tree68... As Balt mentioned, one challenge these days is knowing which signal system you are operating under, as a given aspect may have different meanings on different railroads. This was the root cause of the Amtrak rear-ender some years ago in Indiana (or was it Illinois?), wherein the engineer essentially applied the wrong rulebook to a signal and ended up piling into the rear end of a freight.
As Balt mentioned, one challenge these days is knowing which signal system you are operating under, as a given aspect may have different meanings on different railroads. This was the root cause of the Amtrak rear-ender some years ago in Indiana (or was it Illinois?), wherein the engineer essentially applied the wrong rulebook to a signal and ended up piling into the rear end of a freight.
Recall hearing of a incident about a 'misunderstood' signal in the Chicago area, however, the indicent I recall was the Engineer operating the train through a set of crossovers at a higher speed than the signal on the incident railroad authorized because he had previously worked for another carrier where that specific indication authorized a much higher speed. I believe the entire train derailed, I don't know if fatalities were involved.
I am prejudiced - the B&O CPL's were the BEST of all signals. Didn't rely on a single bulb - visually commanding - the angled relationships of bulbs in the main signal head allowed even the color blind to correctly communicate signal indications.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDRecall hearing of a incident about a 'misunderstood' signal in the Chicago area, however, the indicent I recall was the Engineer operating the train through a set of crossovers at a higher speed than the signal on the incident railroad authorized because he had previously worked for another carrier where that specific indication authorized a much higher speed. I believe the entire train derailed, I don't know if fatalities were involved.
Sounds like the same one. Don't think there were any fatalities - but the Amtrak loco did ride over a flatcar of some sort.
I seem to recall that a change of legacy railroads on the Amtrak route was involved.
The point being that one aspect can mean different things in different situations, such as this.
I do like CPLs...
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...
CPL's turn up in unlikely locations. I recall that a CPL was installed on the southbound CWI near 114th and Torrence in Chicago. It replaced a semaphore (!) about a half-mile further south. The new location provided more stopping distance for the absolute signal at the Calumet River drawbridge.
tree68 BaltACD Recall hearing of a incident about a 'misunderstood' signal in the Chicago area, however, the indicent I recall was the Engineer operating the train through a set of crossovers at a higher speed than the signal on the incident railroad authorized because he had previously worked for another carrier where that specific indication authorized a much higher speed. I believe the entire train derailed, I don't know if fatalities were involved. Sounds like the same one. Don't think there were any fatalities - but the Amtrak loco did ride over a flatcar of some sort. I seem to recall that a change of legacy railroads on the Amtrak route was involved. The point being that one aspect can mean different things in different situations, such as this. I do like CPLs...
BaltACD Recall hearing of a incident about a 'misunderstood' signal in the Chicago area, however, the indicent I recall was the Engineer operating the train through a set of crossovers at a higher speed than the signal on the incident railroad authorized because he had previously worked for another carrier where that specific indication authorized a much higher speed. I believe the entire train derailed, I don't know if fatalities were involved.
I recall the Amtrak train rear ended another train or cars. Not sure of the crossover, but it makes sense as I recall the signal in question was red over yellow. Depending on rules in place it can be a Diverging Approach or Restricting. I recall the engineer read it as the Diverging Approach instead of Restricting.
Jeff
jeffhergert tree68 BaltACD Recall hearing of a incident about a 'misunderstood' signal in the Chicago area, however, the indicent I recall was the Engineer operating the train through a set of crossovers at a higher speed than the signal on the incident railroad authorized because he had previously worked for another carrier where that specific indication authorized a much higher speed. I believe the entire train derailed, I don't know if fatalities were involved. Sounds like the same one. Don't think there were any fatalities - but the Amtrak loco did ride over a flatcar of some sort. I seem to recall that a change of legacy railroads on the Amtrak route was involved. The point being that one aspect can mean different things in different situations, such as this. I do like CPLs... I recall the Amtrak train rear ended another train or cars. Not sure of the crossover, but it makes sense as I recall the signal in question was red over yellow. Depending on rules in place it can be a Diverging Approach or Restricting. I recall the engineer read it as the Diverging Approach instead of Restricting. Jeff
This one:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2009-04-01-0903310374-story.html
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.