 |
Re: UP collision in Kansas this morning.
Author: ex-BN
Date: 07-17-2013 - 22:07
Thank you. That's not how we do it. We report "Switches normal" when releasing the TW. Then all trains still approach prepared to stop. Its a favorite test for the TM's. Perhaps UP will follow suit after this wreck.
Leaving a mainline switch open should strike the fear that running a red block does yet for some reason it happens much too often. My policy has always been to line the switch, test the lock, look at the target, walk away, turn and inspect the switch from a distance. And I don't think I could show my face at work after having left one open--even in signalled track. I don't believe in the "fear" method of railroading these days (think safety glasses, vests etc.) but certain deadly operating rules should scare the hell out of an employee if not followed.
Of course this case in Kansas may have been vandalism--I'm speaking in general terms.
OPRRMS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ex-BN Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I am familiar with territory (dark) where it is
> > still required to approach facing point
> swithches
> > prepared to stop even though they have been
> > reported "lined for the main track". I thought
> > this was an FRA requirement.
> >
> > Is this track partially signalled for switches?
>
> > Or do the rules not require being prepared to
> > stop?
>
> OK, I'll expand my response to your question about
> this yesterday.
>
> The crew of the local had verbally informed the
> dispatcher that all switches used had been
> re-lined and locked for mainline movement (GCOR
> 8.3 and 14.7), then they released their Track
> Warrant. Any subsequent trains would thus be
> operating at Maximum Authorized Speed and not be
> required to be prepared to stop short of switches.
> Crew members are still required to observe the
> position of switches (GCOR 8.2), but not slow down
> for them in anticipation.
Leaving a mainline switch open should strike the fear that running a red block does yet for some reason it happens much too often. My policy has always been to line the switch, test the lock, look at the target, walk away, turn and inspect the switch from a distance. And I don't think I could show my face at work after having left one open--even in signalled track. I don't believe in the "fear" method of railroading these days (think safety glasses, vests etc.) but certain deadly operating rules should scare the hell out of an employee if not followed.
Of course this case in Kansas may have been vandalism--I'm speaking in general terms.
OPRRMS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ex-BN Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I am familiar with territory (dark) where it is
> > still required to approach facing point
> swithches
> > prepared to stop even though they have been
> > reported "lined for the main track". I thought
> > this was an FRA requirement.
> >
> > Is this track partially signalled for switches?
>
> > Or do the rules not require being prepared to
> > stop?
>
> OK, I'll expand my response to your question about
> this yesterday.
>
> The crew of the local had verbally informed the
> dispatcher that all switches used had been
> re-lined and locked for mainline movement (GCOR
> 8.3 and 14.7), then they released their Track
> Warrant. Any subsequent trains would thus be
> operating at Maximum Authorized Speed and not be
> required to be prepared to stop short of switches.
> Crew members are still required to observe the
> position of switches (GCOR 8.2), but not slow down
> for them in anticipation.
