Re: Atk in SC
Author: Glen Icanberry
Date: 02-09-2018 - 03:55

Thanks to most of you for the comments and explanations. Particularly impressed with technical signal expertise, and rules knowledge shown. Towards the end of the discussion there is definitely some tension, but must say that is typical when talking with old head railroaders. Railroaders who have long worked and know their respective crafts.

Did not realize several of you were off the late great Southern Pacific, which did indeed understand the rules and signal requirements. Have not heard some of this great reasoning since last attending rules classes at Santa Fe. Sounds so much like several Santa Fe and SP retirees I knew, glad to know that "old timers" has not clouded your judgment. My memory and judgment is far from perfect, but do respect what you guys have recorded here for the rest of us. Knowledgeable, experienced trainmen, enginemen and signalmen are to be respected.

I can read between the lines well enough to have learned what was not clear from the media reports, rumors and uninformed opinions. Another thread started out just blindly blaming the crew, showing no respect for the fact these brother railroaders had just lost their lives. OPRRMS had a great response, in furnishing the NTSB phone number, so that the disrespectful crackpot could solve the whole mess. We can likely all agree that the wreck was needless, and hopefully change, for the better, will result. The NTSB will sort it out for us to read sooner or later.

Glen Icanberry
Redlands, CA
AT&SF Ry Retired



Subject Written By Date/Time (PST)
  NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Graham Buxton 02-04-2018 - 18:26
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Geob 02-04-2018 - 19:12
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) JOHN 02-04-2018 - 19:53
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-04-2018 - 20:53
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Hoghead 1 02-04-2018 - 21:13
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-04-2018 - 21:16
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) RRACS 02-06-2018 - 07:56
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Hot Water 02-06-2018 - 07:59
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 08:34
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 11:09
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 11:27
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 11:35
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 11:45
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 11:58
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Dr Zarkoff 02-06-2018 - 12:36
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 12:51
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 14:09
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? BOB2 02-06-2018 - 14:57
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? OPRRMS 02-06-2018 - 15:45
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 16:23
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? OldPoleBurner 02-07-2018 - 12:15
  Re: Amtrak in SC-Restricted Speed? Dr Zarkoff 02-07-2018 - 13:45
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) Dr Zarkoff 02-06-2018 - 16:10
  Re: 59 mph, in unsingalled territory OMG! BOB2 02-06-2018 - 17:14
  Re: 59 mph, in unsingalled territory OMG! tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 18:48
  Re: 100 years, actually over 17 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? BOB2 02-06-2018 - 19:36
  Re: 100 years, actually over 17 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? tundraboomer 02-06-2018 - 19:42
  Re: 100 years, actually over 175 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? BOB2 02-06-2018 - 20:39
  Re: 100 years, actually over 175 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? tundraboomer 02-07-2018 - 06:14
  Re: My poor logic, yeah right? BOB2 02-07-2018 - 08:35
  Re: My poor logic, yeah right? OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 13:12
  Re: My poor logic, yeah right? OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 13:32
  Re: Yep that was in the rule book but I never saw it used....and it's still a bad practice. BOB2 02-07-2018 - 15:34
  Re: Yep that was in the rule book but I never saw it used....and it's still a bad practice. OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 17:28
  Re: Yep that was in the rule book but I never saw it used....and it's still a bad practice. OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 18:10
  Re: My poor logic, yeah right? tundraboomer 02-07-2018 - 17:27
  Re: 100 years, actually over 17 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? OldPoleBurner 02-07-2018 - 13:16
  Re: 100 years, actually over 17 years and OMG we're still alllowing that kind of operation and these unnecessary deaths? Dr Zarkoff 02-07-2018 - 13:51
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) BOB2 02-04-2018 - 21:16
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) OPRRMS 02-04-2018 - 20:40
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) WILL 02-04-2018 - 20:59
  Re: NTSB says CSX switch 'lined & locked into siding' (re Amtrak in SC) RWS 02-04-2018 - 21:53
  Atk in SC Nudge 02-07-2018 - 18:21
  Re: Atk in SC OPRRMS 02-07-2018 - 18:36
  Re: Atk in SC tundraboomer 02-07-2018 - 19:15
  Re: Atk in SC Dr Zarkoff 02-07-2018 - 21:38
  Re: Atk in SC Finis 02-07-2018 - 20:46
  Re: Atk in SC Glen Icanberry 02-09-2018 - 03:55
  Re: Except that some of them feel it is safer to run at 59 when you turn them off, but only at restricted speed when they fail? BOB2 02-09-2018 - 07:47
  Re: Except that some of them feel it is safer to run at 59 when you turn them off, but only at restricted speed when they fail? tundraboomer 02-09-2018 - 08:14
  Re: Except that some of them feel it is safer to run at 59 when you turn them off, but only at restricted speed when they fail? OPRRMS 02-09-2018 - 10:50


Go to: Message ListSearch
Subject: 
Your Name: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 ********  **     **  ********  **     **   ******  
    **     **     **  **        **     **  **    ** 
    **     **     **  **        **     **  **       
    **     *********  ******    **     **  **       
    **     **     **  **         **   **   **       
    **     **     **  **          ** **    **    ** 
    **     **     **  ********     ***      ******  
This message board is maintained by:Altamont Press
You can send us an email at altamontpress1@gmail.com