Passenger Trains > NTSB issues new guidance re: Cayce SC and LIRR

The Wall Street Journal reports that the National Transportation Safety Board has issued an unusual guidance prior to the completion of investigations into the Cayce SC crash of the Silver Star, and the death of a Long Island Rail Road track worker. Usually the NTSB waits until the completion of an investigation unless it believes an immediate warning is needed.

NTSB has asked FRA to require lower speed limits for situations where track warning systems have been disabled. The FRA said it will review the request.

In the LIRR case, a track worker was killed as four employees walked single file along an active track. Spotting a train, one stepped to another track where he was struck and killed. Others continued walking on the active track. One maintained that he was safer on an active track. Although LIRR has protocols and requires employees to identify safe spaces for escape, surviving employees did not recall guidance on this subject. NTSB observed that LIRR may be "normalizing" non-compliance with safe regulations.

Copy of the entire request ;-)

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,4488516

Not "unusual."

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

59 mph is a lower speed limit when the signal system has been suspended. Hopefully they will bin the request, otherwise any signal suspension will pretty much require rail service to be bustituted. Lets not forget that even the NEC sees problems with signal power and/or dispatch center outages. Our rail system should be resilient and encouraged to keep operating in adverse conditions.

i have dispatched during the suspension of a signal system and been a conductor on a train during the suspension of a signal system.

from what i remember, EVERYBODY was more alert as there was more radio communication than normal......

66

goneon66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i have dispatched during the suspension of a
> signal system and been a conductor on a train
> during the suspension of a signal system.
>
> from what i remember, EVERYBODY was more alert as
> there was more radio communication than
> normal......
>
> 66

Which is why we need to patiently wait for the full final NTSB report on exactly what all the factors are that led to the tragic accident in SC. Major accidents are rarely, if ever, the result of only one single error.

mbrotzman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 59 mph is a lower speed limit when the signal
> system has been suspended. Hopefully they will
> bin the request, otherwise any signal suspension
> will pretty much require rail service to be
> bustituted. Lets not forget that even the NEC
> sees problems with signal power and/or dispatch
> center outages. Our rail system should be
> resilient and encouraged to keep operating in
> adverse conditions.



Yes.

The NEC in NJ etc routinely drops max speeds when temps are high (the wires sag), and does just fine.

mbrotzman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 59 mph is a lower speed limit when the signal
> system has been suspended. Hopefully they will
> bin the request, otherwise any signal suspension
> will pretty much require rail service to be
> bustituted.

Basically, The request is that after any mainline switch is operated during a signal suspension the next train through should be instructed to verify that it's lined for them before operating over it. How will that lead to bustitution? How is that request so much to bear that it will bring the entire railroad to its knees? After (at least) two deaths how are the lives lost not worth at least considering asking trains to slow down and verify the position of switches after they've been used?

Honestly you sound like a Class 1 CEO right now.