXCESS of one half the range of vision for the territory that they could see, therefore they all take the fall. Compliance with the rules is the obligation of EVERY crew member, even trainees as even trainees have had to pass a rules test BEFORE they begin the on job training part of their training.
I see where they're coming from, but doesn't the guy in the driver's seat pretty much call the shots? If the conductors says you're going too fast and the engineer says you're not, who prevails?**I kind of imagine it's similar to the rule my wife and I have about driving. Whoever has a steering wheel in front of them gets to drive and whoever doesn't gets to shut the hell up.
Air carriers also suffer with the problem of subordinates failing to challenge the 'pilot in control' for mistakes the subordinate observes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenerife_airport_disaster
There is a Emergency Brake Valve on the Conductors side of the locomotive for use by anyone that is not behind the operating controls to initiate a brake application should they feel that the train is being operated in a improper manner.
I agree, it takes a big pair for someone to use that Emergency brake valve and for a trainee to do it take a nearly impossible big pair. Be that as it may, if they don't do it and the accident takes place they have forfeit their opportunity to have prevented the incident and will suffer the consequence.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
ns145 ... That 5 extra mph is a big difference when an unexpected obstruction suddenly pops into view.
Yes, but you forget that maximum 'permissible speed' does not change the requirement under restricted speed to be able to stop in 'half the visible distance to an obstruction.' It does not mean 'whack the train up to permissible speed and await surprise.'
It's a little like changing the maximum speed limits in 'driving too fast for conditions'. You may now be allowed 45mph ... but that doesn't mean you can always go safely at 45mph, and you have to use judgment in exactly how much slower a safe stop would call for.
As here.
Personalities play a role. Imagine a young recruit who's paired with a seasoned engineer and conductor who are not friendly, and have made it clear they aren't that interested in any input from the trainee.
Is that trainee really going to physically grab the throttle or brake levers if the "old heads" are saying "We f*<k!#g know what we're doing; we do this all the time."?
The railroad's expecting a lot from the new kid. That would be a very tough spot to be in.
Lithonia Operator Having never been on a train crew, I am a little confused about some of these accidents in this thread. Is the common theme in all of them that the following train was allowed to be in that block at restricted speed, but they were moving at the upper end of restrictive, and in any event were not obeying the requirement of being able to stop if they saw a train ahead? Jeff, in the one where the student got fired also, you say there was a train in between them and the one they thought was nearest. But still, they had passed a yellow signal, right?
Having never been on a train crew, I am a little confused about some of these accidents in this thread.
Is the common theme in all of them that the following train was allowed to be in that block at restricted speed, but they were moving at the upper end of restrictive, and in any event were not obeying the requirement of being able to stop if they saw a train ahead?
Jeff, in the one where the student got fired also, you say there was a train in between them and the one they thought was nearest. But still, they had passed a yellow signal, right?
This type of situation makes one wonder how wise it was to change the rules involved in dealing with red intermediate signals. At one time trains were generally required to "stop and proceed" at these red intermediates (there were exceptions, like the G plates placed on intermediate signals located on steep grades) . Now they are just treated as restricting signals and don't require trains to stop before passing them. Given PTC's limitations while trains are operating in restricted mode, perhaps there might be some merit in revisting this change.
Also somewhat disturbing to me is that the maximum permissible speed under the Restricted Speed definition on many railroads has been increased from 15 mph to 20 mph. That 5 extra mph is a big difference when an unexpected obstruction suddenly pops into view.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
BaltACDCompliance with the rules is the obligation of EVERY crew member, even trainees as even trainees have had to pass a rules test BEFORE they begin the on job training part of their training.
Do the trainees feel they should not comment on something? I could see a trainee sitting there thinking something was wrong, but keeping his mouth closed out of deference to the engineer, or fear of overstepping authority.
I know that airlines had to change their training after years of crashes due to co-pilots afraid to say something to the pilot.
York1 John
Murphy SidingGood point. I never thought of that possibility. I was envisioning a guy in the background observing, who might not have gotten much attention if he perked up and said “Hey guys- I don’t think you’re doing that right!”.
That being the case, the guy in the background (the instructor) should have perked up and said you are going too fast for the condition.
Euclid BaltACD I view threads as a conversation among 'friends' that in most cases have never met each other personally. Conversations among friends rarely remain 'on point' and wander all over the landscape as things happen in a 'stream of consciousness' manner from all the participants. You may view it that way, but that is not the way it is. Being friendly is fine, and there is plenty of lattitude to wander around in the topic, but wandering all over the landscape in a stream of consciousness is not possible if a thread follows a topic as it is indended to do by the very format here. Threads have titles. They convey the topic. If you want to wander all over the landscape in a stream of consciousness, you have the Chatterbox for that. That is the "Off topic" thread. You and your friends can have fun and wander around there.
BaltACD I view threads as a conversation among 'friends' that in most cases have never met each other personally. Conversations among friends rarely remain 'on point' and wander all over the landscape as things happen in a 'stream of consciousness' manner from all the participants.
Conversations go where they go - as long as there are humans involved - they always will.
tree68 Murphy Siding Why would the new hire student get fired over that? Wouldn't he or she just have been along for the ride, observing? It seems to me that the new hire would have had the potential to be a very safe engineer, having been through that accident. Depends a lot on how "new" the new hire was. Might very well have had his hand on the throttle at the time.
Murphy Siding Why would the new hire student get fired over that? Wouldn't he or she just have been along for the ride, observing? It seems to me that the new hire would have had the potential to be a very safe engineer, having been through that accident.
Depends a lot on how "new" the new hire was. Might very well have had his hand on the throttle at the time.
Good point. I never thought of that possibility. I was envisioning a guy in the background observing, who might not have gotten much attention if he perked up and said “Hey guys- I don’t think you’re doing that right!”.
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...
PsychotThat does seem incredibly unfair.
I can kinda-sorta see the logic in firing them all -- that is a damn dumb mistake to make, and it's not as if the 'student' hadn't been trained/vetted/supervised enough to be out on the road.
To me the 'unfairness' is that the student likely didn't have union representation, and so was helplessly at the receiving end of whatever 'discipline' the railroad decided to mete out. (And I expect the new age of PTC railroads run 'by and for financiers' will be just as hypocritical in hammering the 'little people' for the equivalent of stealing pens and paper clips while lavishly rewarding the schemers at the top... I vividly remember the Burger King debacle a few years ago, before they 'reverse merged' with Horton's to acquire Canadian status for taxes.)
Murphy SidingWhy would the new hire student get fired over that? Wouldn't he or she just have been along for the ride, observing? It seems to me that the new hire would have had the potential to be a very safe engineer, having been through that accident.
I agree, that seems grossly unfair.
jeffhergertThe engr, condr and a new-hire student making his first trip were fired. The engr got his job back on a technicality that I no longer remember. He didn't last long, getting into trouble again. The second time he quit before being fired. He went to work, the OP will like this, for Amtrak but in train service.
You are correct I do like that. It confirms my observations on Amtrak's hiring and vetting procedures. It also gives credence to the fact that Amtrak, and perhaps other railroads, are accidents waiting to happen.
Deggesty Overmod, I was actually thinking of the radios that could be used whether you had AC or DC power coming into your house. The heaters of the tubes were wired in series so you did not need a transformer to provide that power, and a half-wave rectifier was wired in so that DC would flow right through it to provide amplifying power. The standard arrangement was three tubes with 12.6 volt heaters. one with a 35 volt heater (rectifier), and one with a 50 volt heater (output). This arrangement of tubes was called "The All-American Lineup."
Overmod, I was actually thinking of the radios that could be used whether you had AC or DC power coming into your house. The heaters of the tubes were wired in series so you did not need a transformer to provide that power, and a half-wave rectifier was wired in so that DC would flow right through it to provide amplifying power. The standard arrangement was three tubes with 12.6 volt heaters. one with a 35 volt heater (rectifier), and one with a 50 volt heater (output). This arrangement of tubes was called "The All-American Lineup."
Yep, had one of those and bought an isolation transformer so I could use it as an amplifier for a Heathkit AM/FM tuner I built as a start of my "Hi FI" system in the fifties. Definately NOT Hi Fi but a cheap start to bigger things. Then the Heathkit amp and 1 speaker when I accumulated more cash .
Deleted
EuclidYou may view it that way, but that is not the way it is.
Yet you persist with off-topic posts about off-topic posts.
OvermodYou 'tuned' it by moving a pointed wire from place to place on the crystal looking for 'just the right spot'.
Called a "CATS WISKER" I remember winding coils on oatmeal boxes.
I like NDG's "Sting Lining" thread, it gives us some Canadian content we wouldn't get otherwise. I've learned a lot, and I enjoy see our cousins north of the border playing "remember when." Interesting stuff.
And I don't mind showing my age! Kind of a relief not getting proofed anymore when I visit the liquor store!
[quote user="Paul_D_North_Jr"]
[quote user="SD70Dude"] [quotes from otherposters omitted] A incident report from a similar collision, where a intermodal rear-ended a mixed freight at about 25 mph:
http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2011/r11e0063/r11e0063.html
[/quote]
Although I didn't read every word, I did see this near the end, under Analysis and The Accident (emphasis added - I kid you not!):
Train Q101 was travelling at 37 mph as it approached signal 2625N. During the approach, the crew's mental model was based upon the following misconceptions:
- PDN.
I think several posts have returned discussion to the original thread topic of collisions. Talking about hijacking, etc. Is a diversion.
DeggestyHas the originator of this thread complained?
Yes.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.