If the persons operating that switch where "supposed" to leave it locked and lined for the through route when they finished using it according to the rule book then the blame falls on that crew as well. Perhaps 50%/50%, or even 100% blame on a crew that left a switch in the incorrect position.

Or 100% on the management that wrote the rule book and did not fully anticipate that crews might leave a little used switch in the wrong position.

Thanks for your certanity on this issue, I am not persuaded without further investigation.

the issue with this line of thinking, blaming it on the MOW crew, is that a core component of the engineer's duty is to watch the track and stop if necessary in an emergency. - which he didn't do. He was accelerating and didn't even respond until way too late.
100% on the engine crew, even if the MOW crew messed up, the engine crew wasn't paying attention and didn't have the reflex to make an emergency stop.

In the railroad world that I've experienced, all involved would be found 100% guilty, while management would not even be questioned. That still doesn't give anybody license to pile on these guys, unless you have a lifelong perfect record running an engine for a living. How bout it ?? Any volunteers ??

Again, without further investigation I will not agree that the engine crew is 100% at fault. If that little used switch was "expected" to be closed at all times except when in use the engine crew had an expectation that the tracks where "lined" for their use.

I'm going with 33% Management who failed to anticipate this scenario and may have failed to capture it in the rule book, 33% on MOW who did not secure the tracks they used in the "expected configuration" when they finished with them and 34% on the engine crew that was not watching closely enough for the other 66% of the team to "screw up".

I can't imagine that an FRA investigation or whatever would yield anything other than ultimately the engineer just being at fault. Again, the MOW team, etc may have screwed up, but that doesn't alleviate the engine of their duty to pay attention.

It's not like on CSX where they are running 50 mph with a 12,000 ton train and are physically incapable of stopping - that's an entirely different scenario, because even if the engineer reacted in a millisecond the outcome would have been the same. Not so here, if the engineer had actually looked/reacted it wouldn't have happened.

I'm not saying anyone is perfect, we all make mistakes, that's just life. But that doesn't change the cold fact of this being a careless mistake. Honestly I feel bad for the engineer, it really could have happened to anyone who in that split second wasn't focused on what's ahead of him. It's a good lesson to any engineer that focus is key.

deleted by poster

deleted by poster

Everybody involved is responsible for what they did wrong. You can bet your sweet ass that these guys know they screwed up and will never forget it. It's called a learning experience. That's the reason an errant employee usually gets some time at home to think it over, then is allowed to go back in service.

This is really a matter to be discreetly handled by the company and the individuals involved.

So, are there any photos of 475 being towed back to the shops?

Good evening all,



Yes, two post crash photos have made it up onto RailPictures.net

If this link works, the following photo should answer your question.

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/816285/

I'm glad that no one was injured in the accident.

This is going to be one of those teaching opportunities for any tourist railroad. That the safe operation comes before the entertainment of the passengers especially when moving 100 tons of pressure vessel around. The crew here was extremely lucky that they didn't end up with a punctured front tube sheet. It was more than likely just a matter of inches literally internally from that happening.

You can bet on retraining of all Strasburg crews and especially on switch locking procedures.

Trains magazine just posted its report on the accident.

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews ... -one-hurt/

The most jarring thing to me is this line.

“According to sources, the damage on No. 475 looks worse than it actually is, and the shop crew believes that the engine can be repaired and back in service next week.”

.

There will be an interesting internal RR investigation of this and the timetable Special Instructions may be changed.

For one thing, the tracks in question are a siding and a spur off that siding. Neither is a main track. To follow the siding/runaround you use the diverging route at the turnout. The parked equipment was on the spur, the straight route through the turnout.

Fortunately SRC has other engines while 475 is repaired.

Phil Mulligan

Huh?
I only assume a "standard application" of a coal burner smokebox:
1) Baffle with smoke table
2) Cinder screen
3) Blast nozzle / blower pipe
4) Petticoat pipe
5) Stack

I realize that without an arch the firebox would draft fairly evenly, but ??????

Please elaborate.

(Sorry to derail the thread.........derail......Gah!)