i read in some yahoo groups that there was a accident involving two trains on the River line, does anyone have any links to the story? also, where is the River Line?
Railroad Forums
river line Derailment
- Discussion of the operations of CSX Transportation, from 1980 to the present. Official site can be found here: CSXT.COM.
Moderator: MBTA F40PH-2C 1050
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the RiverLine is the second to the last leg of the CSX Mainline from Bayview Yard in Baltimore MD to Selkirk NY. I'm not sure but I think it begins in Trenton NJ and ends at the Selkirk Sub.
River line did inded suffer a derailment this past weekend. On sunday AM, at 4:45(approx.) Q159, a Port Newark-Chicago Stack Train slammed into the rear end of Q161m a Kearny-Chicago TOFC/Stack train at MP 103.5 on the River Subdivision in Alsen NY, about 30 miles south of Selkirk. Engineer on Q159 stated he believed he had a medium approach indication at CP-102(Prepare to stop at next signal, if exceeding medium speed, reduce speed as soon as signal is visible). there is a sharp S curve just north of CP 102, where the single track goes two double track until CP-106. It tunred out he had a restricting signal, (NORAC Rule 80), requring speed not in excess of 10 MPH, prepared to stop within 1/2 the range of vision, etc....
The 159 slammed into the 161 at close to 30 MPH, resulting in several flat cars on the rear of the 161 being sent in numerous directions, including onto a nearby highway, US Rte 9W. No injuries, no HazMats involved and the strength of the wide body probably saved the 159 crew from any serious injury. Track was closed immediately and trains eventually started running again about 7PM Sunday. Significant delays in both directions resulted. Crew will be subject to discipline, and as this is the second incident of this type for this engineer within a tear, he will either be fired or restricted to working as a conductor only. This covers the nuts and bolts of the incident in question....
The 159 slammed into the 161 at close to 30 MPH, resulting in several flat cars on the rear of the 161 being sent in numerous directions, including onto a nearby highway, US Rte 9W. No injuries, no HazMats involved and the strength of the wide body probably saved the 159 crew from any serious injury. Track was closed immediately and trains eventually started running again about 7PM Sunday. Significant delays in both directions resulted. Crew will be subject to discipline, and as this is the second incident of this type for this engineer within a tear, he will either be fired or restricted to working as a conductor only. This covers the nuts and bolts of the incident in question....
I know I'm getting old... My insurance company sent me only half a calendar this year!
Jeff, in answer to your post, I can tell you the following. The railroad, as you know is basically a single track main with seven passing sigings. Alsen is one of them, between CP 102 and CP 106. The normal speed, based on a clear track, is 30 MPH through the controlled sidings on the line, all except CP-87 to CP 90 which runs through Kingston and has a speed limit of 15 MPH. In this particular siding, it is set up so that when a train is stopped between CP 102 and 106, and the dispatcher brings in a second train behind the first, the best signal displayed is usually a restricting. The dispatcher also can talk the second train pass the red signal, giving him permission to pass the stop, once he has come to a complete stop. Then the train has to proceed at Restricted speed. The siding between CP 102 and 106 should be long enough to accomodate both trains. However, there is an active crossing towards the north end of the double track that cannot be blocked w/o dispatcher permission.
As there is a detector just north of CP 106, at MP 1081.1, generally northbound trains will pull up to CP 106 after hearing the southbound pass the detector, unless told otherwise. The 161 and 159 were to meet at least 1 possibly two southbounds. So by the time the southbound cleared CP 106, the 161 would have gotten the OK to head north at CP 106, and the 159 would have cleared CP 102 and then everyone SHOULD have then proceeded according to signal indication. Unfortunately, this "ballet" did not happen, and we now know the result.
As there is a detector just north of CP 106, at MP 1081.1, generally northbound trains will pull up to CP 106 after hearing the southbound pass the detector, unless told otherwise. The 161 and 159 were to meet at least 1 possibly two southbounds. So by the time the southbound cleared CP 106, the 161 would have gotten the OK to head north at CP 106, and the 159 would have cleared CP 102 and then everyone SHOULD have then proceeded according to signal indication. Unfortunately, this "ballet" did not happen, and we now know the result.
Calling signals within the cab are necessary as noted, but it also helps if the conductor can stay awake, and at 4:45 AM, I think we know the scenario in play here.....can't count how many times I've had conductors pass out on me. I now simply leave the lights on, open the window, and turn the radio up. It helps keep me awake, and if I have to be awake, then so should the conductor. This particular conductor is the regular man on this assignment(Q159), and is well acquainted with the hours of this assignemnt, as opposed to a conductor off the extra list who may have been up all day before getting called for this job(which goes to work at 7PM daily).
I know I'm getting old... My insurance company sent me only half a calendar this year!
Thats a VERY coldhearted response. Someone could have been killed and all you can think about is that your day was "ruined"? These people do not run trains for your pleasure, but earn a paycheck. Unless you have worked for the railroad, You have no knowledge of what train crews go through day in and day out. Being on the extra board, working for twelve hours straight getting 8 hours rest and then working another 12 hours over and over in infinitum. Did you ever think maybe the crew was suffering from fatigue? It does happen. They are human beings even if the company tries to run them like robots going as far as to deny personal and vacation time. So you didnt get the train you wanted, so you got skunked, so you didnt get the UP engine you wanted. Too bad. Thats the luck of the draw. You win some you lose some.
trainfreak wrote:Yeah that derailment ruined my day. I missed UP 2001 becuase of it. So it seemed to be human error that resulted in this derailment. But why was he that close to Q161 anyway? And if Q161 was in the block ahead of him wouldnt he have had a red signal?
Last edited by n01jd1 on Fri Jul 02, 2004 12:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Im sorry about my response. I should have really thought about it better. Im sure the crew had a worse day then me and i should have looked at everything and thought more about the lives at stake. Once again i am sorry about this and i will put everything into view next time.
As n01jd1 said, 8 hours "rest" between jobs............doesn't mean you even get 8 hours sleep/rest...........it's 8 hours off duty......and since the crew callers have to call us at least 2 hours in advance, that means the clock's down to 6 hours rest when you are relieved of service.....not to mention travel time between home and work.
I also have to agree with n01jd1 that not many people understand what it's like working in this industry.......it's not just a unique line of work....but a very unique lifestyle.
As far as Ralphs note that this was the second incident for the engineer of Q159 I had noticed that according to the computer, he tried to stay set-back as a conductor as often as possible.............perhaps they rushed him too quickly through training.....not the first time, and unfortunately, since all CSX worries about is cutting $$, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't the last.
I also have to agree with n01jd1 that not many people understand what it's like working in this industry.......it's not just a unique line of work....but a very unique lifestyle.
As far as Ralphs note that this was the second incident for the engineer of Q159 I had noticed that according to the computer, he tried to stay set-back as a conductor as often as possible.............perhaps they rushed him too quickly through training.....not the first time, and unfortunately, since all CSX worries about is cutting $$, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't the last.
I had noticed that according to the computer, he tried to stay set-back as a conductor as often as possible.............perhaps they rushed him too quickly through training.....not the first time, and unfortunately, since all CSX worries about is cutting $$, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't the last.How about... "since all the unions care about is $$ and power from a fat, dumb and happy membership, I wouldn't be surprised if they rally to keep these incompetents employed with the railroad."
Here we go again... A union "brother" fs up and who's at fault? CSX. Whether he's a conductor or an engineer, he should know the response required for a signal indication and if the engineer doesn't react properly, the conductor should put her in emergency.
Perhaps he should have been s...canned the first time he ran a signal... but no, the union thinks that is cruel and mean of big, bad CSX.
So you got one guy in the cab who can't tell the difference between signal indications and another who's dead asleep (and allowed to be so by the engineer). If anything, CSX is at fault for being to lenient with crew discipline. And that was encouraged by the unions.
Let's see, labor doesn't trust management to have employees' best interest as a primary value (because they've demonstrated it), and management is contemptuous of "fat, dumb and happy" front line people (you read it here, folks).
Who wins here? I would say no one!
The reality is that we have a union environment here that, yes, tends to keep people employed who may sometimes not be fit for employment. But -- another fact is that management owns the show, and therefore sets the tone for the way people work, and the degree to which they care about the company and its ultimate success.
My direct experience with the CSX management team over the years is that they fail to recognize how critical trust is to the equation. The prevailing attitudes of front line people has been created by this disregard for building trust.
They have trained the union officials to act like there is nothing management can do that's right. People learn from what they experience.
Until managers begin to show that they value the day-to-day contribution of the people who actually do the work that brings in the cash, nothing will change.
Pete Carpenter tried, but as soon as he was gone, everything slid back to what it was before. Nothing that is pledged by management is real -- it never lasts, is seldom really true for the long term. That's why there's little trust.
Who wins here? I would say no one!
Cowford wrote:Whether he's a conductor or an engineer, he should know the response required for a signal indication and if the engineer doesn't react properly, the conductor should put her in emergency.I agree. They really should take their job seriously enough to 1) know the signals cold, and 2) stay awake and work as a team.
The reality is that we have a union environment here that, yes, tends to keep people employed who may sometimes not be fit for employment. But -- another fact is that management owns the show, and therefore sets the tone for the way people work, and the degree to which they care about the company and its ultimate success.
My direct experience with the CSX management team over the years is that they fail to recognize how critical trust is to the equation. The prevailing attitudes of front line people has been created by this disregard for building trust.
They have trained the union officials to act like there is nothing management can do that's right. People learn from what they experience.
Until managers begin to show that they value the day-to-day contribution of the people who actually do the work that brings in the cash, nothing will change.
Pete Carpenter tried, but as soon as he was gone, everything slid back to what it was before. Nothing that is pledged by management is real -- it never lasts, is seldom really true for the long term. That's why there's little trust.
The problem in this industry as I see it is often crews are called out for a
train without being properly and fully rested. Blame?, there is enough to
go around the full circle. Management wants as much work from the crews as is possible at all costs and takes a dim view of mark offs some of
which might possible be legitimate and some of which is not. The men/
women in an away from home situation want to get back to their home
base as soon as possible no matter how tired they are or will become.
The government shares some of the blame, the hours of service law needs to be changed to give a person eight hours undisturbed rest at all
tie up points whether it be home or away from home.
I ran between Selkirk and Buffalo for a period of ten years and if I got
relieved enroute to Buffalo (my away from home terminal) and had to
finish the trip in a taxi or company vehicle, I always showed myself as
working 12 hours and not 11 hours and 59 minutes. The extra two hours
off could actually have saved my life at times.
I will cite an example, a crew on a freight train goes to work at Selkirk at
8:00PM and gets delayed both in departing the yard (quite common) or
on the road and ends up in Rochester at 8:00AM. They are out of time
and have to ride a taxi cab to the yard in Buffalo, then wait for a shuttle
vehicle to the hotel. They might not get there until 10:00AM or later.
Now some of them want to come right back out for more at 6:00PM in the
evening. Let's see; arrive at hotel at 10:00AM, have breakfast - 10:45AM,
wind down a little, maybe read the newspaper or a book or watch a little
TV, finally sleep about 11:45AM, at 4:00PM, the telephone rings, the rail-
road is calling you for a 6:00PM sign up for a return trip that might not be
any better than the going trip.
Is it any wonder that the crew is tired? You are not as keen or as alert,
your judgement and common sense is not as sharp and you somehow
manage to get back feeling like a vegetable.
A round trip for me was much safer for me with at least six hours sleep as
compared with four hours sleep.
In my opinion, many of the accidents migh have been preventable had the
crew(s) had proper rest in the first place.
Men/women are not machines, they need to get it out of their heads that
these practices can continue without reprecussions.
Noel Weaver
train without being properly and fully rested. Blame?, there is enough to
go around the full circle. Management wants as much work from the crews as is possible at all costs and takes a dim view of mark offs some of
which might possible be legitimate and some of which is not. The men/
women in an away from home situation want to get back to their home
base as soon as possible no matter how tired they are or will become.
The government shares some of the blame, the hours of service law needs to be changed to give a person eight hours undisturbed rest at all
tie up points whether it be home or away from home.
I ran between Selkirk and Buffalo for a period of ten years and if I got
relieved enroute to Buffalo (my away from home terminal) and had to
finish the trip in a taxi or company vehicle, I always showed myself as
working 12 hours and not 11 hours and 59 minutes. The extra two hours
off could actually have saved my life at times.
I will cite an example, a crew on a freight train goes to work at Selkirk at
8:00PM and gets delayed both in departing the yard (quite common) or
on the road and ends up in Rochester at 8:00AM. They are out of time
and have to ride a taxi cab to the yard in Buffalo, then wait for a shuttle
vehicle to the hotel. They might not get there until 10:00AM or later.
Now some of them want to come right back out for more at 6:00PM in the
evening. Let's see; arrive at hotel at 10:00AM, have breakfast - 10:45AM,
wind down a little, maybe read the newspaper or a book or watch a little
TV, finally sleep about 11:45AM, at 4:00PM, the telephone rings, the rail-
road is calling you for a 6:00PM sign up for a return trip that might not be
any better than the going trip.
Is it any wonder that the crew is tired? You are not as keen or as alert,
your judgement and common sense is not as sharp and you somehow
manage to get back feeling like a vegetable.
A round trip for me was much safer for me with at least six hours sleep as
compared with four hours sleep.
In my opinion, many of the accidents migh have been preventable had the
crew(s) had proper rest in the first place.
Men/women are not machines, they need to get it out of their heads that
these practices can continue without reprecussions.
Noel Weaver