http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/21/us/wisconsin-trains-collide/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/07/21/train-derails-wisconsin/12929271/
The crash involved cars carrying sand and lumber. They came from CN and Wisconsin & Southern railroads.
Woke up to this news this morning: Link to story:
@ http://cnsnews.com/news/article/wisconsin-train-crash-injures-2-people-spills-oil
Seems the several stories linked in the Search for information; the media was disappointed that there were “no Crude oil Tank cars involved”
The good news seems to be [snip from posted link] “…An engineer and conductor on the Canadian National train were taken to a hospital with injuries that were not life threatening, Waldron said Monday…”
"…Details about the cause of the crash were not available early Monday. Waldron could not say if the Wisconsin & Southern train was stationary at the time of the collision. A representative for Wisconsin & Southern could not immediately be reached.
Waldron said the Canadian National train was headed from Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, to Champaign, Illinois…"
Maybe, someone who is familiar with the track layout in Slinger,Wi. can describe the location?
Then ther
Shoot the messenger? I guess you’d prefer just “Happy Talk” news? "blatant attempt [IMHO] to create a " mountain out of a mole hill"
That last story looks like pretty straight news reporting, IMHO. Do you dispute the facts?
It sure appeared as a misrepresentation of fact to me. Simply using the photo of an oil train created that appearance.
It was NOT an oil train – both trains carried only sand and lumber. There was diesel fuel spilled out of the derailed locomotives, but no crude oil or ethanol or other explosive cargo.
The Christian Science Monitor’s story is wrong in showing oil tank cars and their claims of hazardous cargo involved.
Apparently the staff at the Christian Science Monitor has fallen victim to the now almost universal practice of no longer employing anybody who has more than an elementary knowledge of railroad operation. I wonder if the writer is aware that diesel fuel is used to power the locomotives and is carried in tanks on the locomotives. That the picture of an oil train is included in the article indicates a knee-jerk reaction to the knowledge that diesel fuel was spilled, considering the great publicity that has recently been given to the accidents involving trains carrying tank cars filled with oil.
I do not remember ever having read an issue of the newspaper, but many years ago I was given to understand that it was a responsible publication. It seems now that this is no longer true.
Re-reading the links, I see that it was the AP that showed the oil train. I retract my criticism of the Christian Science Monitor.
After re-reading the links, I see that it was an AP story that showed the picture of the oil train. I retract my criticism of the Christian Science Monitor.
You CAN partially blame the editors at the Christian S cience Monitor for having an incoorectstory, They should have checkedthe facts before rekeasing the story for publication. The AP was wrong and the Cristian Science Moniotr editorsjust took the AP story as true which is not good reporting practice. The Christina Science Monitor is a good newspaper and they have known better.
Professor: (Schlimm)
Not wanting to get into an argument with you over "nits’ Having done a ‘Search’ on Google referencing the aforementioned train collision at Slinger, Wi.
I found that the AP’s (Associated Press)story was the only one that carried the photo (apparently, a ‘Stock Photo’ of some Railroad Tanks Cars). That it was accompanying a pretty credible story in “The Christian Science Monitor” was sort of a shock to me. The “CSM” is a long- held, very credible news resource. That they would use a mostly unrelated stock picture ( captioned as an “oil train passing a loading rack in Wyoming”. I found disconcerting.
We have had any number of comments in these Forums, referencing the degrading quality of the verbiage and very quality of the stories reporting Railroading in the Main Stream Media;by disinterested media reporting-types. Reportage by writers, who had little knowledge of what they were reporting on; or a distinct lack of interest in the Railroad subject matter being written about.
That was my point in furnishing both links in my Post to this Thread.
Sam:
You are correct. and will get no arguement from me. BUt should’nt the editors have checked the stories before they are printed. Look what happend at the New York Times with that reporter making up stories and they were not checked. Too bad that good newspapers and media outlets do not have a railway savy reporter on staff.
I’m with you. “Train Derailment in Wisconsin Spills Oil” really isn’t the best headline for this incident. I note that the report of the locomotive fuel spill was in the first part of the articles I have read, and the state of the crew was listed at the bottom. Says a lot. [banghead]
Seems to me that some folks are awfully defensive. Look, the picture is just stock footage. Many movies in the past relied on stock footage, so that someone is seen boarding the 20th Century, but later is seen on the west coast on an SP Daylight. Probably very few people pay attention to that other than railroaders and fans.
It is an online article, not a video, and so it is going to be read. You admit the text is factually correct. So really, no biggie.
I’m kind of surprised that the stock photo didn’t include a 4-4-0 steamer with a balloon smokestack. [:-^]
Do we not have the right to expect the media to report accurately? That seems to have fallen by the wayside in recent years. “Never let a good crisis go to waste” comes to mind. Regardless who decided to use that photo it was designed to promote fear of oil trains. That is not the media’s job.
What kind of dispatch and signal systems ?
We do have the right to expect the media accurately…we just don’t have the right media ownership or employees capable or willing to do so.
Whatever it is, there was an obvious technical issue or someone failed to comply with the signals.
According to one news story, the accident occurred at a crossing; according to Newswire, it occurred at a junction.
Looking at a Google map of the area, it seems that the two roads share track for some distance, but I could not be certain that this is the case.
What is the situation at that location?
Yes they share the track briefly where the diamond used to be; now it is two turnouts back to back so that the railroads can in theory run on each other’s track; the WSOR uses CN tracks to get to its southern end which starts in Waukesha WI, several miles to the south.
Google Map satellite view shows this plainly. You can see that the interchange or sharing of track is protected by signals.
Dave Nelson