NTSB Report, LIRR 160

Hi Everyone,

Here is the link to the NTSB report about LIRR MP-15 #160.

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2005/RAB0501.htm

-Barry

The report's a little lengthy, but definetely worth reading if you have the time.

My Favorite quote:

The crew did not apply the hand brake to secure LIRR 160 when they left it unattended, and they did not chock one of its wheels. When the conductor and assistant conductor were asked why they did not set the hand brake or chock a wheel, they responded that it was a “fast switch operation,” during which they would leave the locomotive unattended for only a short period and that they were following a “standard practice” that was “done all the time.”

not many unexpected details, i still think gates and lighted warning devices should be replaced. Seems reckless in this day and age to leave these safety devices out of the mix.

<i>not many unexpected details, i still think gates and lighted warning devices should be replaced. Seems reckless in this day and age to leave these safety devices out of the mix.</i>

Sure - you gonna pay for them?

Seriously, on a little used, low speed, high vandalism rail line, stopping, booting out the conductor, and having him flag traffic, is a lot more practical. If this were a busy line, I'd say sure. But...

More to the point - this accident wouldn't have happened if the crew had followed the rules. And, on a nice sunny day, admittingly in March, there's little excuse. It *really* takes that long to set a handbrake? And, setting a handbrake would likely have been all that was needed.

More distrubing is the condition of the locomotive's brakes...

Ironically, what were they switching? A DM-30....

all i was saying is that it seems like the collisions wouldn't have occurred if gates went down. I know the braking error is inexcusable. but a safety device to back up proper procedure would have covered it. It is still MTA property, we are paying for the victims of the wreck too.

Oh, I agree that the gates would have helped a lot - but gates are really expensive, and it's a maintenance issue in an area where vandalism can be expected.

Of course, if there was a few trains a day, or a few an hour? You bet I'd want to see gates there.

Ideally, there'd be gates at every grade crossing in the world, but we don't live in an ideal world.

Of course, a warning bell/lights would have be cheaper, and offer at least some protection, and not be as vulnerable to vandals...

But you're right - with gates, this would have most likely been an embaressing incident for the LIR, not the major mess it became.

Would the gates have really prevented anything? Gates are timed to go down based on the speed limit on the track. If you are going above the speed limit you can beat the crossing gates. I think gates or not, the same situation would have happened.

The only way that this would have went quite would have been if the loco just derailed or hit a freight car and derailed. with out hittin or or damaging any one or thing..

Lets see,

1. Loco Derials, Causing inury and bad press, Oh it was hauling one of the prized peices of new equipment too, to the repair shop...
2. Brand new train freaks out and passengers are stranded for three +hours(?) while the train crew and management scratch their heads.
3. No scheduled maintenance program or overhaul, AKA when it breaks whine that we need new s@#t.
4. Employees who "bailoff"
5. Oh those supposed "Dual Mode Trains" that never seem to run on any other branch other than the PJ (political reasons).
6. Employees who don't follow procedures (well nobody told me).

Sounds like the LIRR I know and love [/list]

Ya gota love it.
LIRR is a classic