How many of you were aware of the train derailment up in Chicago?I heard that the train was speeding
Yes the train was speeding. The train was doing around 60 mph in a 10 mph. crossover. The two units were the new MP-36phi or something like that. The leading unit had some significant damage. Hope this helps.
ouch!
stay safe
joe
This derailment was on the old Rock Island line that paralells the Dan Ryan Expressway, and yes the train was doing 69 mph approaching a 10 mph crossover signal (red over green) and supposedly (according to the Chicago Tribune this morning) the engineer either did not see or ignored that signal (two signals actually). I had to wonder if the signal was a dwarf signal close to the ground or one on a signal bridge overhead. The locomotives in question seem to me to have the engineers seating position quite a bit further back than those on the EMD F40PH units, and also the nose of the units are much longer than the F40 and are sloped so that I could understand an engineer not seeing a signal close to the ground, especially at nearly 70 mph, but if the signals are on a bridge then this possibility is non existent.
it dont matter if it is a dwarf signal or a mast signal you can see the signal . either he didnt see the correct signal ( either a light burned out or interpted wrong) and the result was a derailment. from a distance you can see the signal on the ground or above. i would venture to say he had the wrong indication showing. not many engineers would run 50 mph over the speed limit on perpose.
2 more questions
- is the metra on cab signal system?
- what did the tapes read was he in emergency before he derailed. did the signal system show on the tapes and was the indication a diverging clear .
my previous statement is made due to the fact if the red aspect was out it would be interpited as a clear not diverging and it would be kept secreat from the public.
Oh c’mon Wabash…the carrier would never keep safety issues or malfunctions from the public. Look at the remote safety issue. The companies safety records differ from the BLE’s. Of course we believe the company…yeah right.
Ken
Wabash, I do believe METRA is on a cab signal system, and NO he was not in emergency when he went into the cross-over.
It sound like, to me, that no matter what signals were in use, the engineer was just plain going too fast! I can be so profound at some times! Any further word on engineer impairment? And where was the conductor?
Maybe like the NY ferry captain - and the Mookie on any car ride - couldn’t stay awa…
Was this the crews regular run?
If so, where was the conductor?
Both are responsible for keeping the train under control.
And if it was their regular assignment, they already knew the speed limit, on tangent track or through crossovers.
Stay Frosty,
Ed
The conductor was probably busy collecting fares. I can’t imagine that he was oblivious to the fact that they were on the “wrong” track and were going to cross over at 47th, but that’s possible.
No cab signals on the ROCK.
The signals for 47th Street are on a signal bridge, if I read my CORA timetable graphics right. There is no way that a trained engineer could mistake a Diverging Clear with the top light out for a Clear, in broad daylight.
My suspicions are that the engineer was not fully attentive, and did not have the clear signal he claims to have had. as an “agreement” employee, I almost hate to have to say it, but it doesn’t look good for him or his story.
I hope Metra installs a higher-speed crossover there, now that the original one was wiped out. Even a 20-mph (#15) crossover would be good.
on a dwarf signal as stated before yes that could be seen as a clear. if it is a over head signal no mistake. he was not paying attention.
iron ken i can understand how you would take exception to the statement . I know all about the ble and the carrier fight on remotes we have had several mishaps with them and we have reported them to the fra. but because the carrier doesnt do anything to the employees operating them ( time off for rule violation) the fra wont follow up with the claim. in other words its going to take a very bad haz-mat spill with death and evacuations before anything will happen.
Ed you are right to a point. this dont haft to be the engineers regular run to be out there. the fra made a mistake ( in my opinion) when they said to be current on a territory up to a year. not 6 months like before. it might have been 11 months since this engineer made this run and he was leagle according to the carrier and the govermant…
There is other questions but i will wait til i see more information on this incedent.
Metra engineer says signals told him to stay on track
October 16, 2003
BY ROBERT C. HERGUTH Transportation Reporter
The engineer of the Metra train that derailed over the weekend told federal investigators that trackside signals indicated just before the incident he was to continue on the current path, not cross to adjacent tracks.
It was at that crossing point just south of 47th Street that the Metra Rock Island District Line train derailed late Sunday afternoon.
The switch had been thrown by a dispatcher for the train to cross from the easternmost tracks to the western ones. The speed limit is 10 mph at the crossover, but the train was traveling at 67 mph, just below the 70 mph limit for continuing on the straight stretch.
“The train’s engineer was interviewed on Tuesday,” the National Transportation Safety Board said in a Wednesday statement. “He reports that he believed the signals were set for continued operation on track 1, with no crossover movement indicated.”
NTSB experts are testing the “signal system on the route . . . to determine if it is operating as designed.”
Metra officials, however, have no evidence of signal malfunction.
The NTSB also noted the engineer, while holding nine years of “railroad experience,” just became an engineer in July.
“The best news is everything ran on time today,” said Metra spokesman Dan Schnolis, adding all damaged track has been replaced and schedules have returned to normal.
One article I read somewhere (in more than one place) says that the approach signal (actually would have shown as Approach Diverging) may not have been changed in time for the engineer to see it.
So here’s my question: is the dispatcher’s console monitored by an event recorder, too? Wouldn’t it be interesting if the route were lined up only a short time (we’re talking seconds here) before the train hit the crossover? There has to be a point where the engineer stops looking at his clear signal and concentrates on the track beyond it. I, for one, would be interested in knowing how the two times (the time the route was lined up and the time of the incident) compare to each other.
Exactly what i was waiting for. the previous signal should have been a approach diverging. if it was clear then i would keep going. all of these signals are recorded also when they are lined and when the signal was taken if he took the clear i assume that the next switch could not be lined as our dispatchers can not line a switch on us after taking the previous signal. the only exception is if we take a approch signal previous and then get a diverging approach at nest signal. ( why you ask this is because we are down to a speed that lets us stop at next signal when we get there it is procede and at the speed of the signal and track turn out speed) In my opinion if the dispatcher lined the switch the indication was that the train had not taken the previous signal and showed he had time to reroute the train… in talking with our dispatchers the system is not perfect. they tryed lining a train who showed he was 10 miles away when he was about to take the signal they was working on lining. what happened is the signal dropped on him causing him to stop. the dispatchers had no idea he was at that signal. the rule is you dont change a signal or route with out contacting engineer to make sure he can stop his train safely before taking that signal. sounds like this didnt happen.
From reports coming out of NTSB and METRA Headquarters and reported in this mornings Chicago Tribune, the rookie engineer simply ignored the signals (his first out of LaSalle staion was amber over amber telling him to slow to 10 mph) but he ignored three signal indications and…WHAM! He has been suspended without pay until the final report from NTSB.
advance approach it seems like the powers to be are covering something . this signal tells me to prepare to stop at second signal. not prepare for a diverging route.
advance approach it seems like the powers to be are covering something . this signal tells me to prepare to stop at second signal. not prepare for a diverging route.
Wabash1, in the General Code of Operating Rules, amber-over-amber is in fact Approach Diverging.
Today’s report says that the route was lined up in plenty of time for the engineer to see all signals connected with the move (so there goes that theory!).
on that road it may be but on the 2 roads i run its advance approach, approach diverging is yellow over green. Now correct me if i am wrong but isnt the metra just a mass transit service operated on old or even current frieght rail? and that its not considered light rail but it uses regular passenger cars and engines?