On Board Video Of a Head On. (Well, Close Enough)

[edblysard]

2.12 Fixed Signal Information

Employees must not use the radio to give information to a train or engine crew about the name, position, aspect, or indication displayed by a fixed signal, unless the information is given between members of the same crew or the information is needed to warn of an emergency.

From the GCOR...in essence, I can not give another crew the aspect of a signal they might face, or are approaching, unless it is in an emergence situation.

 

Verbally calling a signal aspect on the road channel is a way to cover your butt...most of the railroads run an audio tape recorder on the normal road channels they have been assigned.

This way if something does happen, there is an audio record of what was said...and what was not said.

Because most jobs in a given division work on the same channel, it is also a way to indirectly communicate to other crews where you are located.

 

You can bet your bottom dollar the dispatcher involved with this accident got his or her fanny in a wringer because they didn't pick up on the opposing crew not calling their signals, and didn't call them up asking why.

[Anonymous]

This thread has discussed the pracitice of using the radio to call signals and add a measure of safety by communicating intent to other crews.  But aren't there some restrictions on using the radio in a way that duplicates the authority communicated by lineside signals and other controls?

[benburch]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2jUYNimDnE
It's disturbing.

[canazar]

I just got back from a week vacation and I cant believe how this thread has taken off.  I never expected to see such a discussion over this video.   Heck, like some of the people have mentioned, I was even reluctant to post it. 

 But I figured this board would appreciate it for what it is and see as a reminder how dangerous this work is, and a something to learn from.   I have certainly learned alot about signaling and procedures.   Thanks everyone. Great thread.

[edbenton]

Ed we have something close to that in the OTR trucking field called the SAP plan.  Gives you one chance also.  Trouble is in the trucking field we have noticed even with all the testing a 60% relaspe and the companies feel it is not worth the effort to do.  Another reason why I am so against any kind of Drug and Drinking while on the job is I have lost to many friends already from DUI and DWI and I am not talking lost friendships I am talking they are pushing up DAISIES.  I have 10 highschool classmates that will never see another reunion after they got stupid at the 10 year and had a head on with each other and died.  5 in each veichle all were drunk as skunks no seat belts.  I had a close former friend of mine I found out was doing Meth she is now doing time in Prison I turn her in. 

[edblysard]

Mr. Benton..

I agree with zero tolerance, but I also endorse the Red Block system....if you find a co worker impaired, you can call the union Red Block coordinator, who will arrange to have that employee marked off on the Red Block system.

If you feel you are impaired, and a danger, you can voluntarily request the Red Block program.

If you fail a random drug test, you can also request a Red Block program...basically it is a second chance.

The rules for the Red Block program are quite simple...mandatory counseling, rehab, and zero drug or alcohol use...90 days off, and your job insurance will not pay for the lost days.

Hospitalization if the counselor requires it.

The employee has no options...either follow the counselor's orders or your out.

If you successfully fulfill the requirements of the rehabilitation program, test clean, and the counselor agrees you are fit to return to work, the carrier will allow you the resume your duties.

You only get this one chance...fail any drug/alcohol test ever again, you're gone for good.

Where I work, we have two employees, a young man in his early 20s, and a guy my age, 48...the kid blew hot on a alcohol test...completed the Red Block program, returned to work and has told me he never realized how much he had screwed up his life with his alcohol abuse till he was sober for 90 days... he had lost his wife, kid, drivers license, and his new home because of it.

The guy my age had become a coke head...came to work wrecked beyond belief...his conductor refused to go to work with him, called the union rep, got him off property and into counseling...again, personal problems had overwhelmed him...and he has been back three years, clean and sober...both have random drug test many times more than the normal, both don't mind the testing, they say it reminds them that they have a duty to themselves and their co workers to keep clean.

Both, beyond the obvious, have been model employees.

 

The counseling deals not only with the drug and alcohol abuse, but the personal or financial problems that both cause the abuse or result from it.

The older guy is a friend of mine, we were in the same new hire class...he told me the program saved his life...he was at the point that the drugs controlled his every move and occupied his every thought...his whole life revolved around getting his next score...he was co dependent with his wife, both had addictions...in the end, he realized that if his wife would not change, he had no choice but to leave her...he did, and last we heard, she was in jail awaiting charges on DUI.

He also had lost sight of the important things in life...beyond the drugs there was nothing left for him.

He will tell you straight up he had a problem, he doesn't try to hide it...in fact, he is kinda proud he beat it, and is willing to explain to all our new hires how easy it is to slip into that lifestyle.

While neither of these employees ever caused any thing remotely like what we see in the video, both acknowledge that it was only pure blind lick they didn't hurt or kill someone.

 

So sometimes, a second chance can work...but as far as I am concerned, you should only get the one shot at it...blow hot or fail the urine test again, you need to be anywhere else but out here with this stuff.

[MP173]

incredible.

 

[edbenton]

The reason the widow won was I was already in a panic stop for a family of 4 stopped in front of me.  They did the pass and then decided to oh lets go to the farmers stand right here.  I lost the Left front drive axle parking brake line and it dragged me 2 inches over the center line.  So according to her atty who after the case was DISBARRED for notifiying the widow BEFORE THE POLICE DID I was more than 50% at fault.  Even though her husband had a BAC of .24 was not wearing a seatbelt and was doing 75 in a 45 now whose actions contribuded more to his death.

[CNW 6000]

Couldn't the railroads (on the GPS front) take a cue from the trucking industry?  My neighbor is an OTR driver for a steel carrier.  There's a system on his rig that can either tune his truck via radio signal for more HP or shut it down with the proper coded sequence if the truck goes too far into a place it's not supposed to be. 

Say a RR had an engine with this system on it that is supposed to be holding a main to wait for an oncoming train to be diverted into a siding.  If the train passes a couple of signals without slowing or reacting properly the disp could contact the train via radio or phone (if allowed).  With no response they could apply brakes and/or even shut down the engine.  Problem solved?

[cordon]

BNSF is testing the Advanced Train Control System (ATCS), which will use GPS for location and provide most of the functions you mention.

My earlier posts about radio communications come from a feeling that radio calls might jar a crew into alertness.  I have no delusions that it would be a perfect solution, but rather that it might be another tool that train crews could use to help each other succeed.  Besides, it appears that it is nearly "free."  The radio system already exists.  One would have to consider if these radio calls might interfere with others in areas of high radio use.

[Semper Vaporo]

While calling signals appears to be a good safety feature... (everybody then knows where everybody IS)... if someone is not calling signals, then how do you know that they are someplace where they shouldn't be?  The best I can see of this being helpful is if everybody knows where everybody is supposed to be at all times and if you don't hear from them within some prescribed time period then you should become worried about where they really are.  The dispatcher (or someone assigned with the responsibility of monitoring the location and "awareness" of all the crews) would have to have a timer running for all trains in operation and warn anyone in the "ahead vicinity" that some crew is apparently asleep or in the ditch someplace ahead of the last place they reported themselves to be.

According to some of the things told here in this forum thread, the "Alerter" in the locomotive is not necesarily doing what it was supposed to do.  If the engineer can react to the alerter in a slumber state, or even react to well known track sounds and conditions out of a "conditioned response" then the alerter is not doing its job.  I am sure it "Helps", but it is not "perfect" in keeping crews alert.

Maybe all the lead engines need a GPS unit that continuously reports the train's location to a central computer.  That computer then can react to a train that is apparently not responding to trackside signals and issue warnings to the dispatcher and any train ahead of (or behind) the possibly errant train.

But that is maybe a bigger expense than the periodic head-on. 

Let's see, the crash that started this thread cost about $5,000,000 in lost equipment and track damage that might have been saved if some more positive method of train control were in use.  You could also add on the cost of the investigation itself (no small amount I sure!).  Then add on the loss of personel that will happen as the result of the accident, (i.e.: lost time due to injury, as well as the loss of training investment due to those that might no longer be employed), and it could have been much worse.  That amount should go some way toward paying for $2000 or $3000 worth of GPS receiver/location transponder in every road locomotive and a control computer at a central location to track them (and that is quite an overestimate I think... a cell phone with a GPS receiver is only around a hundred dollars!).   This might not be perfect either, (it could break down on either end,) but so can the radio voice communication presently used which seems to be an accepted expense and risk.

 

[MP173]

edbenton:

I certainly understand your position on drug and alcohol free.  I agree.  I am amazed the widow was successful in the lawsuit.  What kind of quirk was involved in that settlement?

Here in Indiana, both CSX and NS crews call signals.  There was a STB ruling on a similar accident in NS territory (Georgia perhaps) from the early 90's in which there was a strong recommendation to call signals.  Also, there was a really nasty accident in my area (near Knox, In) in the same time in which a crew fell asleep.  The CN (ex GTW) does not call signals.  Perhaps the BNSF will rethink this rule, as will the UP.  The UP it seems has had a number of head ones in recent years.

So, to you operating crews....does signal calling help stay alert, or not?

ed

[Anonymous]

I will disagree with you on that one.  I live next to NS's New Castle District and it is CTC with ABS intermediate signals.  They regularly call every signal indication.  They will even announce on the road channel "Stopped at the West End of ____ Siding".  I think this is a good idea, as it lets others (trains or track workers) know where trains are AND that they are in control.  As I've travelled, I've noticed that both NS and CSX crews call signals over the radio a lot, on CTC or Track Warrant territory.  Not all crews do this, but a fair majority do.

   Both of you could be correct.  Just because the crews on the railroad next to you calls signals over the radio dosen't mean every railroad requires calling of signals over the radio.  Even on the same railroad, the requirement could be different depending where you are.  On my area crews are required to call out anything more restrictive than an advance apporach and also to announce when they are stopped at a signal requiring a stop to be made.  I know a different service unit required even the advance approach to be called over the radio. 

  Jeff 

     

 

This is correct, the CSX and the NS last time I checks both run on NORAC rules.  The BNSF, UP snd most shortline including Amtrak run under GCOR.  The rules books are pretty close, but not all rules are the same.  I have taken trains over the CSX in Indiana and we were reguared to call out all signals, but when operating on the UP or the BNSF we were never required to call the signals.  Different Rules, mean different things, to different people.

[jeffhergert]

I will disagree with you on that one.  I live next to NS's New Castle District and it is CTC with ABS intermediate signals.  They regularly call every signal indication.  They will even announce on the road channel "Stopped at the West End of ____ Siding".  I think this is a good idea, as it lets others (trains or track workers) know where trains are AND that they are in control.  As I've travelled, I've noticed that both NS and CSX crews call signals over the radio a lot, on CTC or Track Warrant territory.  Not all crews do this, but a fair majority do.

   Both of you could be correct.  Just because the crews on the railroad next to you calls signals over the radio dosen't mean every railroad requires calling of signals over the radio.  Even on the same railroad, the requirement could be different depending where you are.  On my area crews are required to call out anything more restrictive than an advance apporach and also to announce when they are stopped at a signal requiring a stop to be made.  I know a different service unit required even the advance approach to be called over the radio. 

  Jeff 

     

[CNW 6000]

Welcome Ashcat from someone who shares your zip code! 

[Big Ed]

In addition to what Mike said, even here in cab signal territory (The CSX RF&P Sub) they call signals over the radio without fail.

The sad problem with this crash is that with the other crew being asleep, they would not have been calling signals anyways for the northbound lined through the siding to hear. 

[chad thomas]

As a professional locomotive engineer for the Canadian National, I have viewed this video numerous times. It is frightening to say the least. The first set of signals shown appear to be either a yellow over yellow or yellow over green ("approach diverging") which would give the engineer significant advance notice that he is lined for a diverging route (which he clearly was). The next signal was clearly a red over green ("diverging clear") which indicated that he could run through the turnout at the prescribed speed and proceed on through the siding at prescribed speed and out the other end without stopping. The signal dropped in his face when the train he was meeting ran the red absolute and fouled his track. There was nothing that the train crew could do other than dynamite it and jump out the back door (about a 14 foot drop to the ground from a Dash 9-44-CW). Going out the front door of a safety cab would be too time consuming as you have to open an inner door and then the heavy outer door. This is hard to do even casually let alone in an emergency! The dispatcher had absolutely no time to give warning (and , I might add, these routes can be lined up way in advance, so the dispatcher probably wasn't even paying too close attention to it.), and the opposing train may have given warning as they are supposed to in the event an absolute signal is over run, but I don't think they had the time. About all anyone could have done was plug it and jump! Both crews were most fortunate to have survived. Most accidents like this are usually fatal to everyone involved.

 

Welcome to the forum Ashcat.

[edbenton]

Ed I know you do take safety serious you have to.  I live with the results of someone not taking safety serious EVERYDAY.  In 1996 I was hit by a drunk driver while I was driving a OTR truck bringing home a new trailer to the yard.  He hit me with enough force to tear the cab of my truck from the frame and then bend the trailer dolly leg 90 degrees to the frame of the trailer.  I ended up with a closed head injury that healed and was fine at the time but was told anymore head injures could result in problems.  Four years later I was rear ended and got a concussion 3 weeks later I devolped Epilepsy and now I am on perment disability.  This is all because of someone Drinking and Driving now you see why I am so PRO DRUG FREE WORK FORCE.  The guy who hit me died because he was not wearing a seat belt and his widow succesfully sued for over 1 million dollars from my insurance company.  Still any drug use in either the RR or the OTR trucking fields should not ne tolerated at all.  Should be 1 strike and you are permently GONE.

[rrnut282]

I will disagree with you on that one.  I live next to NS's New Castle District and it is CTC with ABS intermediate signals.  They regularly call every signal indication.  They will even announce on the road channel "Stopped at the West End of ____ Siding".  I think this is a good idea, as it lets others (trains or track workers) know where trains are AND that they are in control.  As I've travelled, I've noticed that both NS and CSX crews call signals over the radio a lot, on CTC or Track Warrant territory.  Not all crews do this, but a fair majority do.

[Anonymous]

In CTC Territory, it is not common practice to announce your approach to a siding to another train. The signals now days tell you everything you need to know without saying a word (other than how many trains you are going to meet, and the dispatcher will usually let you know if you are meeting more than one). In track warrant territory that is a common practice, but not CTC.

[Anonymous]

As a professional locomotive engineer for the Canadian National, I have viewed this video numerous times. It is frightening to say the least. The first set of signals shown appear to be either a yellow over yellow or yellow over green ("approach diverging") which would give the engineer significant advance notice that he is lined for a diverging route (which he clearly was). The next signal was clearly a red over green ("diverging clear") which indicated that he could run through the turnout at the prescribed speed and proceed on through the siding at prescribed speed and out the other end without stopping. The signal dropped in his face when the train he was meeting ran the red absolute and fouled his track. There was nothing that the train crew could do other than dynamite it and jump out the back door (about a 14 foot drop to the ground from a Dash 9-44-CW). Going out the front door of a safety cab would be too time consuming as you have to open an inner door and then the heavy outer door. This is hard to do even casually let alone in an emergency! The dispatcher had absolutely no time to give warning (and , I might add, these routes can be lined up way in advance, so the dispatcher probably wasn't even paying too close attention to it.), and the opposing train may have given warning as they are supposed to in the event an absolute signal is over run, but I don't think they had the time. About all anyone could have done was plug it and jump! Both crews were most fortunate to have survived. Most accidents like this are usually fatal to everyone involved.

[edblysard]

Mr. Benton,

Not here to argue, just point out that the engineer of train #1 passed his drug test, and all prior safety/operational test prior to the accident, and passed his post accident drug test, as did the brakeman.

The conductor had trace byproducts of cocaine in his urine sample, but the report states that no conclusive evidence he was impaired at the time of the accident can be determined from the results of the test.

He may have tooted up one or two days earlier, we will never know, but he wasn't "stoned" at the time of the accident.

End result is that, even if the conductor was impaired, that still leaves two crew members, the engineer and brakeman, un impaired....which begs the question of whether all three were awake or asleep.

 

The report confirms what I earlier posted...train #1 ran by its signals, un aware of them for some reason...the fact that the throttle was moved up, then back down a notch indicated the alerter went off, the engineer notched it up a second, then back down to shut off the alerter...he was either awake, or running on internal "cruise control"...it isn't until approximately 1500 feet from the point of impact that he plugs the train...and at that speed, with that much trailing tons, 1500 feet is nothing.

The train we are "riding in" does exactly what it was supposed to do, at the right times, following the rules.

 

Bluntly put, train #1s crew fell asleep, and didn't wake up till it was way too late.

The report indicates this is CTC, that the trains were running on signal indication...all normal stuff, happens daily...train #1 failed to call their signals, fell asleep, and screwed the pooch....

 

I doubt that any of the crew on train #1 will have a job railroading again, although I would suspect the engineer and brakeman might try and take it to the labor board.

 

I agree with you that drugs and booze have no place in today's railroading world, I don't do them, none of the guys I work do drugs...and if we drink, it is in a social environment, and I have yet, after 11 years, to find any of us hung over or drunk the next day.

Most of us take this stuff very, very seriously.

 

That is one engineer that will NEVER get his job back.  Sorry you do any drugs you deserve to be fired then put in prison.  Considering the size and weight of the trains that are run now anyone that does have illegal drugs in their systems needs to be charged with attempted murder. 

[edbenton]

That is one engineer that will NEVER get his job back.  Sorry you do any drugs you deserve to be fired then put in prison.  Considering the size and weight of the trains that are run now anyone that does have illegal drugs in their systems needs to be charged with attempted murder. 

[blhanel]

Wow, interesting reading.  It pretty well covers all the bases.

[Anonymous]

According the the newspaper, a "breakdown product of cocaine" was found in the blood of the conductor on the M RICBAR.

You mean Crack or Crystal meth?

 

FRA Report shows that 1 person on train 1 has drugs in his system.

[mikeyuhas]

A copy of the complete report may be found at http://www.fresnobee.com/static/2007/news/031007investigation.pdf.

 

 

[AntonioFP45]

Man!

I hope that report regarding cocaine turns out to be false.  Transportation professionals already catch enough "heat" as is.  Would be really a bad, bad situation if illegal drugs are involved.   

[snagletooth]

According the the newspaper, a "breakdown product of cocaine" was found in the blood of the conductor on the M RICBAR.

You mean Crack or Crystal meth?

[ericsp]

I do not know where, or if, the report is online. Here are some quotes from the article, written by Russell Clemings and appearing the March 10, 2007 Fresno Bee.

"The report placed blame for the accident solely on the crew of a train traveling south toward Fresno.

"It discredited crew accounts that a signal failed or that glare from the sunrise -- the accident happened shortly before 6 a.m. -- blinded the crew to a signal."

"'Despite claims to the contrary, there is no basis for accepting the claims of [the southbound train's] crew members that their signal went clear or their vision was hampered by the sunrise,' the report concluded."

"Timothy Smith, chairman of the California State Legislative Board of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, said he was skeptical of the report's findings."

According the the newspaper, a "breakdown product of cocaine" was found in the blood of the conductor on the M RICBAR. The article said that they were unable to determine if the conductor was impaired.

Here is a link to an article from the day of the wreck. http://www.kmph.com/home/3055186.html

[Semper Vaporo]

YouTubby now has 7 copies of the video as follows:

 Poster        Length    Date/Time

truelinebacker 00:46   May 26, 01:00 PM

Motorooter     00:46   May 26, 09:47 PM

TheWrongMask   00:46   May 27, 06:05 AM

mikey69up      00:46   May 27, 05:18 PM

2BRKSHS        01:03   May 28, 12:42 PM

cjzz           01:06   May 29, 03:08 PM

terryk1233     01:06   May 30, 11:55 PM

and most have pointed comments about not liking it being posted OR saying it is a good thing.  Unfortunately, as here, there is just as much speculation about the outcome of the accident as to whether everybody or nobody lived through it. 

No offense to anyone here (or there) but I need to read the OFFICIAL report!