Is This a Safety Contradiction?
PHOTO #1:
This poster recently visited Union Pacific’s triple-track mainline through Nebraska. In Kearney (pronounced car-nee) the main grade crossing in town (Central Ave.) was having maintenance performed on it, and Main Track 2 (center track) was out of service for a good portion of the day.
In the above photo, workers have an escape route if something bad should happen, like a sudden derailment.
PHOTO #2:
But, what happens when two trains surround the center track, as in the background of the below photo?
This forum contributor was at grade level when a surrounding of the center track actually occurred at Central Ave., so a photo of the event cannot be provided. But, the then trapped track workers continued working seemingly un-phased!
PHOTO #3:
The eastbound train (right, going away from the camera) in Photo #1 met the westbound (left, coming towards the camera) in Photo #2 and that westbound is shown below as it passed the workers at Central Ave.
All day long different w
Almost certainly the trains operating where track workers are present had a speed restriction, say 5 MPH between MP? and MP?.for example.
Track centers 20’ and above, they keep working. Below 20 feet, any machinery stops working and all watch the passing movement. Above 20 feet and just the lookout watches.
With signs between the track, track centers are at least 17 feet plus the width of the signs in the photo. Notice the side tracks, which are probably at 15 foot centers.
Looks like a bear saw with the welders truck cutting rail / changing rail thru the crossing. Arc welder following nearby?
From photos #1 and #2, I ‘scaled’ the center-to-center distance between those 3 main tracks as being from 17 to 18 ft. - and the sidings’ spacing as being 15 ft., as mc said above.
I’d worry more about loose and flying banding, cables, dragging chains, shifted loads, etc. than a derailment - which would probably be caught before on a switch or crossing, etc. approaching this site, unless it just happened right there anyway.
From the GPO website, the track center spacing is still shown as within 25 ft. for “adjacent” tracks, although I understand there is a proposal to reduce that to 19 ft. From 49 CFR Part 214 Sec. 214.7 - Definitions. at - http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2009/octqtr/pdf/49cfr214.7.pdf
"Adjacent tracks mean two or more tracks with track centers spaced less than 25 feet apart."
Also, “Fouling a track means the placement of an individual or an item of equipment in such proximity to a track that the individual or equipment could be struck by a moving train or on-track equipment, or in any case is within four feet of the field side of the near running rail.” [emphasis added - PDN]
The only FRA restriction that I could find - though each railroad more adopt more restrictive/ safer procedures - is that where an employee is or could “foul” an “adjacent track” which is not within the protected “working limits”, then the watchmen must give at least 15 seconds advance notice of any approaching train on that adjacent track. See § 214.335 On-track safety procedures for roadway work groups. at:
diningcar (12-15):
The first day, trains WERE moving probably 5 M.P.H. as you suggested.
The second day, the day of the above photos, trains were consistently moving much faster, perhaps 15-20 M.P.H.
In Cajon Pass Too!
In 2008, Cajon Pass in Southern California had its BNSF two-track line triple-tracked.
The Blue Cut / Swarthout Canyon Rd. area, workers had no way out, but kept working while trains passed.
Under Highway 138: Track laying workers often kept working if a train passed alongside. Note the gentleman seated under the equipment on the lower right.
Of course, even without a slow order, Cajon Pass trains often move slowly!
K.P.