• Mishap at Union Station, Utica, NY

  • Discussion related to New York, Susquehanna & Western operations past and present. Also includes some discussion related to Deleware Otsego owned and operated shortlines. Official web site can be found here: NYSW.COM.
Discussion related to New York, Susquehanna & Western operations past and present. Also includes some discussion related to Deleware Otsego owned and operated shortlines. Official web site can be found here: NYSW.COM.

Moderators: GOLDEN-ARM, NJ Vike

  by NYCRRson
 
"BTW.... I was told that Class 1 RR dont need insurance. they got tons of money to pay for any cost for any incidents.. Im not sure if NYSW have insurance or not..."

Generally there are no laws requiring liability insurance for private companies operating on their own property. If you own a home (really own it with the mortgage paid off) then there are no laws requiring liability insurance. It is of course wise to have the insurance so some id'jit doesn't trip on a crack in your driveway and try to sue you.

Large corporations generally "self insure" (they plan on a certain amount of payouts for losses) and set aside some reserves for that purpose. They probably also have a "real disaster" insurance policy underwritten by a group of insurance companies. This might be a 100 million dollar policy that only covers losses after the corporation shells out the first 100 million dollars for a single event.

The World Trade Center Towers that where destroyed on 9/11 where covered by such a total loss insurance policy, of course nobody ever imagined that the building could be a total loss. There was a court fight afterwards, the insurance company said it was a single event and only wanted to pay for one building. The building owners argued that is was two separate events, the building owners (the Port Authority of NY and NJ, a quasi government agency) won and got paid for the value of two buildings.

Cheers, Kevin.
  by BR&P
 
sd80mac wrote:I dont think they need to do that. 0-6-0 said that it will never run again. Since it is just a static display. And if it looks good and straight on exterior parts, it's fine.
Unless I missed what you are talking about, this is a perfect example of how things get mis-read, then passed on saying something different. That's not what he said. This site does not number the posts unfortunately but if you look it up, he said
If it cracked the steam chest or cylinder assemblies
IMHO that engine will never run again under steam. I'm not an expert but that just my thoughts.
While I am not aware of any plans to operate the loco, I have also not heard anything saying it could never be steamed in the future, either.

I know it has a good home now, but after reading Otto's post on about page 2 or 3, I'm visualizing 6721, a couple MDT reefers, and the NYC 19877 caboose as a "period" freight. Stuff a few oily rags down the stack and light them..... :wink:
  by sd80mac
 
NYCRRson wrote: "self insure"
Cheers, Kevin.
Thanks! That was phrase I was trying to recall in my mind. Apparently my mind had day off today.

Amtrak is one of them. Few years ago Amtrak had $ issue and they got long list of passenger cars oos due to wrecks. I asked someone why their insurance aren't covering these. So thy can get them back on rail asap.

I got the answer that they're self insure.
  by BR&P
 
sd80mac wrote:Don - look like I misread... Thanks... My bad...
You are forgiven, my son! :wink: :-) (And go easy on me next time I screw up!) :P
  by sd80mac
 
BR&P wrote:
sd80mac wrote:Don - look like I misread... Thanks... My bad...
You are forgiven, my son! :wink: :-) (And go easy on me next time I screw up!) :P
I'll consider that.... :P :P
  by westshore94706
 
Check the video carefully - the syracuse site has higher resolution - about 12 seconds prior to impact a person in blue shirt can be seen stepping between rear of tender and building. The kid is truly lucky no one was seriously injured or killed from the impact and/or flying debris - bricks, steel window frame and shards of glass - truly lucky.
  by litz
 
Remarkably little major damage at the point of impact between hopper and locomotive ...

(presuming the entire 'cowcatcher' was destroyed?)
  by charlie6017
 
Thanks for all the great footage, Mr. UT-1!

Judging by looks alone, it appears 6721 didn't sustain a whole lot of damage?

Charlie
  by YamaOfParadise
 
charlie6017 wrote:Judging by looks alone, it appears 6721 didn't sustain a whole lot of damage?
I myself haven't been able to make my mind up about this as well. I was leaning much more to the side of it got off lucky without too much damage, but the video of the actual collision is making me have doubts about that. It really seems like the devil is going to be in the details... I think the tender itself definitively ended up taking much more of the damage, but in the locomotive proper I'd worry about the warping of structural components and the breaking of ancient rivets and welds, as well as the steel delaminating. Such things just wouldn't be immediately obvious.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7