Eastern Railroad Discussion > B&OCT Failure of gates to activate at 103rd St. Chicago

The bewitching Megan Hickey at the scene along CSXT's B&OCT on the southwest side of Chicago.

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/01/02/train-crossing-warning-signal-failure-west-beverly/

Not nearly as good as last weeks Metra video footage.
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,4694841,page=1

All Megan has to work with is a smart phone photo.
If you blow the picture up really, really, large you can make out the gates standing straight up on both sides of the tracks.
CSXT checked it out and watched the crossing for 70 hours.  Nothing found wrong. 

Move along folks, nothing to worry about here, move along.................

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/19 05:52 by Englewood.

So, we are going to get a thread every time there is an activation failure?

Posted from iPhone

sure, why not?  this is a RAILROAD DISCUSSION forum..........

66

Right from the article:
"A CSX spokesperson says they were alerted on Friday and immediately sent out a crew and flagmen to stand at the crossing. They remained at the location for 70 hours and were unable to duplicate the activation failure. CSX says they’re conducting a thorough investigation that will be submitted to the Federal Railroad Administration."

This is how the other railroad should have responded with appropriate details to that specific situation.
Interesting that the train did not trigger the gates and signals even while occupying the island circuit over the crossing itself.
Nothing worse than having a glitch you cannot duplicate to make sure you have the right fix in place.
 

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, we are going to get a thread every time there
> is an activation failure?
>
> Posted from iPhone

Perhaps.

At least I was good enough to put the topic in the subject line so that those of you who are not interested in grade crossing
safety can skip over it.  I don't know how TO works for others but the version I have allows me to skip over threads I do not
wish to read.  If the webmaster has a requirement that threads must be peer reviewed before posting I will gladly submit but
I am unaware of any such requirement.

To some on TO this might be more interesting than another picture of the latest Heritage unit pulling a train through the woods
or a 40+ year old freight engine pulling a sad looking, broken down Amtrak engine.

I was raised in the railroad when the rule was :"Safety is of the first importance in the discharge of duty"
If I see something that is NOT SAFE I  am going to draw attention to it.

Sorry if I offend those in the business who think everything is roses.

The public and railroad employees are all put in jeopardy when the signal system is compromised.

 

kevink Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is how the other railroad should have responded with appropriate details to that specific situation.

"Six weeks ago we had an activation failure due to an electrical short at a switch. Additional safety measures were immediately put in place. The problem was resolved later that day."

Sorry if that doesn't fit the "all railroads are bad" narrative.

Englewood Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Typhoon Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So, we are going to get a thread every time
> there
> > is an activation failure?
> >
> > Posted from iPhone
>
> Perhaps.
>
> At least I was good enough to put the topic in the
> subject line so that those of you who are not
> interested in grade crossing
> safety can skip over it.  I don't know how TO
> works for others but the version I have allows me
> to skip over threads I do not
> wish to read.  If the webmaster has a requirement
> that threads must be peer reviewed before posting
> I will gladly submit but
> I am unaware of any such requirement.


I watched a poor kid get cyber bullied all last year on this very forum because people didn’t like his posts.  So I thought pointing out useless threads was the way TO operates.  If that is not the case I will gladly stop.  

>
> To some on TO this might be more interesting than
> another picture of the latest Heritage unit
> pulling a train through the woods
> or a 40+ year old freight engine pulling a sad
> looking, broken down Amtrak engine.
>
> I was raised in the railroad when the rule was
> :"Safety is of the first importance in the
> discharge of duty"
> If I see something that is NOT SAFE I  am going
> to draw attention to it.

I am sure the TO readership will make sure that all crossing protection is working as intended.  The majority are in a position to fix it...(eye roll). The ones that truly are in that position no doubt do their best.  

>
> Sorry if I offend those in the business who think
> everything is roses.

Some of us understand that things built by humans infrequently fail.  It is life, not roses.  One would think if you had as much time on the railroad as you claim you would have learned that. 

>
> The public and railroad employees are all put in
> jeopardy when the signal system is compromised.
>
Well duh.  We also don’t know from the photo in the linked story if the crossing had been flagged by the train.  It is possible there are fuses lit in front of the cars.  But that thought doesn’t fit the “railroads are evil” agenda.  



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/19 10:19 by Typhoon.

justalurker66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Six weeks ago we had an activation failure due to
> an electrical short at a switch. Additional safety
> measures were immediately put in place. The
> problem was resolved later that day."
>
> Sorry if that doesn't fit the "all railroads are
> bad" narrative.

As I recall, that was not the initial explanation. At no time did I ever say all railroads are bad or even that particular railroad. 

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I watched a poor kid get cyber bullied all last
> year on this very forum because people didn’t
> like his posts.  So I thought pointing out
> useless threads was the way TO operates.  If that
> is not the case I will gladly stop. 

It's only the way some posters operate and it says more about them than it does the kid.

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am sure the TO readership will make sure that
> all crossing protection is working as intended.
>  The majority are in a position to fix it...(eye
> roll). The ones that truly are in that position no
> doubt do their best.  

You'll be happy to know that twice in the past year I have called the handy 1-800 number at a crossing to report signals or gates that were clearly malfunctioning. One was pretty interesting in that the gate counterweight was clearly messed up as the gate fell with such speed that actually hit and left marks in the asphalt pavement. In both cases, the person answering the phone asked if I could stick around until the signal maintainers arrived to describe what I had seen. Both signal maintainers were grateful for the added information.

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Some of us understand that things built by humans
> infrequently fail.  It is life, not roses. 

On that we agree!

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, we are going to get a thread every time there
> is an activation failure?
>
> Posted from iPhone

In all honesty, I have only started hearing about these recently and didn't even think it was an issue. And hearing about two within a month is also surprising to me. I have heard and seen numerous times where gates get stuck in the down position after a train clears a crossing, but never stay off when a train comes through. Apparently it happens more than I realized.

Maintainers and other railroad employees:

In this particular case could the gates have been down and lights flashing when the head end approached and crossed the road, followed by the gates raising and the lights switching off as the rest of the train continued through the crossing?

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, we are going to get a thread every time there
> is an activation failure?
>
> Posted from iPhone

So what if we do? You don't have to open it if you aren't interested, it isn't like the title isn't obvious.

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I watched a poor kid get cyber bullied all last
> year on this very forum because people didn’t
> like his posts.  So I thought pointing out
> useless threads was the way TO operates.  If that
> is not the case I will gladly stop.  

So pointing out what you think is a "useless" thread is
somehow different than what people did to that kid because
some people didn't like his posts?  Not to worry, I didn't think
I was being cyber bullied.  No snowflakes here to melt.


> I am sure the TO readership will make sure that
> all crossing protection is working as intended.
>  The majority are in a position to fix it...(eye
> roll). The ones that truly are in that position no
> doubt do their best.  

I know that there are many here on TO that are far more educated than I am.
Also many that hold, or have held, professional positions in engineering, airlines, finance, etc.
They may be quite knowledgeable in their professions but perhaps all they know about railroading
is what they read in fan material and what they see in the media.  When the opportunity arises I 
like to point out the reality or in this case the extreme seriousness in what the media and some fans
are happy to gloss over.  

Quite often on TO I read about an auto being struck by a train. Some fan will begin to talk about
a Darwin award.  When I read a thread about a train passing a stop signal and colliding with another train some fan will demand
legal action against the crew.  I am just drawing attention to the fact that railroad signal devices can fail if they were not 
designed, installed, tested and maintained properly.  

Another thing to consider. Two incidents, that should never happen, have occurred in time and geographical
proximity.  Could there be vandalism, sabotage or hacking of devices????  Fans are the eyes and ears of the railroad in some cases.
They would probably spot a trend before any of the individual railroads would.

> Some of us understand that things built by humans
> infrequently fail.  It is life, not roses.

So, what is your acceptable failure rate for crossing warning devices not working
when they should ?  To make it clear, I am not talking about gates being down when there
is no train but gates being up when a train is entering the crossing.

So what is your acceptable failure rate?  1%, .01% .001% or ZERO ?

Failure of crossing warning devices to activate is, to me, the same as a false clear signal.
False clears are another item railroad management would prefer not to talk about. 

 One
> would think if you had as much time on the
> railroad as you claim you would have learned
> that. 

I kept learning until the day I retired.  One thing I learned is that the signal system
will not have integrity unless those charged with its maintenance also have integrity.
Just sitting here typing I can recall five times when trains got by a red signal and investigation
developed there were extenuating circumstances created by or allowed to continue by the signal department.
Lives, property and careers put in jeopardy by the department whose favorite phrase is "we inspected everything,
it all checked out and nothing wrong was found".  I realize that the overwhelming majority of railroads are not like
that but when I hear of the recent incidents it makes me begin to wonder.

> Well duh.  We also don’t know from the photo in
> the linked story if the crossing had been flagged
> by the train.  It is possible there are fuses lit
> in front of the cars.  But that thought doesn’t
> fit the “railroads are evil” agenda.  

Well, duh, we DO KNOW from the story that "CSXT confirms that the warning signal failed to operate
as a train was coming through the crossing"  CSXT had employees at the crossing watching for 
subsequent failure for SEVENTY hours. After 70 hours they still could not find anything wrong.  So using your theory
that the pictured train had flagged the crossing, CSXT was already aware of a problem and after 70 hours they could 
not find a problem.

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/19 21:48 by Englewood.

Englewood Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Well, duh, we DO KNOW from the story that "CSXT
> confirms that the warning signal failed to operate
> as a train was coming through the crossing" 
> CSXT had employees at the crossing watching for 
> subsequent failure for SEVENTY hours. After 70
> hours they still could not find anything wrong. 
> So using your theory that the pictured train had flagged the crossing,
> CSXT was already aware of a problem and after 70 hours they could 
> not find a problem.
>

Good point.  If the crossing was flagged with fusees at the time the photograph was taken, then that time was within the 70 hour window when CSX was researching the problem.  Clearly when the photograph was taken there was a problem.  But CSX says they couldn't find a problem.  The logic doesn't support the possibility that the crossing was appropriately flagged before the pictured train entered.

As a railfan, I have witnessed a freight train moving at track speed (50 mph) through a grade crossing which didn't activate until the train occupied the crossing, and I have been present when a freight train crew reported a false clear signal with an opposing passenger train approaching.  As a dispatcher, I witnessed a signal that was lined repeatedly into a maintenance blue blocked track segment.  All of these were scary situations, and all were just one step away from deadly situations.  I don't accept the "oh well, signal stuff fails sometimes" explanation.  There are FRA files full of reports of false clear signals that the railroads self-reported with the cause being insufficient testing when signal modifications were made.   

DirtyShirt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>  As a dispatcher, I witnessed a
> signal that was lined repeatedly into a
> maintenance blue blocked track segment.

BN Seattle had a block between control points that could be independently operated by two dispatcher districts. It was possible for one to block and stick out a permit and the other to line a train into it (we found out the hard way). The "fix" was a sign on both consoles (do you call all electronic CTC a machine?) stating "caution dual control." That was it.

Each BN Seattle position had a permanently bound journal book for signal failure reports. We were having a lot of false clear incidents in which signals lined that the dispatcher didn't call. The signal department repeatedly stated, effectively, that it wasn't happening. They "modernized" reporting by replacing the journal book with a loose leaf notebook. Each morning a CTC technician (signal maintainer) would collect the accumulated signal failure forms. The books were kept empty of reports (one maintainer had the audacity to read through them, then crumple them and throw them in the can while one of us was looking). One day, a supervisor discovered that I was writing all of the signal failures on the trainsheet. There was a big deal over that as I was instructed to never write such things on the trainsheet.

There was the repeatedly reported false clear at Ferndale that finally became a big deal when an engineer on a south man became suspicious because what he was hearing on the radio didn't seem to match the clear signal he got in the block before Ferndale. He got stopped and there they were, headlight to headlight with one of them having a green signal. (train order territory, yard limits, the south man was through and the other was switching, putting their train together).

There was the night that I called a signal maintainer for the interlocking at Cut Bank MT. The regular man was off, the regular relief wasn't available, so I got the third out maintainer on the list. After he got there and looked in the bungalow, he called me on the (not recorded) side phone. The regular maintainer wasn't very good, which was common knowledge. He was "fixing" problems by jumpering circuits until the problem went away. There was so much of it in the bungalow that this maintainer couldn't figure out what had been done. The supervisor couldn't reconcile the prints with what was visible. They had to first put the bungalow back to the state the plans described, then fix the problems. It was a long night.

I remember the posters that were placed in SP Bungalows in 1972 after the El Monte collision, a picture of the tipped relay that caused the collision (relays and searchlight signals depend upon gravity to fail safe), instructing signal maintainers to never do this. He was upset that the dispatcher wouldn't let him put the switch on hand throw to test it. He would surely be done before a train came. He hid taking the switch off power from the dispatcher by tilting the relay that detects switch position and went to work. It wasn't our district, but I remember the distraught officials talking about who was going to notify the families.

>  All of
> these were scary situations, and all were just
> one step away from deadly situations.  I don't
> accept the "oh well, signal stuff fails sometimes"
> explanation. 

Maybe train dispatchers are even more sensitive to signal failures than others because they experience more of them. They have a far greater chance of encountering such failures than T&E folks, for example.

I'm certainly not condemning signal department folks in general (I've worked with and learned from a lot of super-professional folks), just the screwups...or the screwup bosses. I think probably Englewood has the same point of view.

TAW

In 1992, a 7 year old girl was walking to church with her Grandma, with whom she lived for a short time. Grandma always was a brisk walker for her size but this spirited, overly aware little girl made for a tough match. Riverton Wy. was small back then. The most commotion was the train that ran through once or twice a day. Which if you lived there, you never even noticed. 

On this particular day the young girl beat her Grandma to the crossing when she realized the train was nearing and cars were still zooming over the tracks. There was no traffic light there. Only flashing lights and the drop arms that helped prevent crossing. 
The girl noticed they hadn't dropped and the train seemed, at this point, dangersously close. She ran into traffic and started waving her arms, screaming for them to stop! Putting herself in eminent danger. Unable to hear her grandmother's screams over the train and her own pleading, cars slammed on their breaks and people were terrified. Just then the ding, ding, ding came from behind her and the red lights began reflecting off the small lot of cars. The arms lowered as the train safely passed. No one hurt, no damage done that the eye could see but in that moment I realized, I'd never shake this feeling. I'd never not feel like someone needed me. I never stop watching or feeling fear of losing someone I care about. The pain of the ones I've lost has transformed into some sort of toxic guilt and my heart, my heart. . . 

Grandma told me that day as she had done before and done many times after, 'you can't save the world!". I never believed her but now I can barely save myself and no one knows more then you. You reading this now. 

Thanks for reading!