Nostalgia & History > UP Rear End-Collision in 1980 - 118 MPH?

While perusing some old FRA accident reports, I came across this one from 1980 - a runaway rear-end collision on UP at Kelso, CA in 1980. What caught my attention was the apparent speed of the runaway train: 118 MPH!

I dug through some old magazines and found this brief account in CTC Board: "(The incident) occurred on November 17 near Kelso, CA... when a westbound work train with its crew aboard somehow ran away downhill from Cima to Kelso and rear-ended the Westbound "VAN" train that was trying to outrun the work train. Three crewmen were killed in the accident that closed the mainline for about 12 hours. Killed were the engineer and the head brakeman on the work train and the conductor on the "VAN"... the "VAN" had encountered engine problems and was just getting underway again when the work train hit it at a reported 100+ mph."

If the VAN was "just getting underway" it must have had time to speed up to 80 MPH (per the accident report) before being struck. I can't imagine a more horrific incident for the crews involved. Does anyone remember this one?

---

The work train was a tie train and there was an aerial picture of the incident in the L.A. Times which looked like a box of tooth picks had been scattered all over the area. From what I understand, the "van" train was told to speed up to get away from the tie train but tripped the overspeed which caused the train to go into a penalty brake application which the engineer tried to recover from but the train slowed down too much and was rear ended.
The rear brakeman on the van train happened to be on the first switch crew I had ever work with in Los Angeles two years earlier. I ran into him several years after the accident and he was still walking with canes and had been pretty banged up in the collision. He didn't elaborate much on the incident but did say that he and the conductor had wrapped themselves up in caboose pads (foam cushions that were used throughout the caboose to sit or lay on) before the tie train struck them.-BMT

those 2 guys are better men then me to stay with the train ...knowing that work train was barreling at them at high rate of speed i have to wonder why they stayed with the Van train ....i would've leaped off that sucker as soon as a safe speed was attained to jump off and watched the mayhem from afar either when they stopped for the penalty or when they knew it was inevitable to outrun the work train ..as for the work train crew ...their fate was doomed trying to corral the train not being being able to jump at that speed...for the brakeman to even survive that incident was a miracle in itself ..albeit with life altering injuries...

Bill,

There is a very complete write-up of the incident in Mark Hemphill's book on the LA&SL. IIRC, the VAN was going in excess of 80mph when it was struck by the runaway tie train.

The UP was cited for multiple bad practices. In particular, the tie gons were very un-roadworthy.

This was not the first modern-era runaway on Cima Hill. In the 1960s, an unmanned Cima ore train got away and was a total loss.

Best regards,

Rob L.

TrackTraveler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...i would've
> leaped off that sucker as soon as a safe speed was
> attained to jump off and watched the mayhem from
> afar either when they stopped for the penalty or
> when they knew it was inevitable to outrun the
> work train.

You are assuming the VAN slowed enough for the crew to safely jump off. My understanding is that is never slowed enough for that. It was a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation for those guys. Let me tell you, try jumping off a train at even 15MPH and see how well you do. I did once, in the dark, but that's a story for another time. Suffice it to say, it isn't as easy a decision as you might think. You don't have much time to weigh your chances when your choices are one hopeless thing over another.

Hello

When I hired out in las vegas they till you about that Rear end-collision. Having work Cima hill you really watch what you are doing going down the hill.

Here is a link to the 1997 runaway report. I know the hoghead on this runway it's very intrusting to talk to him about it.

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1998/RAR9801.pdf


Chris

Wow, that's at least three major runaways on one grade in recent years. Perhaps second only to Cajon in dangerous California grades?

I was working in the Salt Lake depot public relations office when I alerted to the runaway. The dispatcher's office was next door to the depot. They dispatched the railroad from Salt Lake to LA in those days. As I recall the whole incident from start to finish took 11 minutes. I remember all of us talking about what we would do if caught in the same situation. JEB

rob_l Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bill,
>
> There is a very complete write-up of the incident
> in Mark Hemphill's book on the LA&SL. IIRC, the
> VAN was going in excess of 80mph when it was
> struck by the runaway tie train.
>
> The UP was cited for multiple bad practices. In
> particular, the tie gons were very un-roadworthy.
>
> This was not the first modern-era runaway on Cima
> Hill. In the 1960s, an unmanned Cima ore train got
> away and was a total loss.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rob L.

Thought there was a Soda Ash train that ran away on Cima Hill in the 90s. Maybe they recovered the train?

trainjunkie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> You are assuming the VAN slowed enough for the
> crew to safely jump off. My understanding is that
> is never slowed enough for that. It was a "damned
> if you do, damned if you don't" situation for
> those guys. Let me tell you, try jumping off a
> train at even 15MPH and see how well you do. I did
> once, in the dark, but that's a story for another
> time. Suffice it to say, it isn't as easy a
> decision as you might think. You don't have much
> time to weigh your chances when your choices are
> one hopeless thing over another.


UPNW2-1083 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
From what I
> understand, the "van" train was told to speed up
> to get away from the tie train but tripped the
> overspeed which caused the train to go into a
> penalty brake application which the engineer tried
> to recover from but the train slowed down too much
> and was rear ended.

which brings up another question ...doesn't the train have to come to a complete stop after an overspeed penalty...and wait 15 seconds and restart ???...

i didn't see and read the part of trainjunkies post of try jumping off of a moving train ...back in my early railroad career in the mid 70's ...stupid as it may be cuz kids will be kids ..i consider 20 still a kid..we were all young and stupid at that time ... for what reason i can't recall...though lunch and a chaser sounds right ...we had to climb over a train making a pickup of empty pig flats off the 0 track..well you guessed it ...as soon as we got on this guy starts moving and man did he pick up speed quick...we could've rode the train out until he reversed and made the coupling to his train ...but noooooo...somebody had the bright idea lets jump off ...so we did ...the first guy jumps ..we all followed ...i landed in the arms of guy who landed and rolled and was on his back ... of course afterwards we couldn't believe how fast this guy was going just to make a pickup..estimate was about 15-20...we were all in a little bit of a WOW !!!!!!! moment but we weren't in a life or death situation either ..and you're right it wouldn't be an easy decision but with that scenario i still stand by my previous statement of jumping..im going for it

If I remember correctly, it was a DD40AX that was leading the VAN train that tripped the overspeed control trying to get away.

Gary

Hello

This is a little more on it from "RAILWAYS OF AUSTRALIA NETWORK MAGAZINE".

http://www.trainweb.org/mystation/CIMA.txt

Chris

TrackTraveler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> which brings up another question ...doesn't the
> train have to come to a complete stop after an
> overspeed penalty...and wait 15 seconds and
> restart ???...

In this case the VAN slowed to 68MPH before the overspeed reset. WAY too fast to consider jumping.

Wow! Look at the photos on page 20, 21 and 22 in sequence from that PDF file. It really tells a human factors engineering story. I'm thinking the guys that designed the desktop controls never thought the hogger would want to sit with his legs like that, but such is about as natural as they come. Design engineering ain't all in equations. My human factors engineer wife had quite a start when she saw the pictures.

- Kit


Cjcheely Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hello
>
> When I hired out in las vegas they till you about
> that Rear end-collision. Having work Cima hill you
> really watch what you are doing going down the
> hill.
>
> Here is a link to the 1997 runaway report. I know
> the hoghead on this runway it's very intrusting to
> talk to him about it.
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1998/RAR9801.pdf
>
>
> Chris

Kit Courter
Menefee, CA
LunarLight Photography

It made a major difference in power assignments as the tie trains received at least 2 six axle units
with operative dynamics and ballast trains a minimum of three.

WAF Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thought there was a Soda Ash train that ran away
> on Cima Hill in the 90s. Maybe they recovered the
> train?

Yes there was. The train piled up at the west end of the siding, fortunately the engines made it through and the crew were okay. In that incident, they had an SD60 on the point and at that time they had the engine kill switch located down on the left side of the desk top console, which was just a push button. The engineer went to cross his legs and accidentally hit the switch with his shoe, killing not only the lead engine but the entire consist. They were coming up to the west end of the siding in dynamic braking and of course lost it when the units shut down. I don't remember how many cars derailed but they accordioned and the wreck was contained in a relatively small area. After that they started placing a metal bar in front of the switch so that it couldn't be pressed accidentally, but eventually moved the switches to the overhead console near the radio and head end box are.-BMT

It could be. Would have to check Hemphill's book to be sure. The FRA report lists the VAN as the "x9646" West but that must be a typo, as UP didn't have a locomotive numbered 9646. Could have been the "6946" which would be the Centennial that is now on display in Portola...


SN711 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If I remember correctly, it was a DD40AX that was
> leading the VAN train that tripped the overspeed
> control trying to get away.
>
> Gary

trainjunkie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TrackTraveler Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> In this case the VAN slowed to 68MPH before the
> overspeed reset. WAY too fast to consider jumping.


i would concur way too fast to jump and the alternative is getting slammed by a train doing a 100mph or better ...(i hate to use the ananolgy cuz it reminds of watching the vids of the WTC)..like jumping from a burning building to escape the more torturous slow roasting of the intense heat

i know in ATC like the cab signal territory on the NEC...when a speed penalty is assesed the train comes to a complete stop before resetting.....if the alarm is not acknowledges in 15 seconds ...touching something metal to complete a circuit so the dead man doesn't activate...or after passing a signal in excess of the indication if the speed is not reduced to the speed of the indication withinin 15 seconds the penalty is assesed

From Hemphill's book (in turn from NTSB report):

"Shortly before 2pm Nov. 17, 1980, Extra 8044 West with unit 6946 on the point, the VAN, passed Extra 3119 West, the tie train (20 bulkhead flats of ties and a caboose), at Cima. Extra 3119 west stopped in the north siding at Cima to set retainers because the dynamic brake on SD40-2 3119 was not working. As it turned out, most of the tie cars did not have working brakes, so the retainers were useless. Also, the weight of the train reported to the engineer was grossly underestimated.

At 229pm, Extra 3119 West, moving at about 118 mph, caught the VAN, moving at about 85 mph (overspeed feature had been interrupted after it deployed the first time) at about MP 230.6, five miles west of Kelso. Four separate episodes of collision and derailment ensued. SD40-2 3119, the VAN's caboose and 23 freight cars were destroyed, including the twenty tie loads plus three loaded auto racks on the rear of the VAN. Rear end crew of the VAN and head end crew of the tie extra were killed."

Best regards,

Rob L.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/10 15:38 by rob_l.

"Weight of the train was grossly under-estimated.." Now where have we heard that one before? ( Hint.. May, 1989.. Cajon Pass..SP)