Author Topic: Train Derailment in Terre Haute  (Read 1704 times)

trainmaster53

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 7950
Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« on: May 31, 2019, 07:14:44 PM »
Heard that there was a Train Derailment in Terre Haute this after Noon. Any Details on it.

OSIJ

  • Conductor
  • ****
  • Posts: 157
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2019, 07:21:41 PM »
Four covered hoppers with grain on the ground a 19th and Maple St. No injuries reported.

trainmaster53

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 7950
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2019, 07:41:28 PM »
What is going on with all the Train Derailments that CSX is having all over the Country. Heard that there was one in South Carolina as well.

scraphauler

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 5152
  • Oberfeldwebel Hans Scraphauler
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2019, 08:13:43 PM »
This was not CSX - Decatur and Eastern.  Crap happens
The opinions, views, and incoherent ramblings presented here do not necessarily represent the view point of any company I work for or own,  any logical thinking being, or even me.

trainmaster53

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 7950
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #4 on: May 31, 2019, 08:45:44 PM »
It was posted as a CSX Coal Train that Derailed  in Abbeville SC. We got it from a Reliable Source. The Grain Train in Terre Haute was on the CSX St Louis Main Line Headed for the Decatur and Eastern Railroad.

scraphauler

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 5152
  • Oberfeldwebel Hans Scraphauler
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #5 on: May 31, 2019, 09:06:02 PM »
Terre Haute was a D&E bean train with Bunge cars on yard track along side main line - 3 cars flopped over.  Abbeville was 14 coal cars, 5 on side.  Both fairly minor in grand scheme.  Causes under investigation.  UP had train run past end of siding into side of passing coal train in Wisconsin a couple dats ago.  CSX had a big one in Ohio seemingly caused by machinable failure. NS  has a big sideswipe invoking a remote job. All this week. The list goes on. Just another day in paradise.
The opinions, views, and incoherent ramblings presented here do not necessarily represent the view point of any company I work for or own,  any logical thinking being, or even me.

Rick

  • Mogul
  • *****
  • Posts: 2831
  • Conrail #1
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2019, 08:34:38 AM »
Another remote involved in an accident?  Say it isnít so. 


If there was an accident thread and every accident was reported just between csx and ns, the thread would be updated weekly.  Theses things happen and happen often but when you factor in the number of trains and moves that occur without incident these accidents are actually a small percent. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IndyHog

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 1226
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2019, 10:32:38 AM »
They may be a small percent but many have the potential for personal injury for T&E and other crews and sometimes the general public. Perhaps it's time the unions started keeping track of them, because we know the carriers bury the information.
Meet the new boss, he's the same as the old boss......wait a minute, He's much worse

Rick

  • Mogul
  • *****
  • Posts: 2831
  • Conrail #1
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #8 on: June 01, 2019, 11:23:06 AM »
They may be a small percent but many have the potential for personal injury for T&E and other crews and sometimes the general public. Perhaps it's time the unions started keeping track of them, because we know the carriers bury the information.
Thatís a double edged sword there.  I donít have factual data but Iíll bet a paycheck that these are mostly human error.  This just gives the company another reason to get rid of people.  You will not get rid of all accidents, risk of injury is just part of the job but keeping them at a bare minimum would be ideal. 

Iíd like to see numbers comparing remote engines and engineer/conductor jobs over an equal time period and accidents that occurred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IndyHog

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 1226
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #9 on: June 01, 2019, 11:27:53 AM »
Thatís a double edged sword there.  I donít have factual data but Iíll bet a paycheck that these are mostly human error.  This just gives the company another reason to get rid of people.  You will not get rid of all accidents, risk of injury is just part of the job but keeping them at a bare minimum would be ideal. 

Iíd like to see numbers comparing remote engines and engineer/conductor jobs over an equal time period and accidents that occurred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


If a derailment is caused by human error you can bet your sweet A$$ that someone is going to get charged. You've been around. The carriers want these remotes to work so badly that they cover up their "accidents" just like they cover up injuries.
Meet the new boss, he's the same as the old boss......wait a minute, He's much worse

CSX_CO

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 8080
  • Ok...lets get our stories straight......
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #10 on: June 01, 2019, 12:20:05 PM »
They may be a small percent but many have the potential for personal injury for T&E and other crews and sometimes the general public. Perhaps it's time the unions started keeping track of them, because we know the carriers bury the information.

Thatís a pretty bold statement. If you have proof of a carrier hiding derailments you shouldnít be quiet, and contact the FRA.  Thatís a serious violation of FRA rules.

Otherwise, every derailment/accident I see gets entered into the national ďrailway accident reportingĒ data base.  No matter how minor.

I doubt the unions would want to keep track, might not paint their membership in the best of light...


If a derailment is caused by human error you can bet your sweet A$$ that someone is going to get charged. You've been around. The carriers want these remotes to work so badly that they cover up their "accidents" just like they cover up injuries.

Thatís going to depend on your field supervisors.  Funny thing about derailment cause codes is some allow some flexibility in them.  Know of an example where a newly marked up conductor, with a family I assume, will continue to have a career.  Believe they may have been under ďprobationĒ and not union protections, so could ave been fired on the spot.

Around here, the guys on the ground want them to work so bad too.  But, thatís a topic for another day...

IndyHog

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 1226
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #11 on: June 01, 2019, 12:40:26 PM »
I wasn't talking about "hiding" derailments, sideswipes etc. but not assigning the correct cause to the incident. Railroads have been fined in the past for discouraging or firing employees for reporting injuries.
Meet the new boss, he's the same as the old boss......wait a minute, He's much worse

CSX_CO

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 8080
  • Ok...lets get our stories straight......
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #12 on: June 01, 2019, 12:54:19 PM »
I wasn't talking about "hiding" derailments, sideswipes etc. but not assigning the correct cause to the incident. Railroads have been fined in the past for discouraging or firing employees for reporting injuries.

Thereís your double edged sword again.  I guess taking some consideration of the individualís reputation and work ethic shouldnít be a factor then either.  Then weíre back to your statement that the railroad is just fire happy then.

How about we just agree there is some leeway in cause codes, and that may not necessarily be a bad thing for the ground guys.

Other than the above example of work ethic and reputation, Iíve never seen an accident get mis-reported just because it was a remote job.  Up until the last week, the UTU/SMART said those 1 man remotes jobs are perfectly safe.  Now that the FRA has pulled any crew consist protections, they're suddenly the devil.

When the rules are followed they are perfectly safe. Just like a conventional job.  Considering most remotes are low speed in terminals, most of those incidents are minor in scope.  Itís the big ole headline grabbing mainline derailments, like Cayce, SC a few years ago, that cost the big $. Those are usually conventional crews involved in those.  When human error is involved in those, its catastrophic what can happen.  Most of those you just say the location, and railroaders will know. Cayce. Graniteville. Chatsworth. Chase. Etc.

IndyHog

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 1226
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #13 on: June 01, 2019, 01:40:36 PM »
How about we just agree that remotes are here to stay, are less productive than manned switch engines, cost jobs and help erode the Railroad Retirement system. I would expect Smart/UTU to defend them, it is their baby after all.
Meet the new boss, he's the same as the old boss......wait a minute, He's much worse

CSX_CO

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 8080
  • Ok...lets get our stories straight......
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #14 on: June 01, 2019, 09:19:55 PM »
How about we just agree that remotes are here to stay, are less productive than manned switch engines, cost jobs and help erode the Railroad Retirement system. I would expect Smart/UTU to defend them, it is their baby after all.

I wonít argue your points. Thankfully I saw both sides of the transition.  Conventional jobs with 50 and 60 year old employees, and remotes with the ďred assesĒ.

Those 50 and 60 year olds could go toe to toe with a RCO.  That tells me 1 man remotes arenít necessarily the end all be all.  Unfortunately, in the last decade, the art of running an engine has been lost.

So...since they go toe to toe, itís the argument of productivity vs efficiency.

Conventional jobs can be very productive. 

1 man RCOís can be very efficient.

Look at it from a car per man basis.  Letís say 3 pullers have 6 men conventional, and 3 as 1 man RCO.  We will ďhideĒ the additional U man for the RCOís.

If the 6 total men on the 3 conventional pullers pull 1200 cars.  Thatís 200 cars per man.  Incredibly productive.

Say those 3 RCI JOBS average 200 each too.  Thatís 600 cars.  Thatís incredibly efficient, but not nearly as productive.

So...what are you looking for? Productive or efficient?

Anyway...delving on a subject long removed from the amount of derailments CSX has compared to other carriers.

IndyHog

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 1226
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #15 on: June 01, 2019, 11:05:54 PM »
Agreed.  All railroads have derailments. Seems like a cost of doing business almost. It's just like grade crossing accidents. They happen all the time, every day somewhere.
Meet the new boss, he's the same as the old boss......wait a minute, He's much worse

hytwr1

  • Chief Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 633
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #16 on: June 02, 2019, 02:13:04 PM »
Unfortunately, in the last decade, the art of running an engine has been lost.

Ain't that the truth. Heck some guys can't even get whistle signals right anymore. Somebody working Terre Haute uses two shorts for everything forward backup doesn't matter. Drives me nuts when I hear two shorts and see the train back up!

Power braking is a lost art on some too.

There's still a couple guys who run the St Louis line who will boogie right into town at 40 and stand on the brakes. Most are down to 25 before the hit the Haleys...

Lots of old stuff lost over the last few years...

Rick

  • Mogul
  • *****
  • Posts: 2831
  • Conrail #1
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #17 on: June 02, 2019, 04:00:17 PM »
Ain't that the truth. Heck some guys can't even get whistle signals right anymore. Somebody working Terre Haute uses two shorts for everything forward backup doesn't matter. Drives me nuts when I hear two shorts and see the train back up!

Power braking is a lost art on some too.

There's still a couple guys who run the St Louis line who will boogie right into town at 40 and stand on the brakes. Most are down to 25 before the hit the Haleys...

Lots of old stuff lost over the last few years...
Two shorts is used to acknowledge the engineer understands what he was told to do whether itís forward or reverse after heís acknowledged over the radio if thatís how it was received.  Some guys do that some donít and prefer just to talk on the radio.  Sometimes itís a response to hand signals just to let the conductor know heís received and to let others around know heís about to start moving.  At night in a yard itís helpful especially if the air isnít setup throughout the train.  If you can hear the brakes release then thereís a good chance that cut of cars is getting ready to move.  If you hear the horn then you should be looking to see whoís getting ready to move. 

As for the air, csx maybe different but first course of action to slowing a train is dynamic on NS.  There are of course exceptions to this rule.  This is for line of road too.  Air is always used when in a yard.  Engineers can be written up for improper use of brakes in these situations.  Iím not sure if itís US wide but I understand conrail wasnít as critical of train handling so air was used more frequently.  Things changed when ns took over as I understand it when it comes to slowing or stopping.  Iíve heard stories of old heads that all it took was one practice stop/slowing with the air to see how the train sets up and then they were Golden the whole trip.  There was one guy that no matter what train it was he could stop so the front steps where right at a cone.  No jockeying of the throttle, no running release, just gradual application of the air.  Even now, depending on length, tonnage, speed and terrain I believe once you go past first service you have to bring the train to a stop.  There are rules for a running release.  Thereís an ns engineer on here so he can clarify this if I donít have the exact information on that.  A you better have job insurance if you have to dump the train. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CSX_CO

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 8080
  • Ok...lets get our stories straight......
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #18 on: June 02, 2019, 06:15:17 PM »
The reason the old heads were so good with air is because they didnít have dynamic brakes for much of their career.  That, it they didnít work. That, or they werenít nearly as good as theyíve gotten in the last 20 years.  An AC6000 had such good dynamic brakes you wouldnít have to touch the air.

Rick

  • Mogul
  • *****
  • Posts: 2831
  • Conrail #1
Re: Train Derailment in Terre Haute
« Reply #19 on: June 02, 2019, 06:58:17 PM »
The reason the old heads were so good with air is because they didnít have dynamic brakes for much of their career.  That, it they didnít work. That, or they werenít nearly as good as theyíve gotten in the last 20 years.  An AC6000 had such good dynamic brakes you wouldnít have to touch the air.
I never even thought of that.  I know engineers love the newer ACís and their dynamics.  There are some dc motors with pretty decent dynamics still around but you are right in that many trips the air is never used. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk