1 Train Collision 1/4/24

I admit I know very little about the subway equipment, coming from a freight background upstate. But I don't understand was went wrong with the disabled train. Why does just pulling an emergency cord disable the train? After it comes to a stop, can't the emergency valves be closed or reset again to resume normal operation? And since they were able to move the train operating from the 6th car, the brakes must have been released on the head end. Sounds like the hoodlums did more than just pull a brake cord.

I was wondering that too.
That photo seems to shows x-over move.

Something that no one has mentioned including the media, possibly because no one is old enough to remember it: In 1970 there was a train collision on the Queens Blvd. line at the Roosevelt Ave-Jackson Hts. station that was the identical scenario to this one. That one resulted in two fatalities and many injuries.

After reading the story in today's Daily News, it appears that the causes are probably the same. Poor communication between the train operator in the 6th car, (3rd car in 1970) and the crew member at the head end acting as the operator's eyes.

If this was a 'shoving move' why didn't they change ends?

BR&P wrote: ↑Mon Jan 08, 2024 11:11 pm I admit I know very little about the subway equipment, coming from a freight background upstate. But I don't understand was went wrong with the disabled train. Why does just pulling an emergency cord disable the train? After it comes to a stop, can't the emergency valves be closed or reset again to resume normal operation? And since they were able to move the train operating from the 6th car, the brakes must have been released on the head end. Sounds like the hoodlums did more than just pull a brake cord.

Upon resetting the cords, they were unable to get the train to recharge. Therefore the brakes on the affected half of the train were cut out and they were doing what is called "other than head car operation".

Need to fingerprint the ebrake pulls. Are there cameras on these trains?

GirlOnTheTrain wrote:Upon resetting the cords, they were unable to get the train to recharge.

Now THAT'S a vital part of the story. Hopefully the reason will be made public as the investigation continues.

Head-end View wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2024 7:47 pm Something that no one has mentioned including the media, possibly because no one is old enough to remember it: In 1970 there was a train collision on the Queens Blvd. line at the Roosevelt Ave-Jackson Hts. station that was the identical scenario to this one. That one resulted in two fatalities and many injuries.

After reading the story in today's Daily News, it appears that the causes are probably the same. Poor communication between the train operator in the 6th car, (3rd car in 1970) and the crew member at the head end acting as the operator's eyes.

Someone did actually:

http://thehasbeen.org:9090/?p=71704

GirlOnTheTrain wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:03 pm Upon resetting the cords, they were unable to get the train to recharge. Therefore the brakes on the affected half of the train were cut out and they were doing what is called "other than head car operation".

Would that mean that the trip arm wouldn't trip until the operating cab hit it? Assuming that the 1 still uses those.

GirlOnTheTrain wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:03 pm Upon resetting the cords, they were unable to get the train to recharge. Therefore the brakes on the affected half of the train were cut out and they were doing what is called "other than head car operation".

So why didn't they just drag the affected train instead of pushing it?

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 8:55 amSo why didn't they just drag the affected train instead of pushing it?

The train was being pushed by its own rear cars. Getting something else to the location to drag it would have been much more complicated in a busy subway.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 8:55 am

GirlOnTheTrain wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:03 pm Upon resetting the cords, they were unable to get the train to recharge. Therefore the brakes on the affected half of the train were cut out and they were doing what is called "other than head car operation".

So why didn't they just drag the affected train instead of pushing it?

You don't wrong rail a train from 79 Street to 42 Street. The system isn't set up for that and there were trains stacked up behind that BO train. Apparently supervision on board wanted to change ends at 103 Street middle and run south through the loop, but obviously they didn't get that far.

Red Wing wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 7:03 am

GirlOnTheTrain wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:03 pm Upon resetting the cords, they were unable to get the train to recharge. Therefore the brakes on the affected half of the train were cut out and they were doing what is called "other than head car operation".

Would that mean that the trip arm wouldn't trip until the operating cab hit it? Assuming that the 1 still uses those.

Exactly, with the brakes cut out on the first five cars, the train wouldn't dump until the sixth car overran the stop arm. Even CBTC trains still have stop arms.

GirlOnTheTrain wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 9:23 am You don't wrong rail a train from 79 Street to 42 Street. The system isn't set up for that and there were trains stacked up behind that BO train. Apparently supervision on board wanted to change ends at 103 Street middle and run south through the loop, but obviously they didn't get that far.

That raises this: Why wasn't the inner tracks blocked off so 1 Express trains don't cross over (assuming this broken train was going up on M track by 103rd before being dragged, and M track was clear)? I can't see them holding up 2/3 trains by going 4-3-2 and then reversing. Blocking off 4 to do a 4-M-1-2 and then down to South Ferry. Where was this train supposed to end up, anyway?

I really believe that the trip arm would have retracted once the front section passed the arm's sensor location. That is based on what I have observed.