EuclidMaybe not as far as that goes, but the way people have presented these points in this thread sure makes it sound like they do not believe that speeding to make up time is wrong. They have not just acknowleged that it happened. They have strongly defended it.
I didn't get that perception. Maybe it's you?
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
243129Amen. Now back to train number 188 and the cause(s) of the disaster.
I don't believe you have the helm.
Where is Captain Queeg when we need him. Someone needs to take the helm of this ship before we have a mutiny.
zugmann Euclid Maybe not as far as that goes, but the way people have presented these points in this thread sure makes it sound like they do not believe that speeding to make up time is wrong. They have not just acknowleged that it happened. They have strongly defended it. I didn't get that perception. Maybe it's you?
Euclid Maybe not as far as that goes, but the way people have presented these points in this thread sure makes it sound like they do not believe that speeding to make up time is wrong. They have not just acknowleged that it happened. They have strongly defended it.
No, it is not just my perception. The last several pages have been a debate over whether speeding to make up time is right or wrong. So it is not surprising that many have said it is right and not wrong. Here is a collection of viewpoints over the last several pages that suggest to me that people believe that exceeding the speed limit with a passenger train is not wrong:
Railroad speed limits at track speed are arbitrary.
Railroad speed limits are only advisory and not regulatory. So it is up to the discretion of the engineer to select his own running speed as long as it is safe and prudent. It is the same as the advisory yellow signs saying slow down for curves on the highways.
Speeding to make up lost time with a passenger train is condoned by superintendents who “make that known” although they will not say so because it is a rule violation.
Superintendents will discipline engineers who fail or refuse to speed to make up lost time.
Cops do not write tickets for everyone who exceeds the speed limit, which explains why superintendents dismiss speed violation if it is for a good cause.
Every driver exceeds the speed limit at times because highway speed limits are arbitrary just like railroad speed limits.
Railroads are built to handle speeds much higher than the track speed limit, so it is perfectly safe to exceed the speed limit.
Stay safe and prudent.
Speeding with a train is, has been and always will be wrong. Tacit approval doesn't hack it. No official would stand behind you should an incident related to speeding at their intimation arise.
What part of speeding is wrong don't folks understand?
EuclidNo, it is not just my perception. The last several pages have been a debate over whether speeding to make up time is right or wrong. So it is not surprising that many have said it is right and not wrong. Here is a collection of viewpoints over the last several pages that suggest to me that people believe that exceeding the speed limit with a passenger train is not wrong: Railroad speed limits at track speed are arbitrary. Railroad speed limits are only advisory and not regulatory. So it is up to the discretion of the engineer to select his own running speed as long as it is safe and prudent. It is the same as the advisory yellow signs saying slow down for curves on the highways. Speeding to make up lost time with a passenger train is condoned by superintendents who “make that known” although they will not say so because it is a rule violation. Superintendents will discipline engineers who fail or refuse to speed to make up lost time. Cops do not write tickets for everyone who exceeds the speed limit, which explains why superintendents dismiss speed violation if it is for a good cause. Every driver exceeds the speed limit at times because highway speed limits are arbitrary just like railroad speed limits. Railroads are built to handle speeds much higher than the track speed limit, so it is perfectly safe to exceed the speed limit. Stay safe and prudent.
TL;DR - but something can be wrong and still be widely accepted.
243129 Speeding with a train is, has been and always will be wrong. Tacit approval doesn't hack it. No official would stand behind you should an incident related to speeding at their intimation arise. What part of speeding is wrong don't folks understand?
The fact that people speed has nothing to do with whether it is right or wrong.
EuclidThe fact that people speed has nothing to do with whether it is right or wrong.
No, just highlights hypocrisy.
The middle 20th Century was a different world than what we have in the 21st Century. The accepted norms of those times are not the accepted norms of now.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Backshop So is speeding on the highway, yet you do it.
30MPH in a 25MPH zone is speeding is it not? I doubt that you will find anyone who has not exceeded the posted speed limit in an automobile. However cars and trains are apples and oranges. Exceeding the speed limit with a car, which most adults drive, cannot be compared with operating a train. Why are schoolbus drivers held to a different standard? The same would apply to locomotive engineers.
BackshopAlso, you can't tell me that in all your years of operation, your speedometer never crept over the speed limit, even for a few seconds.
Of course my speedometer would creep over the speed limit, but never by more than 2 or 3 MPH and that would be corrected immediately with a brake application. You are grasping at straws to make an argument.
BaltACD The middle 20th Century was a different world than what we have in the 21st Century. The accepted norms of those times are not the accepted norms of now.
Ordering/inferring that an engineer should speed with a train may have been the "accepted norm" but it is no less wrong.
The proof of how wrong it was would be evident with the denial of the supervisor who ordered the engineer to exceed the timetable speeds to 'git er in on time.' For a supervisor 'back then' to expose an engineer to a potentially grave situation is unconscionable.
243129Ordering/inferring that an engineer should speed with a train may have been the "accepted norm" but it is no less wrong. The proof of how wrong it was would be evident with the denial of the supervisor who ordered the engineer to exceed the timetable speeds to 'git er in on time.' For a supervisor 'back then' to expose an engineer to a potentially grave situation is unconscionable.
Activate your time machine and go back and change what was - maybe you can go back to the early 30's and save the world form the conflict that happened as a side benefit. I am not making any judgements just reporting what I observed.
BaltACD 243129 Ordering/inferring that an engineer should speed with a train may have been the "accepted norm" but it is no less wrong. The proof of how wrong it was would be evident with the denial of the supervisor who ordered the engineer to exceed the timetable speeds to 'git er in on time.' For a supervisor 'back then' to expose an engineer to a potentially grave situation is unconscionable. Activate your time machine and go back and change what was - maybe you can go back to the early 30's and save the world form the conflict that happened as a side benefit. I am not making any judgements just reporting what I observed.
243129 Ordering/inferring that an engineer should speed with a train may have been the "accepted norm" but it is no less wrong. The proof of how wrong it was would be evident with the denial of the supervisor who ordered the engineer to exceed the timetable speeds to 'git er in on time.' For a supervisor 'back then' to expose an engineer to a potentially grave situation is unconscionable.
Who said anything about changing "what was"? I said it was wrong then and it is wrong now. I highly doubt that you are old enough to have "observed" what went on in the 30's and 40's.
243129 BaltACD 243129 Ordering/inferring that an engineer should speed with a train may have been the "accepted norm" but it is no less wrong. The proof of how wrong it was would be evident with the denial of the supervisor who ordered the engineer to exceed the timetable speeds to 'git er in on time.' For a supervisor 'back then' to expose an engineer to a potentially grave situation is unconscionable. Activate your time machine and go back and change what was - maybe you can go back to the early 30's and save the world form the conflict that happened as a side benefit. I am not making any judgements just reporting what I observed. Who said anything about changing "what was"? I said it was wrong then and it is wrong now. I highly doubt that you are old enough to have "observed" what went on in the 30's and 40's.
The 30's I don't remember from observation, however, a near entire library of observations of the era have been written by too many documentarians to count. In the 40's I remember falling off a wall in Newark, Ohio and breaking my collar bone. The 50's I do recall overhearing my fathers side of many railroad conversations, some of which he was very displeased with what he was hearing.
Our family friends were almost exclusively railroad, when friends congregate, shop talk ensues. As a child you can grasp elements of the conversation that make sense to you. As you age, more and more elements of the conversations make more sense.
BaltACDAs you age, more and more elements of the conversations make more sense.
Being 'ordered' to exceed the speed makes no sense no matter how old you are.
BaltACD The 50's I do recall overhearing my fathers side of many railroad conversations, some of which he was very displeased with what he was hearing. Our family friends were almost exclusively railroad, when friends congregate, shop talk ensues. As a child you can grasp elements of the conversation that make sense to you. As you age, more and more elements of the conversations make more sense.
It sounds to me like in the 1950s, you were grasping elements of conversations that actually began around 1900 and had been passed along just as they were being passed along to you. The 1900 era of Casey Jones was when railroad officials quietly countenanced speeding to make up time. That concept was the theme of the legends of Casey Jones and the Wreck of No. 97.
That was the era of the high wheeled 4-6-0s that really opened the door to serious speed. I recall reading the historical newspapers telling of the M&StL RR receiving their first new high-wheeled 2-6-0s Moguls. They boasted that the new engines were capable of going 80 mph with passenger trains. They certainly had no authorized speeds of 80 mph.
243129Being 'ordered' to exceed the speed makes no sense no matter how old you are.
Being "ordered" is not what was happening, nor is it what we are claiming.
Instead it was unofficially accepted that experienced engineers, intimately familiar with their territory on a daily basis, knew which stretches of the subdivision were completely safe for fudging the speed limit. Conversely the engineers would also know where it was better to go slower than track speed in the interest of passenger comfort, again on a daily basis. The conductor and trainmen back in the train would also be ensuring that any speeding was done safely.
The old school management was more concerned with monitoring for those rule violations that presented actual risk. That could be speeding in curves or temporary slow orders, and of course the many other safety critical operating rules. If a train could make up time and get back on schedule it kept the overall railroad running more smoothly, a happy condition for the Superintendent. And a smooth operation is also a safer one.
Euclid BaltACD The 50's I do recall overhearing my fathers side of many railroad conversations, some of which he was very displeased with what he was hearing. Our family friends were almost exclusively railroad, when friends congregate, shop talk ensues. As a child you can grasp elements of the conversation that make sense to you. As you age, more and more elements of the conversations make more sense. It sounds to me like in the 1950s, you were grasping elements of conversations that actually began around 1900 and had been passed along just as they were being passed along to you. The 1900 era of Casey Jones was when railroad officials quietly countenanced speeding to make up time. That concept was the theme of the legends of Casey Jones and the Wreck of No. 97. That was the era of the high wheeled 4-6-0s that really opened the door to serious speed. I recall reading the historical newspapers telling of the M&StL RR receiving their first new high-wheeled 2-6-0s Moguls. They boasted that the new engines were capable of going 80 mph with passenger trains. They certainly had no authorized speeds of 80 mph.
You are the one bringing up romance of the rails. Old 97 & Casey Jones were just rule violators that did no know how to perfrom their duties safely. They were also incompetent rule violators when I was a kid.
cx500Being "ordered" is not what was happening, nor is it what we are claiming.
Talk to BaltAcd about that .
243129 cx500 Being "ordered" is not what was happening, nor is it what we are claiming. Talk to BaltAcd about that .
cx500 Being "ordered" is not what was happening, nor is it what we are claiming.
Never learned the finer points of leadership have you?
BaltACD 243129 cx500 Being "ordered" is not what was happening, nor is it what we are claiming. Talk to BaltAcd about that . Never learned the finer points of leadership have you?
Again the imperious attitude surfaces. Remember that as a dispatcher you sat at a desk not a throne.
Did you or did you not post on another thread that your father, who was a superintendent, 'instructed' an engineer to ignore timetable speeds in order to get the train in on time ?
BaltACD Euclid BaltACD The 50's I do recall overhearing my fathers side of many railroad conversations, some of which he was very displeased with what he was hearing. Our family friends were almost exclusively railroad, when friends congregate, shop talk ensues. As a child you can grasp elements of the conversation that make sense to you. As you age, more and more elements of the conversations make more sense. It sounds to me like in the 1950s, you were grasping elements of conversations that actually began around 1900 and had been passed along just as they were being passed along to you. The 1900 era of Casey Jones was when railroad officials quietly countenanced speeding to make up time. That concept was the theme of the legends of Casey Jones and the Wreck of No. 97. That was the era of the high wheeled 4-6-0s that really opened the door to serious speed. I recall reading the historical newspapers telling of the M&StL RR receiving their first new high-wheeled 2-6-0s Moguls. They boasted that the new engines were capable of going 80 mph with passenger trains. They certainly had no authorized speeds of 80 mph. You are the one bringing up romance of the rails. Old 97 & Casey Jones were just rule violators that did no know how to perfrom their duties safely. They were also incompetent rule violators when I was a kid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wreck_of_the_Old_97
From the link:
“At Monroe, Broady was instructed to get the Fast Mail to Spencer, 166 miles (267 km) distant, on time. The scheduled running time from Monroe to Spencer was four hours, fifteen minutes - an average speed of approximately 39 mph (63 km/h). In order to make up the one hour delay, the train's average speed would have to be at least 51 mph (82 km/h). Broady was ordered to maintain speed through Franklin Junction, an intermediate stop normally made during the run.
The day after the wreck, Vice-president Finley made a speech in which he said: "The train consisted of two postal cars, one express and one baggage car for the storage of mail.... Eyewitnesses said the train was approaching the trestle at speeds of 30 to 35 miles an hour.[5]"
The Southern Railway placed blame for the wreck on engineer Broady, disavowing that he had been ordered to run as fast as possible to maintain the schedule. The railroad also claimed he descended the grade leading to Stillhouse Trestle at a speed of more than 70 mph (110 km/h).
Several eyewitnesses to the wreck, however, stated that the speed was probably around 50 mph (80 km/h). In all likelihood, the railroad was at least partially to blame, as it had a lucrative contract with the U.S. Post Office to haul mail (hence the train's name), and the contract included a penalty clause for each minute the train was late into Spencer.
It is probably safe to conclude that the engineers piloting the Fast Mail were always under pressure to stay on time so that the railroad would not be penalized for late mail delivery.”
My point of bringing up the Wreck of Old 97 is not about whether the engineer was competent enough to break the speed limit without wrecking the train. My point is that this was the era of engineers being expected to make up time by speeding; and being pressured to do so by management off the record. It was 1903. I doubt that this practice persisted into the 1950s. Unless you have documentation stating otherwise, it is just urban legend perpetuated by those who acutally do want to prolong the romance of the rails.
243129Exceeding the speed limit with a car, which most adults drive, cannot be compared with operating a train.
I agree with you, I have lots of experience driving cars and bikes but don't have any expertise in train handling, so they are different. But I don't fully comprehend why you consider modest speeding with a car, putting yourself and all the many, many other drivers at risk, seems to be OK. You should feel just as responsible for the other drivers out there as you were for the passengers in the coaches behind. The death toll on the roads is horrendous, far higher than it ever was on the rails even when speeding was sometimes winked at. Often speed is a factor on the roads.
Reckless speed is one thing, but 5-10mph over the official limit can often be done in complete safety, as you implicitly admit for driving a vehicle. This is true whether on the highway or running a passenger train. Traffic enforcement usually acknowledges this with a degree of tolerance; so did the railroad superintendents in the past.
cx500 243129 Exceeding the speed limit with a car, which most adults drive, cannot be compared with operating a train. I agree with you, I have lots of experience driving cars and bikes but don't have any expertise in train handling, so they are different. But I don't fully comprehend why you consider modest speeding with a car, putting yourself and all the many, many other drivers at risk, seems to be OK. You should feel just as responsible for the other drivers out there as you were for the passengers in the coaches behind. The death toll on the roads is horrendous, far higher than it ever was on the rails even when speeding was sometimes winked at. Often speed is a factor on the roads. Reckless speed is one thing, but 5-10mph over the official limit can often be done in complete safety, as you implicitly admit for driving a vehicle. This is true whether on the highway or running a passenger train. Traffic enforcement usually acknowledges this with a degree of tolerance; so did the railroad superintendents in the past.
243129 Exceeding the speed limit with a car, which most adults drive, cannot be compared with operating a train.
Let me ask this. The speed limit on the highway is 30MPH, could you be arrested for going 35MPH?
Are the same 'tolerances' winked at for schoolbus drivers as they are for auto drivers?
243129Again the imperious attitude surfaces. Remember that as a dispatcher you sat at a desk not a throne.
The throne was behind the control stand on 243129's engine.
Deleted. Just not worth it on here at times.
zugmann Deleted. Just not worth it on here at times.
I saw it first, but wasn't quick enough to quote.
It was totally worth it.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
No. it's not anymore.
It's the circle of internet life:
1. Someone says something.
2. Someone else says BS about said thing.
3. Zugmann corrects BS.
4. Yes, but...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.