Re the Metrolink Crash in Glendale, CA Jan. 27, 2005. I am sure that if the train had been in the pull mode rather than the push mode there would have been fewer lives lost.
The passenger controlcab car is much lighter than a locomotive, and hence will derail more easily.
It is interesting to note that the car next to the locomotive was not crushed by the locomotive, which one would expect as the locomotive is much heavier.
We have a similar operation with the West Coast Express between Vancouver and Mission B.C. Canada
All trains are in the push mode west bound into Vancouver in the Morning.
I have warned friends who ride it to not ride in the front car in push mode or in the car next to the Locomotive, as these two cars are at greatest risk for personal injury in the event of a collision or derailment.
Should the Government re-examine the saftey aspects of push pull operations?
I was thinking the same thing. Once I heard of a commuter train somewhere in the northeast hitting an 18 wheeler, and It was in push mode, and half of the front coach was destroyed. several people died. But then again the engine being crushed into the first car would do just as much damage…
Jury is out on the question and will remain so despite extended debate. Push-pull is becoming the standard around the world on commuter operation and even some medium distance trains. Unless I’m wrong Amtrak runs their Michigan-Chicago trains push pull and that’s quite a haul.
It may be down by the time you read this but today’s LA Times has a story detailing the debate. It’s part of thier coverage of the Metrolink crash and one of the few items which doesn’t require registration to read, or at least didn’t today.
Whether in push or pull mode the incident highlights the need for grade separation.
For my two cents…control car operations should only be permitted where there are no street crossings at grade.
The vehicle struck, was a Jeep Grand Cherokee…not one of the bigger vehicles on the road. Cab control cars are, in my estimation, too light and have too little collision protection to ‘safely’ withstand a collisions at a grade crossing.
Amtrack runs its Cascade’s push=pull, but has a gutted F40PH rebuilt as a baggage car on the push end. It still has the weight to push vehicles off the track.
It is my opinion that train 100 would not have derailed had a locomotive - either “real” or “gutted” been leading. That doesn’t mean that there still would not have been an accident given that the collision between the Jeep and #100 took place just as they were meeting another moving train and the stopped ballast train. That Jeep had to go somewhere and there is precious little room between the trains.
“Amtrack runs its Cascade’s push=pull, but has a gutted F40PH rebuilt as a baggage car on the push end. It still has the weight to push vehicles off the track.”
The Long Island Railroad used to used to use gutted Alco FA1s on the as HEP generators on the push end. However, the LIRR switched to cab-control cars on it’s diesel only push-pull trains. Dual-mode trains have a locomotive on each end.
I wonder what would have happened if MU cars had been invoved instead of a push-pull train.
Trains have been running push-pull for decades. Lets not get crazy here. Yes its was horrible but we can’t stop and change the world because of it. Are you willing to pay extra $$$$ to for all the grade separations around the country???
Kenneo Yes Amtrack uses gutted F40PH engines on their Talgo Cascades Trains.
I have noted that the US Government has also expressed concern for structural integrity problems with these light weight articulated cars and have mandated that cables be attached between each car to keep them from jack knifing in the event of a derailment.
Using a F40PH gutted control cab does increase the margin of safety.
In the old days of steam on the CPR, a box car was always put right after the coal tender as a sacrificial crush zone. Of course steam engines were very heavy.
I would have less of a problem with push pull operations if they had no level crossings or were on a dedicated line. This still does not protect the cab control car from derailing by way of slides. The West Coast Express’s only derailment was from just that, a slide that derailed the control cab car, however it remained upright and only sustained some undercarriage damage.
If fragments of the Jeep got caught underneath the train and were pushed or dragged into the switch, a derailment would have occurred regardless of whether it was a 60-ton cab car or a 160-ton locomotive.
Having said that, I suspect that there’s opportunity for some improvement in the crashworthiness of cab cars, or in some sort of pilot to deflect struck objects. I suspect that the Jeep would have been impacted differently with the locomotive hitting it, and possibly knocked clear, in which case the derailment may not have happened. But eliminate or restrict the cab car concept? Don’t hold your breath–the efficiencies are far too great.
I would have qouted Mark, but this is good too. Look at all the points made here and in the other forums about this topic. Debris lodged under a locomotive could have caused a derailment. Trains operating in push mode are common, and operate safely everyday. The object that is struck has the potential to derail the train. Amtrak in Bourbannis in 1999 is an example…City of New Orleans, locomotive first, hits a tractor trailer and derails-11 dead-locomotive leading-I said it twice for effect. South Shore in Gary 1991?, commuter train operating with EMU cars, strikes tractor trailer carrying steel coil, coil bounces down the aisle of the car, kills 1 or 2. Now Amtraks Cabbage cars-not sure they are any safer than a normal cab car-ever ridden one-I have, they are VERY light, not too sure if that would have spared too much in a higher speed situations. I believe push pull operations are safe and effecient. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water just yet.
My comments were not in relation to the physical forces involved. I have seen bicycles derail SD-45’s. My main (and, really, only) point was stated in the FRA Emergency Order – cab cars are much lighter than locomotives. The heavier the vehicle is, the less likely it is to derail in the kinds of collisions we are talking about. When a train hits something, the moving train “jumps up” because the forward motion has been partially blocked and the vehicle (engine or car) must transfer some component of that energy somewhere, so it goes up and/or sideways. Since it takes much more energy to lift a locomotive … .
I did not know where the siding switch was located until Mark mentioned its location. I would venture to guess that the frog was a high-winged afair that would catch and halt anything that was being pushed down the track by the cab car. And as Mark stated, and Carl confirmed, once that Jeep caught on the switch, the rest was history.
Note that the situation with long trains of self-propelled cars, diesel mu’s or electric mu’s, is not much different than the push-pull situation.
I restate my strong recommendation for closed-TV monitoring.
Closed-circuit TV monitoring is standard in dangerous spots on highways in general and why should not grade crossings be any different. Again, about $20,000 per crossing should do it. Good protection at a bargain price.
As a life-long Chicagoan, push-pull has been part of suburban operations for most of my life. In Chicago, bi-level gallery coaches are all equipped with HEP and MU cables and some of the coaches have a control cab on the upper level at one end. Suburban trains are arranged with a cab-equipped coach at one end, a varying number of coaches without cabs and an HEP-equipped locomotive at the other end. The consist is arranged to have the locomotive on the outer end. Inbound trains are controlled from the cab coach with the locomotive pushing on the rear end and outbound trains are operated from the locomotive. Switching expenses are reduced enormously since consists don’t have to be re-arranged to change directions. There may be some variations on this theme, such as LIRR’s use of HEP control cabs, but this is generally how push-pulls are operated.
Used primarily in commuter service. Locomotive and x number of cars, last car having a space where the engineer sits with duplicate locomotive controls. In one direction, engineer is in locomotive, pulling per usual. At end of run, instead of turning locomotive or entire train, engineer simply walks to other end of train, gets into cab in cab car and locomotive now pushes the train in the other direction.
If you look at these commuter cars, you’ll notice that the end (cab) car has a headlight, horn, windows for engineer, etc. Since the lights are on, this train is in push mode.
(Forgot to note where I pulled the image from. Oops!)
Mookie: Here’s a simple explanation of push-pull.
It was invented by a chief mechanical officer of the CNW Railway about 1958. He explained his inspiration to our class of locomotive engineers in 1972. He stated that he was at the CNW depot in Chicago one afternoon and watched as trains backed in from the California Avenue coach yard using a tail-hose (long air brake hose with a small control valve and whistle attached) operated by a brakeman. He also made note of how certain standard commuter coaches had been equiped with a windshield and wiper for the extended back-up moves from outlying points top rotect the brakeman in charge of the back-up move.
A “cab-car” was developed with all the controls of a standard locomotive plus an addition air tank to actuate the control of the airbrake system. A cable was installed under each coach so as to transmit the control or throttle positions from the cab car to the locomotive. In essance a push-pull train is the same as a subway or multiple unit electric train , except only one car, the locomotive, is powered. It was developed so trains in rush hour service didn’t have to be pulled away from their locomtive, be repositioned in the depot, and have another unit tacked onto the other end for departure. The enginemen merely “change ends,” same as an MU train. Same goes for outlying terminals. This saved the railroads enormous amounts of money in terminal time.
It was the custome of the CNW, and all railraoads that followed with this technique to have the power at the “outbound” end of the train to avoid filling the depots up with exhaust. The only exception to this rule was on the CNW’s Lake Geneva train where, during the winter months, it ran power towards the Depot in order to break snow on the lightly used Lake Geneva branch.
A few comments from an engineer that operated cabcar equipped suburban trains for twenty years (and bear in mind that the specs on any new equipment may be different from what I ran on the CNW):
The pilot of a cabcar is designed completely different than that of a locomotive. The photo tree68 posted does not show enough detail, as the pilot is in shadow, but the configuration is such that a vehicle (or whatever) that is struck directly broadside can easily get jammed between the main deck and the pilot. When you hit a vehicle (as I have done many times) the first thing you look for is the struck object off to the side of the tracks. If you see it, you can breathe a little easier while the train is stopping, knowing that you will not derail. One time the vehicle my train struck DID get caught, and it was an anxious few seconds until the train finally stopped (from 70mph).
The pilot itself is much smaller than the pilot (plow) on freight locomotives. It is held in place by support posts from the car body. It is suffiecient to deflect rocks and refrigerators and other objects places on the tracks, but when a vehicle is involved, I would much prefer to have a locomotive-type plow. The problem is that the cabcars must also be designed so they can couple onto other coaches, even from the cab end. So a large, locomotive-style pilot is not really possible.
I never liked operating from a cabcar. You have absolutely no room to move. The cab itself is divided into two smaller ‘cabs’, maybe three feet wide on each side, and maybe five feet from front window to the back wall of the cab, and is seperated by the ‘hump’ of the center aisle below, which protrudes halfway up into the cab. On the CNW, the fireman (when they had them) or the conductor (when available) would sit on the other side. We could see each other, but could not cross to the other side, due to the amount of safety equipment bolted on the cab walls.
The door behind the engineer that separates the ca
Zardoz’s above post is right on the mark.
I’ve operated cab cars on the CNW, and on the South Shore when we had them years ago. The pilots are minimal at best.
The MU cars on the South Shore Line are prety well designed, as they are huge flat sheets of steel, well braced. The last time I hit a car, broadside, the pilot was able to shove the car aside and spin it real good. Sometimes it would cause the auto to spin into the brake pipe under the steps of the lead car, but would not derail it. When we got stopped the flagman went back, looked at the dazed driver, and noticed a large spot in the middle of the driver’s pants in the shape of the state of Wisconsin. She said to the driver,“Bet ya wet your pants didn’t cha.”
