Western Railroad Discussion > Metra Derailment, Speeding.

Now they're saying that the train was doing 69 thru a a 10mph turnout. If that is the case, mercy be upon the engineer. Heres the story taken from KATV:

NTSB Says Commuter Train Was Speeding

UPDATED - Sunday September 18, 2005 3:38pm from our sister station WJLA-TV


Two Dead in Chicago Train Derailment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Train Derailment in Chicago Leaves 2 Dead
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Train Derailment Kills One, Injures 83



CHICAGO (AP) - A commuter train was going almost 60 mph above the speed limit just before it derailed, killing two people and injuring dozens, the acting chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board said Sunday.Mark Rosenker said the Metra train was traveling at 69 mph and should not have been going faster than 10 mph when it switched tracks at a crossover just before jumping the tracks Saturday.

"Sixty-nine miles an hour is very, very fast when you're dealing with a 10-mile-an-hour restriction," Rosenker said.

The NTSB will examine several factors to determine why the train was going at that speed, including the train's three data recorders, records of the track signals and toxicology reports on the crew, he said.

Investigators already have determined that nothing was abnormal with the tracks, which had just been inspected on Friday, Rosenker said.




» Click Here To Return to Previous Page

» Find More Articles Related To This One



http://www.wjla.com/headlines/0905/261207.html

Now whether this was the truth or not, we'll find out.

Didn't Metra have something similar a couple years ago with a 10mph speed restriction for a crossover the engineer said he knew nothing about? Don't suppose someone decided to change tracks on him and didn't alert him first to the change?

jmlott2002 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Didn't Metra have something similar a couple years
> ago with a 10mph speed restriction for a crossover
> the engineer said he knew nothing about? Don't
> suppose someone decided to change tracks on him
> and didn't alert him first to the change?

It was reported that he was a newer engineer to Metra....

Craig

jmlott2002 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Didn't Metra have something similar a couple years
> ago with a 10mph speed restriction for a crossover
> the engineer said he knew nothing about? Don't
> suppose someone decided to change tracks on him
> and didn't alert him first to the change?

Yes they did. According to inside sources investigators are looking into this incident. Questions were brought up about signal aspects, spacing and interference from the sun. In the Rock Island days this was 40 mph territory. Metra has since raised it to 70 mph. Don't know if they compensated for the increased speed limits pertaining to signal spacing. Something for the investigators to figure out. My prayers go out for the victims and the train crew here. Dan

Odd thing about all this. The one on 10-21-2003 had units 409 and 411. 23 months later, 409 is pushing the train through the same crossover at nearly the same speed just the other direction.

Then how does that interface with the live witness account ( on an internet feed from "http://cbs2chicago.com/video") in which the guy claims structure around the bridge collapsed, causing the train to bump-and-bounce over it ??

Still hearing some conflicting accounts. L A Times article said the engineer was relatively new to Metra but had worked for a freight railroad previously. No mention of a collapsed bridge.

casco17 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Still hearing some conflicting accounts. L A
> Times article said the engineer was relatively new
> to Metra but had worked for a freight railroad
> previously. No mention of a collapsed bridge.

The only mention I've heard of a bridge was when it first happened. Everything
else since then has focused on the engineer. He had 45 days in service on Metra
(following normal training), and 5 1/2 years previous employment with CSX.

Yarddogh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Then how does that interface with the live witness
> account ( on an internet feed from
> "http://cbs2chicago.com/video") in which the guy
> claims structure around the bridge collapsed,
> causing the train to bump-and-bounce over it ??

Just a thought, not a judgement.

If a train is going through a 10 MPH crossover at 69 MPH, anything around it is going to feel it, including the bridge. It could be that the vibrations of the derailment caused the concrete to fall from the bridge.

Just asking:

How is the engineer notified of the speed limit over a particular stretch of track? By a sign beside the track? (Never noticed one, that meant anything to me, anyway.) By an in-cab signal? Is the dispatcher supposed to keep him updated on the speed limit where the train is? Is the engineer given a package of orders specifying speed limits in different areas? If so, how is he supposed to remember it all?

It seems to me that, given the distance ahead that one can see fine detail, and the long stopping distance of steel wheel on steel rail, if you're cruising along at 70 MPH and see a 10 MPH crossover ahead, you can be on top of it before you have a chance to do anything significant about it if you're not warned.

Even so, I expect that that engineer's days in the railroad industry are over.

The training he recieved would have made him aware of all the speeds, permanent speed changes and turnout speeds. In addition most RR's have signs trackside, a specified distance from the permanent speed change. Speeds of the track are all part of the physical characteristics one must know to get qualified on a said peice of RR.


ddkid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just asking:
>
> How is the engineer notified of the speed limit
> over a particular stretch of track? By a sign
> beside the track? (Never noticed one, that meant
> anything to me, anyway.) By an in-cab signal? Is
> the dispatcher supposed to keep him updated on the
> speed limit where the train is? Is the engineer
> given a package of orders specifying speed limits
> in different areas? If so, how is he supposed to
> remember it all?
>
> It seems to me that, given the distance ahead that
> one can see fine detail, and the long stopping
> distance of steel wheel on steel rail, if you're
> cruising along at 70 MPH and see a 10 MPH
> crossover ahead, you can be on top of it before
> you have a chance to do anything significant about
> it if you're not warned.
>
> Even so, I expect that that engineer's days in the
> railroad industry are over.

This is what the old timers used to call "seat box failure".

ddkid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> It seems to me that, given the distance ahead that
> one can see fine detail, and the long stopping
> distance of steel wheel on steel rail, if you're
> cruising along at 70 MPH and see a 10 MPH
> crossover ahead, you can be on top of it before
> you have a chance to do anything significant about
> it if you're not warned.

In addition to Frank's answer, I'll offer this regarding the above paragraph.

Train opertion in the derailment area is by signal indication.

The various combinations of signal indications at the derailment location and on the signals in advance of the location, are designed to allow a train to have ample time to reduce speed to what was prescribed for movement through the turnout.

Thus, as the engineer, you must operate your train in accordance with the rule requirements indicated by the signals.

In some cases, albeit rare, there can be some sort of malfunction in the signal system. But the cause of derailments such as this one are generally human failure.

Yarddogh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Then how does that interface with the live witness
> account ( on an internet feed from
> "http://cbs2chicago.com/video") in which the guy
> claims structure around the bridge collapsed,
> causing the train to bump-and-bounce over it ??

Said witness is simply misinformed and/or misinterpreted what he saw. The train likely did strike portions of the steel structure of the bridge north of the crossover, but the bridge is reported to have been intact both before and after the derailment. Indeed, Metra trains have already resumed service on at least one track over that same bridge.

By Saturday evening (the day of the crash), the NTSB spokesman was already stating definitively that "the ONLY [emphasis his] thing we are ruling out at this point is bridge failure, and we are sending our bridge specialist back to Texas in the morning." I believe I saw this on one of the clips on the same site you cite.

Three event recorders? One on the locomotive, one on the cab car. Does the third indicate presence of a 2nd cab car in the consist or are there two different ones on the engine?

There were two cab cars in the consist.

David Harrison

Several of the Chicago Tribune photos taken from the north side of the scene (e.g. http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2005-09/19521864.jpg) show that two cars have the red/white striped end, which is used only on cab/control cars. Views from the side show the mid-train car to be coach 7488 (see http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2005-09/19521861.jpg) from the previous order of control cars, and it appears that one of the newer 8500-series control cars was in the lead.

[If the photos do not work as external links or for those not registered with the Tribune, the story and photos can be found easily at http://www.chicagotribune.com .]

Wouldn't the dispatcher alert the engineer as to a crossover move? I know here in Alabama and Georgia,the NS dispatchers usually tell a train they are "going in the siding" well before they get to the place,at least a couple signals away from the actual siding entrance and the signals are place 2 to 3 miles from each other,plenty of time to make adjustments to their speed.

jmlott2002 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Wouldn't the dispatcher alert the engineer as to a
> crossover move?

No, silly. That's what the signals are for!

topper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Train opertion in the derailment area is by signal
> indication.
>
> The various combinations of signal indications at
> the derailment location and on the signals in
> advance of the location, are designed to allow a
> train to have ample time to reduce speed to what
> was prescribed for movement through the turnout.

In this area, would that be one or two signals prior to coming upon the crossover signal? As in, if your last signal was Green (70mph), would one signal be enough to slow to 10mph?

Kennedy