Doesnt make sense to me why he was even on the same rail as the contractors working.. he hadnt called his mile markers or anything and usually everyone is aware of work being taken place.. but also American Railways work alot different then Canadian, yous have 4-5 different rail companys or more using the same rail..
Why is the train and maintenance vehicle on the same track? The maintenance vehicle has required time before the next train. Where was the dispatcher telling there was a maintenance vehicle ahead of the train? 1:43
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had the kind of protection you describe. However, because the track was technically not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by a generic, universal rule that is common to all railyards that requires trains to move slowly enough that they can be stopped within half the range of vision.
@@sturmovik1274 If a locomotive is supposed to be on a track ,all else has lesser priority. A train, moving at 30MPH will take up to one mile to stop with full brake activation. Even on branch lines all train orders must indicate maintenance crews location and explosive warning detonators placed on the rails at a distance sufficient to warn any driver. Unfortunately those commenting are confusing automobile think with rail reality. I suspect the driver was a scapegoat so the actual company can escape their responsibilities for not following normal safety practice in place for 130 years.
As my comment mentions, the NTSB report describes at least three levels of protection that failed. That said: 1: It is common for trains to be operated through work zones, at restricted speed and coordinating with the work crews by radio. 2: I know well how long trains need to stop. The limit here was 10, and the train was doing 19. 3: This was not a branch line; it was what is called other-than-main. Other-than-main is a general category of short, low-speed track. It's the lowest and slowest track there is. Usually, as in this case, it is within a yard and therefore governed by yard operating rules. These rules, among other restrictions, require trains to be able to stop within half the distance that the crew can see and not exceed 20 mph. The local limit may be lower, as it was in this case. 4: Detonators are almost unused nowadays, even on smaller local lines. Train orders haven't been called that in 40 years. Nowadays information like this is assembled into bulletins and given to the engineer and conductor at the start of their shift. 5: The person who drives the train is not the driver. He/she is the engineer. 6: Yes, I agree that the engineer/conductor will likely be scapegoated. Everyone I know who works for the RRs says that safety has been as bad as it's ever been these last few years, and individual employees are scapegoated.@@Mercmad
A Train Engineer is not allowed to use a cell phone while opperating the train. My nephew told me that and he is a Train Engineer. They tell you on day one.
Probably put in place after the 2008 Chatsworth, California crash between a passenger train and a freighter, the engineers in both trains were both texting just before the crash, 25 killed.
@@thud9797 That is correct, that particular crash banned any usage of personal electronic items while on the job including video cameras unless it is to report or document a safety hazard. This is why it's rare to find modern cab ride footage (compared to in the past), however there are a few people that still ignore that rule, and then you get the occasional cool cab ride video on RUclips every now and then, haha
Why was the track not called out of service and switches thrown to route to the next track? IF a contractor is working on a line they should have no trains on that line and cordination to alternate trains and work. There is a lot more failures on this than the guy on the phone.
I'd say they were a welding crew or similar and he was following up dousing any potential spot fires?? He crashed into the gang because he was on his phone. Was probably supposed to be following at a distance.
Notice how he was described as "former" train driver. He was fired right away, the train company's name was never mentioned. The track should have been closed, you are absolutely right. Freeway repairs always have a CHP car, with lights on to warn drivers, but having an extra pair of eyes a mile up the track would mean the unnamed train company would have to PAY FOR IT. A worker paid with his life, the the driver goes to prison. Shit rolls downhill & Greed kills again.
True. The driver SHOULDNT have been on the phone but the OTHER breaches of safety should be pointed at the management who allowed this BS accident to happen?? Was the driver even told of the work ahead?? Cmon NSTB!!! You can do BETTER than this!!
From my understanding, at least here in Upstate New york, dispatch is always notified when there's track crew working so that the engineers can be aware that somebody is on the tracks, but still no excuse for this man's negligence
Correct on both counts, nationwide. There are detailed procedures that would have been followed to protect the maintenance-of-way crews. The exact procedures vary by the type of work being done, but if those procedures were followed you are correct that ultimate responsibility lies with the train crew. It's interesting, though, that they didn't charge the conductor. That's the other guy on the engine and he is, administratively and legally, responsible for the train. The engineer actually drives (most of the time), but the conductor is responsible for keeping the engineer alert and in compliance with rules/law.
There's a thing called a 'Form B" that both the engineer and the conductor on this train should have known about before beginning work. It's essentially a form establishing working limits for track workers/crews. They should have also had physical protection up such as red/yellow board warning the train crew to stop as well as portable derails set in place which do exactly that-derail the train before it can reach the workers. If there's a switch between them, that would be lined and locked as well to keep the train out of their work zone.
Per the NTSB report: -The work crew thought they were protected by track authority. However, since they were on/fouling other-than-main, they were only protected by yard-limit rules. The report didn't say how that misunderstanding occurred. -At the time of the accident, the work crew had completed work at that location and had removed their portable derails before removing their equipment. -The engineer, at least, was working his second train of the day. On starting his tour he had been given bulletins for the accident territory. These bulletins, about 8 hours old at the time of the accident, did not mention any work in that area. The report did not mention whether he received new bulletins when he got on the second train. -Another commenter says the work crew had removed devices which should have given 25 seconds warning of an approaching train, but the NTSB report doesn't mention any such devices.@@po9318
@@eliyahtherailfanner131 Meaning thathengineer should have received Track Notices abouthe maintenance and location. Also,ften a yellow *[__]* sign a certain distance (1/2 mile?) before the work area so that train could be gradually slowed and be able to stop or continue at 5 mph through the work zone.
@@robertgift Was it stated somewhere that there was no signs along the way? He didn't hit the brakes until after contact with the backhoe, so he obviously wasn't paying attention.
@@soleinspector5511 When the mee-mool lights *(o)T(o)* started operating, they knew thathey had 25 seconds before train arrival. Ample time to gethe backhoe out ofoul.
Per the NTSB report: -The contractors believed they were protected by track authority (meaning the dispatcher would have known about them and advised all trains); however, since they were working on other-than-main track, they were only protected by yard-limit rules (meaning a general speed limit of 20 mph or less; the train was doing 19 at impact). The report didn't say how that misunderstanding occurred. -The contractors had finished their work at that location, and had removed their portable derails before clearing their equipment. -The engineer's daily bulletin, about 7 hours old, did not list any work at that location -The engineer was ultimately at fault.
I'm curious, did the engineer know there was maintenance equipment on his track? Seems to me if he knew he might have paid more attention. Oh he's dead wrong for his behavior, but did other facts not in evidence help the process of someone dying?
Irrelevant and immaterial. As the Operator, he is responsible. This is why, as a Private First Class driving a General, I had the balls to tell the General, "Sir, with all due respect, I was not ASKING you to put on your seat belt." The General smiled, put on his seat belt, and told my Company Commander (Who was sweating bullets), "I like this one. He's my driver for the next four months." With Great Momentum comes Great Responsibility.
Who conducted him to go down this track? Why was there work being done on an active line? How stupid can people be to charge this man with anything? Whoever brought these charges needs to be in jail themselves.
Not all tracks get taken out of service when being worked on And the fact is that if he had been following the rules, it wouldn't have happened. Playing on his phone instead of controlling the train. He was speeding as well...... Absolutely his fault. His job isn't that hard, and the average starting salary for a train engineer is around $70,000. No telling what he was making, but they have automatic raises. But whatever his pay, it was more than enough for him to keep his ass off the phone.
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had the kind of protection you describe. However, because the track was technically not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by a generic, universal rule that is common to all railyards that requires trains to move slowly enough that they can be stopped within half the range of vision.
Also per the NTSB, the contractors had finished work at that location and had removed their portable derails before clearing their equipment.@@donaldt7764
Diana, that one letter you sent here in the mail. I looked at the post date on the envelope. I mentioned it to you that I would be very surprised if something did not happen. That was because I was very much expecting something to happen and what I was expecting had been voiced and spoken about in detail. And what happened later matched 100%, what had been voiced. By the time you got that letter, it had already been established for months that my train would be derailed in Ireland. And how did I know that? This is how. I found out they were going to derail my train. That there would be horrible Carnage and mutilation and dismemberment. I knew that the front of the train would be the most severely damaged. I knew that I would be knocked around but I would come out of it okay. Just after getting this knowledge, and this was when I was in my room in the barracks in Frankfurt Germany, my roommate, Jimmy Rowe, walks in. Okay so I told him that I was going on a eurail trip that summer and that they were going to derail my train. I gave him all the information as you read above. at first he said it was impossible for me to know that. He said it was crazy. He said it sounded paranoid. I told him paranoia had nothing to do with it. It was really going to happen. He asked me if I had told this to anyone else? I told him no I had not. He advised me not to mention this to anybody. He said they would think I was crazy. He asked if I was trying to get a section 8 discharge out of the army. Why would I have done that? I joined the army so I could travel and live in Europe. There I was doing what I wanted to do. Anyway I asked him to do this. I said I know this is going to happen. Just give me some advice and talk to me as though you know that it's going to happen. And guess what, he actually did that. He asked when is it going to happen? I said I don't know only that it will happen when I am there for it to happen. He asked me where will it happen? I told him I do not know that either but only to say that it will happen at the location where I am. After that he asked me where I planned to go on this eurail trip. I told him mainly to Ireland and Rome and Italy. So Jimmy Rose started talking about various incidents that had happened around the continent Continental Europe. Then he started talking about Ireland. He mentioned there had been several suspicious incidents in Ireland. You know what he told me? He said I don't think that you could possibly know anything like this, but, in my opinion if it happens anywhere it will be in Ireland. Jimmy Rowe told me that. I said the same thing. It will happen in Ireland. What was the date of this conversation? The year for 100% sure was 1980. It might have been in the month of April or May. Right at the end of July in 1980 I went on official leave from the army in Frankfurt Germany. I had a backpack. Took the train to Brussels where I spent the night in the hostel. Next day took the train to North coastal France where I caught the overnight ferry to Ross lair harbor on Southeast coastal Ireland. Rossler harbor is just North of old kinsale head and it was off old kinsale head where German u-boats torpedoed the passenger ship Lusitania. From rossler harbor I took the train North to Dublin. Spent a day or two there. Two women from Australia, Claire Lawrence and Enid Pasco, and I took the bus one morning to the main train station in Dublin. On the way to the train station I told them to sit as far to the rear of the train as possible with their backs to the direction of travel. I told them something bad could happen. I think they left it off at first. I told him two or three times to do what I told him that it's not a joke. We got our tickets. Starting from the very rear of the train, I walked forward looking in each window. The first place I saw where I could sit with my back to the direction of travel, I went in and sat there. Ain't it and clear set further to the rear and whether they took my advice or not they would be okay because they were far enough to the rear. We left the station sometime around 10:00 a.m. on August 1st 1980. Approximately two and a half hours later I'm not sure of the time, they derailed the train. By far most of the damage was done to the front of the train. People were horribly mutilated, bodies cut in half, people dismembered, contused over every inch of their bodies, horribly disfigured and profoundly disabled for life. Killed 18 people and injured 70. I was thrown back with enough force that my body tore two sets of steel-bolted train seats right up out of the floor and smashed a steel bolted table flat. I managed to dig myself out of the rubble under which I was partially encased. I got a small group to go into the wreckage and help people in any way they could like treatment for short and stopping bleeding. I got specific help for a young woman I saw in the wreckage. Her left leg was chopped off just below the knee and she was in very bad conditions otherwise. They awarded me the army commendation medal for that. It was supposed to be the soldiers medal which, they say, is the highest metal that can be awarded in peacetime not facing an enemy Force. But that's okay. I did not join the army to get medals. I did not want a medal. I only wanted to travel and live in Europe. Claire and Enid walked up into this town of Buttervent. They saw a man there and told him what I had told them in the bus on the way to the train station. He took them in his vehicle to his house just north of the town. He left them there with his wife. He went back to the Civic center in that town. Later I showed up there. He approached me and asked me who I was and when we established yes I'm John Shaw. He told me Claire and Enid or at his house and he invited me to go there. Okay so I have to get in a train wreck before I get an invitation in Ireland but I figured well what the hell I am here so I told him yes. So we got in his car and went to Velvet town house just north of this town of buttevant. He asked a series of very pointed specific questions. I will tell you what he asked me. Are you a member of any terrorist organization? Have you ever been a member? Do you know anyone who is in a any terrorist organization? Did you know anything about what happened today? Did anybody tell you that this would happen? Have you ever heard of the Irish Republican army? Do you know anybody in the Irish Republican army? Do you know anyone who has had any contact with the Irish Republican army or any terrorist organization? I answered no to everything. I answered no. The fact is the truth would have been yes. I mean, how do you think I knew this was going to happen to begin with? Divine intervention? I just denied everything. Just because you know something it doesn't mean that you have to tell it. Somebody might be asking questions and that's okay. You do not have to answer those questions and you do not have to give them information and that's okay too.
So the next time you see a drunk on the road are you going to rear end them so you get a new car, claiming it's all their fault? Asking for a friend...
It is apparent you have zero knowledge of train operations. There generally is not trains running on tracks with maintenance crews. That track would be shut down. Also a conductor and engineer would be on a train.
Something isn’t right. How is a crew working on the tracks without the engineer being notified of this well in advance? Why was the crew not notified about a train in route towards them? This is not all the engineers fault by himself. He should not have been on the phone. Correct me if I’m wrong but is all the blame truly on him?
They said he was speeding, I'll use an example, let's say the work crew knew a train was on its way and it would arrive in an hour, but with him speeding he reached them in 30min.
Trains operate on tracks while maintenance is being performed all the time. Whether or not anyone agrees if cameras should be allowed in the cab, at the present time, cameras are allowed to video the crew. The camera is considered a safety device and tampering with it (such as covering it up) is prohibited.
I would say that Camera pointed to the view outside of the cab that captures what a train crew sees from their Cabs should be established. The lead Engine of a train should be face the primary direction of the train. It is why when see lot of trains consist the last following Engine faces the rear, so if and when they make a return trip, the new lead Engine is facing the correct direction. Just common sense.
So if he was told “tracks are clear” all the way to his destination then he’s not required to look out the front windows to monitor track conditions because he was told they’re clear ? If he hits anything before his destination then it isn’t his fault because he was told “tracks are clear” ? You know that doesn’t make sense. He should have been monitoring track conditions the whole time regardless if tracks are supposed to be clear or not.
This is ridiculous. My father spent his whole career working on the railroad. When work was being done on the tracks......besides the normal warnings and speed restrictions being given the engineers.....the workers set railroad torpedoes out on the rails to warn the engineer and the workers of each other. A railroad torpedo is a small explosive strapped to the rail, that gives a loud report when ran over by the train.....louder than an M-80.....which warns the engineer to stop. They would usually set out several in a row. BOOM-bada-boom-bada-boom! A railroad torpedo could wake the dead. How could they not be using them now days? It would have avoided this incident. PLUS they could have used a derail device to put the train in the dirt before it hit the workers. What's wrong with modern people? Why have they forgotten all the lessons of the past? Lessons paid for in blood.
So, what happened to the conductor who was also riding in the cab? He should’ve taken charge and caught this screw up. The one of very reasons why two man crews are still used.
Yes, but many Trains are/were only manned with Engineer. When no Conductor was deemed required for the train to operate, you lose that valuable back up safety measure to make sure the train operates in safe matter at all times.
@@abbottshaull9831 The conductor acts as another set of eyes when the train is moving, as they always have, the point is that if 1 person gets distracted, falls asleep, or worse, has a medical emergency, you still have someone onboard that can still apply the emergency brake and contact dispatch.
@firepower782 That does matter if the engineer wasn't made aware. Had he seen the crew, who's to say he could've stopped the train in time. Also, trains hitting track crews have happened several times.
@@sirblack1619 May have happened several times, but not with the Engineer caught on camera looking at his phone. That's immediate termination and criminal charges. If it was a mistake or an accident that's one thing, caught looking at your phone that's not an accident, you're fucked. And he is.
Imagine how many people would be charged with manslaughter if these rules applied to regular cars and trucks. Get in a fatal crash while not paying attention 20 yrs in prison.
I feel like the train operator isn’t the only one that’s in the wrong, they should have investigated dispatch because maintenance workers shouldn’t be on the same track as a train
Regardless of him being on the phone thats a curve did anyone bother to let him know they were on the tracks? Cell phone or not thats not enough time to react . i agree he needs punishment but they're not telling the whole story, or no one told him. They should be charged to.
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had the kind of protection you describe. However, because the track was technically not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by a generic, universal rule that is common to all railyards that requires trains to move slowly enough that they can be stopped within half the range of vision.
My thoughts exactly, just like there always had been. Otherwise railroads are going to have to fork out a lot of money on many lawsuits like this. No two man crew for a system of corrections and balances (it worked great before), and you are going to be walking a thin line
Some RR's have the conductor drive a route along the tracks, and where there is switching to be done,will park/ meet the train. But then the engineer is alone till the next stop.
@@user-mr3ct1dm9p I did that at Illinois Railnet. It's done with short lines, either restricted speed or exempt track. The conductor must not be more then a mile from the train at all times. Class 1s and regionals must have conductor aboard
To answer some of the common questions being asked: This accident occurred inside yard limits. The train was traveling 19mph when it struck the equipment, instead of the 10mph limit governed by the railroads rule book. The track work wasn't listed in the morning job briefing. This was actually the conductor who was bringing the train to the ALE yard from the CN interchange, while the engineer and brakeman worked on the switcher. And for those who aren't aware, train crews are prohibited from using electronic devices while on duty.
Manslaughter for what my parents taught me not to play on the train tracks. So who in their right mind would think it's okay to park a flatbed semi and a backhoe on the train tracks that are operational
What a shame, a totally preventable incident, prayers for the family of the departed, never trust anyone when they tell you its fine just do it, seen too many close calls,i always assume the information given is wrong and work accordingly, shouldn't have to, but for every good guy out there there's an incompetent greedy pos like that engineer. That wasn't even a small lack of attention taking a quick call from home, he covered the camera and was straight up acting like hes chilling in a bar after work, totally premeditated actions that cost a man his life, thats not manslaughter that may as well be premeditated murder , absolutely appalling. This was no accident it was an inevitability 😔
Engineer only knows what is ahead of him if he is notified of it thats the dispatch job to charge the man with manslaughter for what he wasn't aware of is ridiculous then the dispatch should be charged also
So... Was him being on the phone the reason he missed a 'stop' signal earlier in the track? Otherwise how was he supposed to see equipment on the track around a blind corner with no time to safely stop regardless of when the brakes were engaged?
Was anyone in management fired for allowing a train to traverse a track with a work crew on it? That train would not of moved an inch that day if we held management acountable for their decision-making.
The failure was the persons (ALE) that allowed the train and the workers, to be at the same location and time. And where is the train Conductor? Crews down to just "One Man" crews now? Regardless, if he was on his phone or not, which is not smart. You can NOT stop a train like a car.
reminds me of the time while going track speed in the yard here 5mph this woman walked out from a sitting boxcars bout few car lengths from the one coming in looked up at the train smiled waved then laid herself across the tracks the engineer applied the brakes but so close still took 5 car lengths to come to a stop i had to ask wht the engineer was looking so gaunt that night
Why were the train signals allowing the train to run while maintenance was on the track? Sometimes a short train will haul supplies to the maintenance crew, for their use during the maintenance. But something else is going on here. The conductor watches the signals while the engineer drives the train. This news report is very short on details. What train line was this???
That would be the train crew's failure to comply with Form B restrictions. Form Bs are used to protect men and equipment work zones on the track. Form Bs notify of the time that a work zone is in effect, the foreman in charge, the milepost limits, and whether trains must stop before entering the work zone and request permission to enter the work zone from the foreman in charge on the ground. There should of been two people in the cab in my opinion regardless (like there always used to be) to catch things like this.
@@Look_What_You_Did Your RUclips name and way you responded to my comment is rather peculiar. However, give me a minute to find my GCOR book (the book provided by the federal government for railroad operating standards in North America) it's been a while, and I'll quote the rule on here.
The MOW crew was working on track that was in Restricted Limits, meaning a speed that will permit stopping within one-half the range of vision, but not exceeding 20 miles per hour. From his union's own website: "When restricted speed is required, the warning should bring one out of your seat - make the hair on the back of your neck stand - because that is how dangerous the situation is at that point." "When speed is restricted, engineers and conductors must insist that each other drop all other activities, remain vigilant and attentive at the task at hand."
If he was warned workers were on the track then he deserves to be charged… but trains don’t stop on a dime even at 10 mph. If he wasn’t made aware of the maintenance crew then he’s only partially to blame.
Did not know that train tracks can be blocked while in use. I get that the engineer should have been watching but I guess I assumed if you're gonna block tracks that you try and do it when they're not in active use. Seems like doing road work and assuming cars won't run into you because you're totally protected by a high vis vest. Which we actively do not do.
This is the most ridiculous story ever and charges were filed. This guy was driving a train and they don't stop on a dime plus when there is work on track they would not even be allowed to take the trip in the first place. Whole lot of stupid right here!
Worked for railroad 40 years.. engineers/condutors have train orders before you ever move train. It tells if and where any maintnance is being done... NOW maintnance are to set red flag/lights and DERAILERS on the track they working on... this not the engineers fault alone..someone else is to share the blame.. Dispatcher should have informed them. Maint. Superv. Should have pit out warning device and derails. Sounds like typical management coverup
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had the kind of protection you describe. However, because the track was not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by yard-limits rules. They had portable derails, but removed them on completion of their work before clearing their equipment. The engineer's bulletins did not mention any work or restrictions at that location, which the NTSB cited as a contributing factor.
Dispatch was on their phones (didnt let the workers know there was a train), operator was on his phone (wasnt told there was workers), workers didnt notice a train coming? On their Phones?
This should be enough to get these stupid cell phones banded out of vehicles or anything mobile cell phones that cost so many deaths it's pathetic can't put a cell phone in your face and operate a vehicle where is seriously really makes me mad and innocent man trying to do his job to provide for his family has to lose it because of a stupid cell phone.
Trains don't "swerve" the tracks led straight towards the contractors, the train was on the same line as the contractors, there wasn't any other track for the train to be on.
You two don't get it... So explain to the world how an engineer was to stop this. If they can't swerve to hit somebody... sure AF can't swerve to avoid somebody... So how is the engineer responsible?
@@Look_What_You_Did I never said he was responsible. But, he is responsible. He was on his phone and not paying attention to signal lights on the tracks. It’s a federal law that you can’t use your phone while operating a train. If you are texting and driving and slam into the back of someone it’s your fault. Im sorry but I don’t see how we are the ones who don’t understand.
Quite simple if you operating any type of vehicle or heavy equipment, you don't use Cell Phone to while Operating. Even while using hand free tools to use is still a freaking distraction. The problem is in many cases the Police Agencies don't enforce many of these Laws due to the fact that themselves have electronic devices that are used to transmit information such as the nature of a call or current location of ongoing situation that they are responding too. These tools are also used for them in filing reports while in the field so they don't have to hours filling out various reports while the actions that happen during said calls of service. Just because they are sitting at various locations they are doing much more than monitoring traffic at that time.
His cell phone did not put workers in the path of an oncoming train. It would likely have taken a thousand feet to stop so popping around that bend would have caused him to miss it. Why didn’t the workers move as it was quickly approaching? Just going to stand in the path of a train? Smh lots wrong here..
Why was a work detail scheduled for an active rail line? The engineer screwed up, but he is not fully at fault! Scapegoat to avoid an even larger lawsuit.
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had full protection which would relieve them of the need to watch for trains. However, because the track was technically not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by a generic, universal rule that is common to all railyards that requires trains to move slowly enough that they can be stopped within half the range of vision. Also, working on an active line (with strict and extensive protection) is common practice. Minor maintenance and daily inspections would not be possible if the whole line had to be closed each time. It is done, safely, hundreds of times each day.
I'd say they were a welding or grinding crew and he was following up dousing any potential spot fires?? He crashed into the gang because he was on his phone. Was probably supposed to be following at a distance.
trains can't stop on a dime. Seems like he would've plowed through there no matter what. Why were the train and the equipment allowed on the same track to begin with?
All switches for that track should have been diverted. No work crew is allowed to work unless the switch has been locked out, and blue flag/blue light protection has been established. Also the engineer should have been paying attention. Also where was the conductor?
there is a lot of stupid in this one.
It was a year ago😂😂
Doesnt make sense to me why he was even on the same rail as the contractors working.. he hadnt called his mile markers or anything and usually everyone is aware of work being taken place.. but also American Railways work alot different then Canadian, yous have 4-5 different rail companys or more using the same rail..
There will be just as much money paid as there was stupid/negligence. Putting your cap in front of the camera is a dead give away.
FOCUS , FOCUS!
PTC failure too?????
Why is the train and maintenance vehicle on the same track? The maintenance vehicle has required time before the next train. Where was the dispatcher telling there was a maintenance vehicle ahead of the train? 1:43
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had the kind of protection you describe. However, because the track was technically not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by a generic, universal rule that is common to all railyards that requires trains to move slowly enough that they can be stopped within half the range of vision.
@@sturmovik1274 correct, they listed lack of attention & exessive speed as the main factors. Guy was on his phone not looking while speeding.
@@sturmovik1274 If a locomotive is supposed to be on a track ,all else has lesser priority. A train, moving at 30MPH will take up to one mile to stop with full brake activation. Even on branch lines all train orders must indicate maintenance crews location and explosive warning detonators placed on the rails at a distance sufficient to warn any driver. Unfortunately those commenting are confusing automobile think with rail reality. I suspect the driver was a scapegoat so the actual company can escape their responsibilities for not following normal safety practice in place for 130 years.
As my comment mentions, the NTSB report describes at least three levels of protection that failed. That said:
1: It is common for trains to be operated through work zones, at restricted speed and coordinating with the work crews by radio.
2: I know well how long trains need to stop. The limit here was 10, and the train was doing 19.
3: This was not a branch line; it was what is called other-than-main. Other-than-main is a general category of short, low-speed track. It's the lowest and slowest track there is. Usually, as in this case, it is within a yard and therefore governed by yard operating rules. These rules, among other restrictions, require trains to be able to stop within half the distance that the crew can see and not exceed 20 mph. The local limit may be lower, as it was in this case.
4: Detonators are almost unused nowadays, even on smaller local lines. Train orders haven't been called that in 40 years. Nowadays information like this is assembled into bulletins and given to the engineer and conductor at the start of their shift.
5: The person who drives the train is not the driver. He/she is the engineer.
6: Yes, I agree that the engineer/conductor will likely be scapegoated. Everyone I know who works for the RRs says that safety has been as bad as it's ever been these last few years, and individual employees are scapegoated.@@Mercmad
@@sturmovik1274best answer and explanation to all of this
A Train Engineer is not allowed to use a cell phone while opperating the train. My nephew told me that and he is a Train Engineer. They tell you on day one.
Probably put in place after the 2008 Chatsworth, California crash between a passenger train and a freighter, the engineers in both trains were both texting just before the crash, 25 killed.
...obviously? 😉
@@thud9797 That is correct, that particular crash banned any usage of personal electronic items while on the job including video cameras unless it is to report or document a safety hazard. This is why it's rare to find modern cab ride footage (compared to in the past), however there are a few people that still ignore that rule, and then you get the occasional cool cab ride video on RUclips every now and then, haha
@@thud9797 It was in place before that accident as well.
Engineer not conductor are allowed to use their phone while train is in motion or if a crew member is on the ground. I am a conductor
Unless he was aware of machinery was on the tracks it wouldn't make a difference. These trains dont stop on a fime.
@@user-zy5vg9pe3edime not time 😂
@@user-zy5vg9pe3e no, he meant dime, “stop on a dime” lol
@@user-zy5vg9pe3e 🤡
@@user-zy5vg9pe3eDime not time LMAO😅
@@user-zy5vg9pe3e I laughed so hard at this. lmfao
Why was the track not called out of service and switches thrown to route to the next track? IF a contractor is working on a line they should have no trains on that line and cordination to alternate trains and work. There is a lot more failures on this than the guy on the phone.
I'd say they were a welding crew or similar and he was following up dousing any potential spot fires?? He crashed into the gang because he was on his phone. Was probably supposed to be following at a distance.
Notice how he was described as "former" train driver. He was fired right away, the train company's name was never mentioned.
The track should have been closed, you are absolutely right.
Freeway repairs always have a CHP car, with lights on to warn drivers, but having an extra pair of eyes a mile up the track would mean the unnamed train company would have to PAY FOR IT.
A worker paid with his life, the the driver goes to prison. Shit rolls downhill & Greed kills again.
True. The driver SHOULDNT have been on the phone but the OTHER breaches of safety should be pointed at the management who allowed this BS accident to happen?? Was the driver even told of the work ahead?? Cmon NSTB!!! You can do BETTER than this!!
Exactly! And not a single question from the "newsboys".
@aw8079 you can tell by the color of said engine it was ether a cp or cn train.
From my understanding, at least here in Upstate New york, dispatch is always notified when there's track crew working so that the engineers can be aware that somebody is on the tracks, but still no excuse for this man's negligence
Correct on both counts, nationwide. There are detailed procedures that would have been followed to protect the maintenance-of-way crews. The exact procedures vary by the type of work being done, but if those procedures were followed you are correct that ultimate responsibility lies with the train crew.
It's interesting, though, that they didn't charge the conductor. That's the other guy on the engine and he is, administratively and legally, responsible for the train. The engineer actually drives (most of the time), but the conductor is responsible for keeping the engineer alert and in compliance with rules/law.
@@sturmovik1274 my brother is an Amtrak engineer, says the same thing that the conductor is in charge of the train, never knew that
There's a thing called a 'Form B" that both the engineer and the conductor on this train should have known about before beginning work. It's essentially a form establishing working limits for track workers/crews. They should have also had physical protection up such as red/yellow board warning the train crew to stop as well as portable derails set in place which do exactly that-derail the train before it can reach the workers. If there's a switch between them, that would be lined and locked as well to keep the train out of their work zone.
Per the NTSB report:
-The work crew thought they were protected by track authority. However, since they were on/fouling other-than-main, they were only protected by yard-limit rules. The report didn't say how that misunderstanding occurred.
-At the time of the accident, the work crew had completed work at that location and had removed their portable derails before removing their equipment.
-The engineer, at least, was working his second train of the day. On starting his tour he had been given bulletins for the accident territory. These bulletins, about 8 hours old at the time of the accident, did not mention any work in that area. The report did not mention whether he received new bulletins when he got on the second train.
-Another commenter says the work crew had removed devices which should have given 25 seconds warning of an approaching train, but the NTSB report doesn't mention any such devices.@@po9318
Maybe he/she was in the can?
Seems like there are more people who should be at fault
What do you mean?
@@eliyahtherailfanner131 Meaning thathengineer should have received Track Notices abouthe maintenance and location. Also,ften a yellow *[__]* sign a certain distance (1/2 mile?) before the work area so that train could be gradually slowed and be able to stop or continue at 5 mph through the work zone.
@@robertgift Was it stated somewhere that there was no signs along the way? He didn't hit the brakes until after contact with the backhoe, so he obviously wasn't paying attention.
@@soleinspector5511 When the mee-mool lights *(o)T(o)* started operating, they knew thathey had 25 seconds before train arrival. Ample time to gethe backhoe out ofoul.
Per the NTSB report:
-The contractors believed they were protected by track authority (meaning the dispatcher would have known about them and advised all trains); however, since they were working on other-than-main track, they were only protected by yard-limit rules (meaning a general speed limit of 20 mph or less; the train was doing 19 at impact). The report didn't say how that misunderstanding occurred.
-The contractors had finished their work at that location, and had removed their portable derails before clearing their equipment.
-The engineer's daily bulletin, about 7 hours old, did not list any work at that location
-The engineer was ultimately at fault.
I'm curious, did the engineer know there was maintenance equipment on his track? Seems to me if he knew he might have paid more attention. Oh he's dead wrong for his behavior, but did other facts not in evidence help the process of someone dying?
the ntsb must have a report of this accident by now.
No RR flagman, I wouldn't doubt. I heard a private outside contractor, not MOW
Irrelevant and immaterial. As the Operator, he is responsible.
This is why, as a Private First Class driving a General, I had the balls to tell the General, "Sir, with all due respect, I was not ASKING you to put on your seat belt."
The General smiled, put on his seat belt, and told my Company Commander (Who was sweating bullets), "I like this one. He's my driver for the next four months."
With Great Momentum comes Great Responsibility.
@@TimeSurfer206 Hey that's a good one, I like that. I may just have to steal that Spiderman momentum line from you!
@@TimeSurfer206 Found the lying loser.
Who conducted him to go down this track? Why was there work being done on an active line? How stupid can people be to charge this man with anything? Whoever brought these charges needs to be in jail themselves.
Not all tracks get taken out of service when being worked on
And the fact is that if he had been following the rules, it wouldn't have happened.
Playing on his phone instead of controlling the train. He was speeding as well......
Absolutely his fault.
His job isn't that hard, and the average starting salary for a train engineer is around $70,000.
No telling what he was making, but they have automatic raises.
But whatever his pay, it was more than enough for him to keep his ass off the phone.
There are definitely some details being left out. Crews dont just jump on the tracks. They have to get track authority.
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had the kind of protection you describe. However, because the track was technically not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by a generic, universal rule that is common to all railyards that requires trains to move slowly enough that they can be stopped within half the range of vision.
Thats why portable derails are used on non controlled track to make the work limits inaccessible.
Also per the NTSB, the contractors had finished work at that location and had removed their portable derails before clearing their equipment.@@donaldt7764
That's about 5 years in prison.
Diana, that one letter you sent here in the mail. I looked at the post date on the envelope. I mentioned it to you that I would be very surprised if something did not happen. That was because I was very much expecting something to happen and what I was expecting had been voiced and spoken about in detail. And what happened later matched 100%, what had been voiced. By the time you got that letter, it had already been established for months that my train would be derailed in Ireland. And how did I know that? This is how.
I found out they were going to derail my train. That there would be horrible Carnage and mutilation and dismemberment. I knew that the front of the train would be the most severely damaged. I knew that I would be knocked around but I would come out of it okay. Just after getting this knowledge, and this was when I was in my room in the barracks in Frankfurt Germany, my roommate, Jimmy Rowe, walks in. Okay so I told him that I was going on a eurail trip that summer and that they were going to derail my train. I gave him all the information as you read above. at first he said it was impossible for me to know that. He said it was crazy. He said it sounded paranoid. I told him paranoia had nothing to do with it. It was really going to happen. He asked me if I had told this to anyone else? I told him no I had not. He advised me not to mention this to anybody. He said they would think I was crazy. He asked if I was trying to get a section 8 discharge out of the army. Why would I have done that? I joined the army so I could travel and live in Europe. There I was doing what I wanted to do. Anyway I asked him to do this. I said I know this is going to happen. Just give me some advice and talk to me as though you know that it's going to happen. And guess what, he actually did that. He asked when is it going to happen? I said I don't know only that it will happen when I am there for it to happen. He asked me where will it happen? I told him I do not know that either but only to say that it will happen at the location where I am. After that he asked me where I planned to go on this eurail trip. I told him mainly to Ireland and Rome and Italy. So Jimmy Rose started talking about various incidents that had happened around the continent Continental Europe. Then he started talking about Ireland. He mentioned there had been several suspicious incidents in Ireland. You know what he told me? He said I don't think that you could possibly know anything like this, but, in my opinion if it happens anywhere it will be in Ireland. Jimmy Rowe told me that. I said the same thing. It will happen in Ireland. What was the date of this conversation? The year for 100% sure was 1980. It might have been in the month of April or May.
Right at the end of July in 1980 I went on official leave from the army in Frankfurt Germany. I had a backpack. Took the train to Brussels where I spent the night in the hostel. Next day took the train to North coastal France where I caught the overnight ferry to Ross lair harbor on Southeast coastal Ireland. Rossler harbor is just North of old kinsale head and it was off old kinsale head where German u-boats torpedoed the passenger ship Lusitania. From rossler harbor I took the train North to Dublin. Spent a day or two there. Two women from Australia, Claire Lawrence and Enid Pasco, and I took the bus one morning to the main train station in Dublin. On the way to the train station I told them to sit as far to the rear of the train as possible with their backs to the direction of travel. I told them something bad could happen. I think they left it off at first. I told him two or three times to do what I told him that it's not a joke. We got our tickets.
Starting from the very rear of the train, I walked forward looking in each window. The first place I saw where I could sit with my back to the direction of travel, I went in and sat there. Ain't it and clear set further to the rear and whether they took my advice or not they would be okay because they were far enough to the rear. We left the station sometime around 10:00 a.m. on August 1st 1980. Approximately two and a half hours later I'm not sure of the time, they derailed the train. By far most of the damage was done to the front of the train. People were horribly mutilated, bodies cut in half, people dismembered, contused over every inch of their bodies, horribly disfigured and profoundly disabled for life. Killed 18 people and injured 70. I was thrown back with enough force that my body tore two sets of steel-bolted train seats right up out of the floor and smashed a steel bolted table flat. I managed to dig myself out of the rubble under which I was partially encased. I got a small group to go into the wreckage and help people in any way they could like treatment for short and stopping bleeding. I got specific help for a young woman I saw in the wreckage. Her left leg was chopped off just below the knee and she was in very bad conditions otherwise. They awarded me the army commendation medal for that. It was supposed to be the soldiers medal which, they say, is the highest metal that can be awarded in peacetime not facing an enemy Force. But that's okay. I did not join the army to get medals. I did not want a medal. I only wanted to travel and live in Europe. Claire and Enid walked up into this town of Buttervent. They saw a man there and told him what I had told them in the bus on the way to the train station. He took them in his vehicle to his house just north of the town. He left them there with his wife. He went back to the Civic center in that town. Later I showed up there. He approached me and asked me who I was and when we established yes I'm John Shaw. He told me Claire and Enid or at his house and he invited me to go there. Okay so I have to get in a train wreck before I get an invitation in Ireland but I figured well what the hell I am here so I told him yes. So we got in his car and went to Velvet town house just north of this town of buttevant. He asked a series of very pointed specific questions. I will tell you what he asked me. Are you a member of any terrorist organization? Have you ever been a member? Do you know anyone who is in a any terrorist organization? Did you know anything about what happened today? Did anybody tell you that this would happen? Have you ever heard of the Irish Republican army? Do you know anybody in the Irish Republican army? Do you know anyone who has had any contact with the Irish Republican army or any terrorist organization?
I answered no to everything. I answered no. The fact is the truth would have been yes. I mean, how do you think I knew this was going to happen to begin with? Divine intervention? I just denied everything. Just because you know something it doesn't mean that you have to tell it. Somebody might be asking questions and that's okay. You do not have to answer those questions and you do not have to give them information and that's okay too.
He was on the phone same as If your in a car accident and drunk ,your automatically at fault
There is a reason why it’s said that safety rules are written in blood. This is one.
So the next time you see a drunk on the road are you going to rear end them so you get a new car, claiming it's all their fault? Asking for a friend...
*you're (x2...)
YOU'RE
It is apparent you have zero knowledge of train operations. There generally is not trains running on tracks with maintenance crews. That track would be shut down. Also a conductor and engineer would be on a train.
Something isn’t right. How is a crew working on the tracks without the engineer being notified of this well in advance? Why was the crew not notified about a train in route towards them? This is not all the engineers fault by himself. He should not have been on the phone. Correct me if I’m wrong but is all the blame truly on him?
50/50 fault
@@KnoxvilleRailfanProductions Zero fault.
@@Look_What_You_Did 50/50. The engineer was on the phone which is not allowed.
Trains run on tracks being worked on all the time. Even more with PSR nowadays
They said he was speeding, I'll use an example, let's say the work crew knew a train was on its way and it would arrive in an hour, but with him speeding he reached them in 30min.
Trains operate on tracks while maintenance is being performed all the time. Whether or not anyone agrees if cameras should be allowed in the cab, at the present time, cameras are allowed to video the crew. The camera is considered a safety device and tampering with it (such as covering it up) is prohibited.
I would say that Camera pointed to the view outside of the cab that captures what a train crew sees from their Cabs should be established. The lead Engine of a train should be face the primary direction of the train. It is why when see lot of trains consist the last following Engine faces the rear, so if and when they make a return trip, the new lead Engine is facing the correct direction. Just common sense.
@@abbottshaull9831they already had outward facing cameras for grade crossing incidents and so on.
Safety device?
As an operator of heavy/deadly equipment; it requires your 100% attention 100% of the time.
Endlessly fascinated by a phone and hopelessly distracted.
why didn't PTC force him to slow down? there is way too much detail left out
He got railroaded.
The blame should be on the person who didn't tell him there would be people working on the track.
He wasn't supposed to be on his phone, regardless. That's what got him charged.
@@LittkeTM That should get him fired, not charged with manslaughter.
@@stuwest3653 The government makes it very clear that it's manslaughter.
So if he was told “tracks are clear” all the way to his destination then he’s not required to look out the front windows to monitor track conditions because he was told they’re clear ? If he hits anything before his destination then it isn’t his fault because he was told “tracks are clear” ? You know that doesn’t make sense. He should have been monitoring track conditions the whole time regardless if tracks are supposed to be clear or not.
@@mouser485 A person driving a car while on the phone is not at fault if someone runs a red light and hits them. Negligence has degrees of severity.
So sad and poor decisions on the train crew!! Our condolences to the operator family and those injured.. 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
This is ridiculous. My father spent his whole career working on the railroad. When work was being done on the tracks......besides the normal warnings and speed restrictions being given the engineers.....the workers set railroad torpedoes out on the rails to warn the engineer and the workers of each other. A railroad torpedo is a small explosive strapped to the rail, that gives a loud report when ran over by the train.....louder than an M-80.....which warns the engineer to stop. They would usually set out several in a row. BOOM-bada-boom-bada-boom! A railroad torpedo could wake the dead. How could they not be using them now days? It would have avoided this incident. PLUS they could have used a derail device to put the train in the dirt before it hit the workers.
What's wrong with modern people? Why have they forgotten all the lessons of the past? Lessons paid for in blood.
Some Railroads stopped using torpedoes years ago.
@@gregfranklin1024 Would have prevented this incident.
I worked for the BNSF as a Engineer. They got rid of torpedoes years ago.
I work for CSX. We still use torpedoes but only in Detroit to keep people out of the yards.
@@viktorakhmedov3442 Interesting, thanks.
My father was an engineer of Penn Central & Conrail and he told his job very serious!
So, what happened to the conductor who was also riding in the cab? He should’ve taken charge and caught this screw up. The one of very reasons why two man crews are still used.
Yes, but many Trains are/were only manned with Engineer. When no Conductor was deemed required for the train to operate, you lose that valuable back up safety measure to make sure the train operates in safe matter at all times.
@@abbottshaull9831 The conductor acts as another set of eyes when the train is moving, as they always have, the point is that if 1 person gets distracted, falls asleep, or worse, has a medical emergency, you still have someone onboard that can still apply the emergency brake and contact dispatch.
This occurred within yard limits. Conductor is seldom on the head end. Movement at restricted speed- able to stop in 1/2 the range of vision.
Obstructed the camera to conceal the fact he was breaking rules.
Sounds safety minded to me.
The engineer should know if the equipment was on the track, I don't think he was notified about it
Doesn't matter now that they have him on camera looking at his phone. He's done.
@firepower782 That does matter if the engineer wasn't made aware. Had he seen the crew, who's to say he could've stopped the train in time.
Also, trains hitting track crews have happened several times.
@sirblack1619 yeah ik but most times engineers are informed,l about what's ahead, he couldn't have stopped the train tho as close as he was
@@sirblack1619 May have happened several times, but not with the Engineer caught on camera looking at his phone. That's immediate termination and criminal charges. If it was a mistake or an accident that's one thing, caught looking at your phone that's not an accident, you're fucked. And he is.
Per the NTSB report, he was not notified in the formal documentation given to him when he came on duty, as would have been usual procedure.
Imagine how many people would be charged with manslaughter if these rules applied to regular cars and trucks. Get in a fatal crash while not paying attention 20 yrs in prison.
More failures than just a phone here.
Smirking in his booking picture tops it off .
People…….put down your goddamn cellphones and look around at the world.🌎
World is to brutal now to look at it. Good luck with that.
Distracted driving.
Sending condolences what a terrible worker man absolutely unacceptable
I feel like the train operator isn’t the only one that’s in the wrong, they should have investigated dispatch because maintenance workers shouldn’t be on the same track as a train
Regardless of him being on the phone thats a curve did anyone bother to let him know they were on the tracks? Cell phone or not thats not enough time to react . i agree he needs punishment but they're not telling the whole story, or no one told him. They should be charged to.
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had the kind of protection you describe. However, because the track was technically not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by a generic, universal rule that is common to all railyards that requires trains to move slowly enough that they can be stopped within half the range of vision.
who authorized track maintenance while the track was actively being used? There's many more to blame than just this guy
A one man crew? This is why there should be two.
My thoughts exactly, just like there always had been. Otherwise railroads are going to have to fork out a lot of money on many lawsuits like this. No two man crew for a system of corrections and balances (it worked great before), and you are going to be walking a thin line
Doesn't show the conductors reaction....either was sleeping or not paying attention
I retired from the railroad there big guy! I am fully aware were the conductor sits....
Some RR's have the conductor drive a route along the tracks, and where there is switching to be done,will park/ meet the train. But then the engineer is alone till the next stop.
@@user-mr3ct1dm9p I did that at Illinois Railnet. It's done with short lines, either restricted speed or exempt track. The conductor must not be more then a mile from the train at all times. Class 1s and regionals must have conductor aboard
To answer some of the common questions being asked:
This accident occurred inside yard limits.
The train was traveling 19mph when it struck the equipment, instead of the 10mph limit governed by the railroads rule book.
The track work wasn't listed in the morning job briefing.
This was actually the conductor who was bringing the train to the ALE yard from the CN interchange, while the engineer and brakeman worked on the switcher.
And for those who aren't aware, train crews are prohibited from using electronic devices while on duty.
Who fail to notify the engineer that work was being done?
Manslaughter for what my parents taught me not to play on the train tracks. So who in their right mind would think it's okay to park a flatbed semi and a backhoe on the train tracks that are operational
What a shame, a totally preventable incident, prayers for the family of the departed, never trust anyone when they tell you its fine just do it, seen too many close calls,i always assume the information given is wrong and work accordingly, shouldn't have to, but for every good guy out there there's an incompetent greedy pos like that engineer. That wasn't even a small lack of attention taking a quick call from home, he covered the camera and was straight up acting like hes chilling in a bar after work, totally premeditated actions that cost a man his life, thats not manslaughter that may as well be premeditated murder , absolutely appalling. This was no accident it was an inevitability 😔
Engineer only knows what is ahead of him if he is notified of it thats the dispatch job to charge the man with manslaughter for what he wasn't aware of is ridiculous then the dispatch should be charged also
So... Was him being on the phone the reason he missed a 'stop' signal earlier in the track?
Otherwise how was he supposed to see equipment on the track around a blind corner with no time to safely stop regardless of when the brakes were engaged?
Was anyone in management fired for allowing a train to traverse a track with a work crew on it? That train would not of moved an inch that day if we held management acountable for their decision-making.
He was indicated but no record of a trial yet
If only he had been a federal employee or law enforcement, he would be back at work.
Lack of communication
Ok where was the conductor/brakeman??? Still does not change the fact they want to go to one man crew!
The govt ruled a few weeks ago. 2 person crews will remain required for OTR trains.
Under certain situations one man can be used. Don't worry the carriers will win...they always do.@@kirk1618
That track should have been out of service. There’s no way the conductor would have enough time to stop even if he was going the speed limit.
The failure was the persons (ALE) that allowed the train and the workers, to be at the same location and time. And where is the train Conductor? Crews down to just "One Man" crews now? Regardless, if he was on his phone or not, which is not smart. You can NOT stop a train like a car.
reminds me of the time while going track speed in the yard here 5mph this woman walked out from a sitting boxcars bout few car lengths from the one coming in looked up at the train smiled waved then laid herself across the tracks the engineer applied the brakes but so close still took 5 car lengths to come to a stop i had to ask wht the engineer was looking so gaunt that night
Why were the train signals allowing the train to run while maintenance was on the track? Sometimes a short train will haul supplies to the maintenance crew, for their use during the maintenance. But something else is going on here. The conductor watches the signals while the engineer drives the train. This news report is very short on details. What train line was this???
That would be the train crew's failure to comply with Form B restrictions.
Form Bs are used to protect men and equipment work zones on the track. Form Bs notify of the time that a work zone is in effect, the foreman in charge, the milepost limits, and whether trains must stop before entering the work zone and request permission to enter the work zone from the foreman in charge on the ground.
There should of been two people in the cab in my opinion regardless (like there always used to be) to catch things like this.
Wow... got another sharp one here. Otay junior. Where is this alleged notification? Where is the alleged signalling?
@@Look_What_You_Did Your RUclips name and way you responded to my comment is rather peculiar. However, give me a minute to find my GCOR book (the book provided by the federal government for railroad operating standards in North America) it's been a while, and I'll quote the rule on here.
They might not have been using a Form B. Track warrant?
@@Look_What_You_DidYou don’t have a clue. 😂
The MOW crew was working on track that was in Restricted Limits, meaning a speed that will permit stopping within one-half the range of vision, but not exceeding 20 miles per hour.
From his union's own website: "When restricted speed is required, the warning should bring one out of your seat - make the hair on the back of your neck stand - because that is how dangerous the situation is at that point."
"When speed is restricted, engineers and conductors must insist that each other drop all other activities, remain vigilant and attentive at the task at hand."
How many cell phones have caused roadway fatalities??
If he was warned workers were on the track then he deserves to be charged… but trains don’t stop on a dime even at 10 mph. If he wasn’t made aware of the maintenance crew then he’s only partially to blame.
Did not know that train tracks can be blocked while in use. I get that the engineer should have been watching but I guess I assumed if you're gonna block tracks that you try and do it when they're not in active use.
Seems like doing road work and assuming cars won't run into you because you're totally protected by a high vis vest. Which we actively do not do.
This is the most ridiculous story ever and charges were filed. This guy was driving a train and they don't stop on a dime plus when there is work on track they would not even be allowed to take the trip in the first place. Whole lot of stupid right here!
Was there a warning about the track getting worked on? Why was his train even on that track if it was being repaired?
That’s no engineer
Worked for railroad 40 years.. engineers/condutors have train orders before you ever move train. It tells if and where any maintnance is being done... NOW maintnance are to set red flag/lights and DERAILERS on the track they working on... this not the engineers fault alone..someone else is to share the blame.. Dispatcher should have informed them.
Maint. Superv. Should have pit out warning device and derails. Sounds like typical management coverup
The track main track in yard limits. No derails on main track. No yardmaster/ control operator at this yard. Operated by a shortline.
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had the kind of protection you describe. However, because the track was not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by yard-limits rules. They had portable derails, but removed them on completion of their work before clearing their equipment. The engineer's bulletins did not mention any work or restrictions at that location, which the NTSB cited as a contributing factor.
that is a blind curve; you couldn't stop a train in time..... was there a signal or other info that he missed?
Train was going around a blind turn, even if he had been paying attention he wouldn't have been able to stop in time if it had any loaded cars.
This was to save the company. Because there is a lot of missing info from the company alone. Like why wasn’t he notified miles back.
Why was thebtrackbeven open???
Dispatch was on their phones (didnt let the workers know there was a train), operator was on his phone (wasnt told there was workers), workers didnt notice a train coming? On their Phones?
We’re was there track protection
why are they working on a track that is active? why wouldn't they have notice to all trains coming thru?
who scheduled the work when the train was going down the tracks
Why would they be on the tracks when a train is coming
He should have been notified by others
Don’t do what he did kids
This should be enough to get these stupid cell phones banded out of vehicles or anything mobile cell phones that cost so many deaths it's pathetic can't put a cell phone in your face and operate a vehicle where is seriously really makes me mad and innocent man trying to do his job to provide for his family has to lose it because of a stupid cell phone.
ok boomer
“Banded”
25 years sounds good.
So sad. Could happen to anyone. The guy operating the train is at fault but shouldn't be beaten up over it. A complete accident.
Don't text and train, kids.
So they didn't hear the train coming?
So the cabin camera was obstructed preventing it from capturing the moment he swerved for the contractors?
Trains don't "swerve" the tracks led straight towards the contractors, the train was on the same line as the contractors, there wasn't any other track for the train to be on.
Swerved for the contractors? I’m not sure how to respond to this without sounding condescending.
You two don't get it... So explain to the world how an engineer was to stop this. If they can't swerve to hit somebody... sure AF can't swerve to avoid somebody... So how is the engineer responsible?
@@Look_What_You_Did ya I know some people have a little knowledge but cannot connect the dots
@@Look_What_You_Did I never said he was responsible. But, he is responsible. He was on his phone and not paying attention to signal lights on the tracks. It’s a federal law that you can’t use your phone while operating a train. If you are texting and driving and slam into the back of someone it’s your fault. Im sorry but I don’t see how we are the ones who don’t understand.
Well he would've known they had the track closed if he was paying attention
The last photo on his phone was probably a selfie, with construction guys running for their lives in the background...
On his phone, his fault. Was he aware if maintenance crews on the tracks? Seems like a dispatcher or someone else should be going to jail as well
Why are the tracks being worked on while active trains are running??
He’s screwed.
Quite simple if you operating any type of vehicle or heavy equipment, you don't use Cell Phone to while Operating. Even while using hand free tools to use is still a freaking distraction. The problem is in many cases the Police Agencies don't enforce many of these Laws due to the fact that themselves have electronic devices that are used to transmit information such as the nature of a call or current location of ongoing situation that they are responding too. These tools are also used for them in filing reports while in the field so they don't have to hours filling out various reports while the actions that happen during said calls of service. Just because they are sitting at various locations they are doing much more than monitoring traffic at that time.
5' 4"? Dang . How he see out the cab window?
How is a work train on a live track?!!!
30 years hard labor in jail.
His cell phone did not put workers in the path of an oncoming train. It would likely have taken a thousand feet to stop so popping around that bend would have caused him to miss it. Why didn’t the workers move as it was quickly approaching? Just going to stand in the path of a train? Smh lots wrong here..
Do they not have PTC where this happened at???
This was in yard limits. Outside of PTC.
I’m sure his union rep will have him back on the job before you can spell train wreck.
Why was a work detail scheduled for an active rail line? The engineer screwed up, but he is not fully at fault! Scapegoat to avoid an even larger lawsuit.
Per the NTSB report, there was a misunderstanding about protection. The contractors thought they had full protection which would relieve them of the need to watch for trains. However, because the track was technically not a main line, they did not. They were only protected by a generic, universal rule that is common to all railyards that requires trains to move slowly enough that they can be stopped within half the range of vision.
Also, working on an active line (with strict and extensive protection) is common practice. Minor maintenance and daily inspections would not be possible if the whole line had to be closed each time. It is done, safely, hundreds of times each day.
Why don't they tell the trains to not go if there's people working on the tracks somebody is at fault in the main office
Don’t work on an active track?
I'd say they were a welding or grinding crew and he was following up dousing any potential spot fires?? He crashed into the gang because he was on his phone. Was probably supposed to be following at a distance.
What happened to track and time??
What happened to eic? Watchman?
trains can't stop on a dime. Seems like he would've plowed through there no matter what. Why were the train and the equipment allowed on the same track to begin with?
Negligence
People who drive trains can't get lost 😂😂😂😂😂😂
He screwed up.
Umm, didn't they hear the train coming?
Running signal?
Does the USA have controllers for their rail network?
It is an addiction.
"Smoking his vape" is up there with "This houseboat is not a real boat, it needs a barge to push it." 😂
😆😆😆
All switches for that track should have been diverted. No work crew is allowed to work unless the switch has been locked out, and blue flag/blue light protection has been established. Also the engineer should have been paying attention. Also where was the conductor?