charlie hebdo And if this thread's discussion is a sample of what railroaders believe, the correct procedure needs clarification.
And if this thread's discussion is a sample of what railroaders believe, the correct procedure needs clarification.
The correct procedure is strict adherence to restricted speed.
I did some searching and found the Bradford IA accident report. It happened in August of 2006. The following train had stopped short of a red intermediate and then proceeded past it, passing it at 17 mph. (They were still "stop and proceed" signals back then.) The engr allowed his speed to get up to 32 mph before he saw the rear end of the train ahead and dumped the air.
So I amend my view on pulling tha air somewhat. The conductor or trainee should've done it at the very least when the speed went past 20 mph. The report mentions interviews with the crew members, but doesn't have them attached to the report. It would be interesting to know what the in-cab conversation, if any, was during this critical time.
The report also calls the trainee a conductor pilot. One was a trainee making the homeward leg of his first trip as I recall.
As I said, the engineer was in my class. Most of us were set up (promoted) as engineers in March of 2005. So he would've been an engineer for 16 to 18 months.
Here's the report.
https://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L02097#p1_z10_gD_lAC_y2006_m8_s1
I've also a link to the subdivision profile.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170110223058/http://www.fogchart.com/Down/Beta/MASON%20CITY.pdf
The first part of the chart is orientated for northward movement, the second part for southward. The trains involved were southbound.
Jeff
Discussions with various opinions are great when about preferences about menus or what to do about Amtrak. But operational procedures should be not subject to a variety of opinions. Not only is this an indication of possibly poor training, it's an indictment of the people who write the procedure/rules.
The bottom line in this incident is the engineer's non-adherence to restricted speed. There really is no other answer.
The culture of railroad operations today is derived from the arrogance of corporate management in not accepting input from their veteran employees. They have a better idea.....they think.
charlie hebdo But operational procedures should be not subject to a variety of opinions. Not only is this an indication of possibly poor training, it's an indictment of the people who write the procedure/rules.
As 243 points out, problems arising from a failure to observe restricted speed are the result of failing to observe restricted speed. I'm sure one could find hundreds of examples of it working as planned on a daily basis, but those don't get reported.
A large part of that can be experience and expectations - as seen by the collision with the "phantom" second train. I'm sure the crew was trained on restricted speed - although it appears they failed to observe it in an appropriate manner. That may have been because they allowed their experience to modify what they were seeing on the signals. "I've never seen that before."
I hesitate to condemn the people who write the procedures/rules. There was a time when railroad rulebooks would fit in your pocket. One reason crewmembers carry grips these days it to hold the plethora of books and other resources they have to have with them. Writing rules to cover every possible scenario is impossible.
My comment on dispatchers was partially tongue-in-cheek. On a busy line, the DS will usually have a plan, based on everything going per the plan, which I liken to a game of chess. The DS may be working with things the crews on the rails aren't aware of (reroute, second section, etc) which would render "how we've always done it" moot.
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...
tree68I hesitate to condemn the people who write the procedures/rules. There was a time when railroad rulebooks would fit in your pocket. One reason crewmembers carry grips these days it to hold the plethora of books and other resources they have to have with them. Writing rules to cover every possible scenario is impossible.
The Rules writers try to devise a framework to cover all conditions on a carriers property - however, local physical characteristics in a number of cases fall outside that framework, thus you have Time Table Special Instructions to modify the rules application to specifics as identified in the TTSI. TTSI may go further than just modifying the application of a rule and on to specifying specific train handling requirements at certain locations under specified conditions.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDThe Rules writers try to devise a framework to cover all conditions on a carriers property - however, local physical characteristics in a number of cases fall outside that framework, thus you have Time Table Special Instructions to modify the rules application to specifics as identified in the TTSI. TTSI may go further than just modifying the application of a rule and on to specifying specific train handling requirements at certain locations under specified conditions.
Exactly.
And the TTSI will be based on known or recognized conditions.
Every now and then, though, there will arise a situation....
243129 The bottom line in this incident is the engineer's non-adherence to restricted speed. There really is no other answer. The culture of railroad operations today is derived from the arrogance of corporate management in not accepting input from their veteran employees. They have a better idea.....they think.
mumble, mumble, something about going to hell in a hand basket.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Sidinghat culture is prevalent in most all industries now. I can't tell if it's always been that way or if it started out better and has gotten progressively worse.
Perhaps it is a consequence of the predictability that veteran employees tend to think in terms of "there really is no other answer" (eg, "we've ALWAYS done it this way"), while some might prefer to explore other options?
BaltACDThe Rules writers try to devise a framework to cover all conditions on a carriers property - however, local physical characteristics in a number of cases fall outside that framework,
This will be a little off topic, but then again, maybe not.
In education, school handbooks with rules were three or four pages long with the normal information -- times, excuses, etc.
Today, most schools have online handbooks that amount to small books, some with over a hundred pages.
What happened? Mostly, it was the threat of a lawsuit. Every time something happened, a parent would come in threatening to call a lawyer. Immediately, that situation would be written up as a new rule and put into the handbook.
The school board each year tried to outguess everyone by making more and more rules to cover every possible situation, strictly to avoid lawyers.
Is this a partial reason for railroads' rules? (I have no background in railroading, so this is just an offhand guess.)
York1 John
School handbooks are about dealing with students and parents, students only in college. Ours were hardly so long.
But this is about employees only. The rules lack clarity by trying to cover every contingency. Confusion reigns, even on here where current and former employees can analyze in a leisurely fashion with no resolution. But in the cab, there is no time to discuss "Hey, what should I do? "
York1 BaltACD The Rules writers try to devise a framework to cover all conditions on a carriers property - however, local physical characteristics in a number of cases fall outside that framework, This will be a little off topic, but then again, maybe not. In education, school handbooks with rules were three or four pages long with the normal information -- times, excuses, etc. Today, most schools have online handbooks that amount to small books, some with over a hundred pages. What happened? Mostly, it was the threat of a lawsuit. Every time something happened, a parent would come in threatening to call a lawyer. Immediately, that situation would be written up as a new rule and put into the handbook. The school board each year tried to outguess everyone by making more and more rules to cover every possible situation, strictly to avoid lawyers. Is this a partial reason for railroads' rules? (I have no background in railroading, so this is just an offhand guess.)
BaltACD The Rules writers try to devise a framework to cover all conditions on a carriers property - however, local physical characteristics in a number of cases fall outside that framework,
In the 'Olden Days' Rules were written by Operating people out of the blood that came from the incidents that happened that needed a rule written to prevent that incident from happening again. For the most part those rules were written in simple declarative English and written to a audience that was expected to have at least a Elementary School education.
The olden days are gone. Now whenever a rule is written it has to 'pass muster' with the Legal Department - that have a number of lawyers that just feel that they EACH have to add a phrase or sentance to further obfuscate the intention of the rule and lay in some 'gotcha's' for the unwary employee. Lawyers being lawyers they write their rules for lawyers, not for the employees that need to use, understand and apply the rules on a day in day out basis.
Restricted Speed is the ONLY speed that depends on VISION.
Hit something, anything and you have VIOLATED the requirements of Restricted Speed.
Case Closed. Everyone in the operating cap of the locomotive SHARES in the responsibility for rules compliance.
I've always thought that the 'rules-based' railroad culture came out of the military-style discipline that was adopted early as the model for critical operation. There were two styles of rule: one that covered general behavior and for want of a better word 'deportment'; the other specific situations where particular behavior was expected without thought or demur.
What Balt said reminded me of a reason my grandfather invested in Kansas Power & Light: they wrote their annual reports in clear, plain English, including an explanation of any special financial doings. There is no substitute for this in safety-critical applications; in fact, clarity and unambiguous meaning become of greater than usual importance there. (See the old joke about 'you can't have too much water in a nuclear reactor'). When rules become written to entrap those who haven't learned weasel compliance ... you're almost by definition vetting, training, and setting up for supervising entirely the wrong stuff.
And then comes the rule against 'malicious compliance' ... doubtless with its own set of selective enforcement policies. And over a hundred years of adversarial labor relations evolving weird contract provisions on top of selective attempts at overwork. If I understand correctly in some respects this brave new world of financially-imposed 'efficient' operation is worse than it's ever been.
And so it goes...
I know my college roomate and I grew our housing rulebook by several items after we pointed out that there was no rule against whatever is was that we were doing at the time. ;)
I point out odd signs and rules to my kids and tell them the reason for that is that someone has done that.
Yes, the railroads' rulebooks covered general operations on the entire property, and ETT's had special instructions for places that needed detailed instruction over certain sections, such as the Southern's Asheville Division ETT had detailed instructions concerning operation on Saluda Grade, emphasizing the proper use of retainers when descending the grade.
Johnny
And what to do if the timed switch didn't throw in time, either defect or the train exceed the limited track speed, and one got headedi into a runaway control siding.
BaltACD Restricted Speed is the ONLY speed that depends on VISION. Hit something, anything and you have VIOLATED the requirements of Restricted Speed. Case Closed. Everyone in the operating cap of the locomotive SHARES in the responsibility for rules compliance.
If only it were so simple.
charlie hebdoIf only it were so simple.
It IS that simple, and by intent.
If you hit something you've exceeded requirements by 200%. That's far more than most other metrics of 'excessive speed' -- even statutory reckless driving in Virginia, the most extreme case, is 145%.
The rule is HALF the distance to anything you can see. (Or less, is implied, but now the 'safe course' may be complicated by assertions of malicious compliance...)
I was referring to the apparent lack of agreement about responsibility for what to do and who should do it in situations like the collisions. Professionals on here don't agree. After the fact conclusions are rather beside the point. If the guidelines were clearer to operating personnel and training were better, collisions like this wouldn't happen. Instead they are trained with confusing rules. Fortunately nobody was killed.
I also wonder why the dispatcher had the two trains running with so little headway?
So then we move on to PTC 2.0? A totally automated system? In the meantime.......
charlie hebdo I was referring to the apparent lack of agreement about responsibility for what to do and who should do it in situations like the collisions. Professionals on here don't agree. After the fact conclusions are rather beside the point. If the guidelines were clearer to operating personnel and training were better, collisions like this wouldn't happen. Instead they are trained with confusing rules. Fortunately nobody was killed. I also wonder why the dispatcher had the two trains running with so little headway? So then we move on to PTC 2.0? A totally automated system? In the meantime.......
Restricted speed: Be prepared to 'hold the bag'.
charlie hebdo BaltACD Restricted Speed is the ONLY speed that depends on VISION. Hit something, anything and you have VIOLATED the requirements of Restricted Speed. Case Closed. Everyone in the operating cap of the locomotive SHARES in the responsibility for rules compliance. If only it were so simple.
It is just that simple. 1/2 the range of vision permits opposing trains on the same track to stop before impacting each other, when that standard is complied with. Impacting each other means NEITHER complied.
Brainiacs have trouble with simple standards. Don't overthink it.
If it's so simple, why did the accident happen? Stupidity? Why are they on such a tight headway?
I live along the very busy UP West line. It's triple tracked, with many freights on their transcontinental line plus many Metra trains. Because of congestion, many freights, especially IM creep along at about 10 mph or halt. No collisions.
charlie hebdoIf it's so simple, why did the accident happen?
Because the crew (and, as has been pointed out, the entire crew is responsible) did not comply with a very simple instruction - you must be able to stop your train within 1/2 the sight distance.
It's just that simple.
In curvy territory, or with other impediments to sight distance, half the distance might be less than 100 feet. Better have your train down to a speed that allows you to stop in 50.
I'm qualified to evaluate engineers, be it check rides, announced, or unannounced tests.
If I'm doing a check ride and something like this happens, it's on me as much as it is on the engineer with his hand on the handles. The same applies to any rules violation (I'm also trained to detect drug and alcohol issues). If I allow a clearly intoxicated individual to operate, it's on me, too. I better be pulling him/her out of service first.
Murphy Siding charlie hebdo I was referring to the apparent lack of agreement about responsibility for what to do and who should do it in situations like the collisions. Professionals on here don't agree. After the fact conclusions are rather beside the point. If the guidelines were clearer to operating personnel and training were better, collisions like this wouldn't happen. Instead they are trained with confusing rules. Fortunately nobody was killed. I also wonder why the dispatcher had the two trains running with so little headway? So then we move on to PTC 2.0? A totally automated system? In the meantime....... Right or wrong, I think I can understand why the rules seem to be so general and vague. There are so many what ifs involved in every possible situation that to cover all the possibilities, you'd have a book that looks like it was written by euclid. In addition, the rules -maybe by neccesity?- are written in a general fashion to protect the railroad? In essence, it is against the rules to do anything that causes problems. Whether that rule is broken shall be determined by the company after the fact. ps. life isn't fair.
Right or wrong, I think I can understand why the rules seem to be so general and vague. There are so many what ifs involved in every possible situation that to cover all the possibilities, you'd have a book that looks like it was written by euclid. In addition, the rules -maybe by neccesity?- are written in a general fashion to protect the railroad? In essence, it is against the rules to do anything that causes problems. Whether that rule is broken shall be determined by the company after the fact. ps. life isn't fair.
What are some examples of rules that you feel are too general and vague? When I write, I do think of the clarity of railroad rules as a model. I don't see anything too general and vague about restricted speed except maybe the part about watching for broken rails. I notice they don't require you stop short of them. If that were required, you would be going slow enough to be considered malicious. What are you supposed to do if you see a broken rail?
What I do see as vague is how the people in the cab are supposed to cooperate and each one has the authority to stop the train, on their own independent judgement, under certain condtions, while considering that their judgement may be questioned after the fact, resulting in discipline.
charlie hebdo If it's so simple, why did the accident happen? Stupidity? Why are they on such a tight headway?
Inattention. Being cocky. Not getting proper rest. What have you.
It happened because the rules were not adhered to. You cannot write a rule that humans cannot break. Someone screwed up bad.
The idea of having to be able to stop within half the range of your vision is not that complicated a concept to understand. I'm sure they understood that. But, for whatever reason, they did not proceed within that safety zone.
If you rear-end someone on the highway from following too closely, the judge won't be real impressed if you say, "There was a lot of traffic."
EuclidWhat I do see as vague is how the people in the cab are supposed to cooperate and each one has the authority to stop the train, on their own independent judgement, under certain condtions, while considering that their judgement may be questioned after the fact, resulting in discipline.
That is what is likely confusing. In response to Lithonia, I think that is the problem. You are suggesting evryone in the cab was stupid or inattentive or lazy? Again an example of the often fundamental attribution error. I and Euclid suggest maybe the division of repsonsibility is unclear, but that is not a popular view. I suggested that maybe the dispatcher made an error. That doesn't evn rate a response.
The whole idea should be to have procedures and devices to avoid/minimize human errors.
For reference, here is the NORAC rule for the Restricted Speed method of operation:
80. Movement at Restricted Speed Movements made at Restricted Speed must apply the following three requirements as the method of operation: 1. Control the movement to permit stopping within one half the range of visionshort of: a. Other trains or railroad equipment occupying or fouling the track, b. Obstructions, c. Switches not properly lined for movement, d. Derails set in the derailing position, e. Any signal requiring a stop. AND 2. Look out for broken rail and misaligned track. AND 3. Do not exceed 20 MPH outside interlocking limits and 15 MPH within interlocking limits. This restriction applies to the entire movement, unless otherwise specified in the rule or instruction that requires Restricted Speed.
Movements made at Restricted Speed must apply the following three requirements as the method of operation:
1. Control the movement to permit stopping within one half the range of visionshort of:
a. Other trains or railroad equipment occupying or fouling the track,
b. Obstructions,
c. Switches not properly lined for movement,
d. Derails set in the derailing position,
e. Any signal requiring a stop.
AND
2. Look out for broken rail and misaligned track.
3. Do not exceed 20 MPH outside interlocking limits and 15 MPH within interlocking limits.
This restriction applies to the entire movement, unless otherwise specified in the rule or instruction that requires Restricted Speed.
A broken rail may or may not be a problem. If it is securely held by the ties, etc, it may be passable. I've dealt with broken rails that simply had a slow order over the spot until MOW got it fixed. The key point there is to look for it. And one might consider a broken rail that cannot be traversed as an obstruction, would they not?
While each crew member has the authority and ability to stop a movement, in the vast majority of cases, it'll be the engineer who pulls the handle, because the crew members are communicating within the cab. The fireman's dump valve is more for if the engineer can't.
You can bet that someone who pulled the air without communicating it to his/her fellow crew members would not win any popularity contests.
And there are other requirments if an emergency application is made as well.
As for how the crew is supposed to cooperate, I offer NORAC Rule 94:
94. Responsibilities of Employees: Signals and Restrictions a. General Requirements Employees qualified on the operating rules and located on the leading engine or car must be on the lookout for signals affecting the movement of their train. They must communicate to each other in a clear manner the name of each signal as soon as it becomes clearly visible. Any discrepancy regarding the signal name must be reconciled immediately; otherwise, the train must be stopped. After the name of a signal has been communicated, employees must observe it until passed. Any change in the signal must be communicated in the required manner. When a train reaches a point 2 miles from a temporary restriction, employees qualified on physical characteristics and located on the leading engine or car must immediately communicate with the Engineer and confirm the requirements of the restriction. If a train is not operated in accordance with the requirements of a signal indication or restriction, qualified employees located on the leading engine or car must communicate with the Engineer immediately. If necessary, they must stop the train.
Signals and Restrictions
a. General Requirements
Employees qualified on the operating rules and located on the leading engine or car must be on the lookout for signals affecting the movement of their train. They must communicate to each other in a clear manner the name of each signal as soon as it becomes clearly visible. Any discrepancy regarding the signal name must be reconciled immediately; otherwise, the train must be stopped. After the name of a signal has been communicated, employees must observe it until passed. Any change in the signal must be communicated in the required manner.
When a train reaches a point 2 miles from a temporary restriction, employees qualified on physical characteristics and located on the leading engine or car must immediately communicate with the Engineer and confirm the requirements of the restriction.
If a train is not operated in accordance with the requirements of a signal indication or restriction, qualified employees located on the leading engine or car must communicate with the Engineer immediately. If necessary, they must stop the train.
tree68I'm qualified to evaluate engineers, be it check rides, announced, or unannounced tests.
What are your qualifications?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.