DERAILING A REAL STEAM LOCOMOTIVE - ON VIDEO!

OUCH!!! That's gonna hurt.........someones ego for sure!!!

Did Mr. Scrapiron advise them?

Ouch.  That is so unfortunate.

Rich, from the title of your thread I thought you were referring to this one: 

Kids, don't do this at home:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...eature=fvwp&NR=1

Elliot strikes again?

Oh...ouch....

Chris

No...this derailment was not caused by wide gauge on bad track, which is what got Elliot.

This was simple human error and a communications foul-up. Obviously no one checked the derail before they moved and no one in the cab communicated anything about the status of the derail and which way it was lined.

Job briefings - they are a wonderful thing - and critically important on the railroad.

Sir Topham Hatt isn't gonna be real happy about that.

Question: 

Based on how aggressively the crew started backing up with those coaches, where those coaches empty and they where getting ready to stage them next to the station? It just seemed like a rather neck breaking departure and maybe they where running late and in a hurry. Lots of disasters, large and small, are caused by nothing more then people being in a hurry, or Go Fever.

Yow !

Rich would have been really mad.

Scrapiron

From what I understand, the engine was shunting mail cars for a mail pick up demonstration.

Accidents happen... Let's hope they learned from their mistake.

I noticed that they didn't wait for the home signal to indicate clear either.

In looking closer at the video, the point rodding shows that the catch point is operated from the signal box. Presumably the interlocking would have ensured that signalman would have set the catch point before setting the home signal to clear.

This certainly counts as an 'Oops!' 

HA HA HA HA HA LOL LOL LOL!!!!!!!!  If they worked for NS they'd be in a heap o trouble.  Derail??? What derail?????

I almost never derailed any engines or cars but I worked with a few guys that did.  As long as no one got hurt...that's worth a few laughs.

Rick

WOW!!!!!!!!!!! OUCH!!!!!

Alex

Rick,

I just have to ask, how do you almost never derail something?  Is that like saying that you sometimes almost always keep the train on the track?   

Oh that sucks!!! And a nice group of foamers to catch it too!

I had one wide gauge incident when I was in tourist service ( one axle each of coupled passenger cars) and a couple of interesting close calls but nothing like this. 

Thank goodness the air coupling mechanism didn't brake so they still had the trains brakes to stop them.  Other wise they might of rolled over.

RickO called it right... Sir Topham happy is gonna quite red faced when he gets this news!

JHZ

Gomez Addams was the driver/engineer!

I noticed it seemed like it took a little while for the engineer or fireman to take a lookout the back. Out of curiosity, when that happens, do the engineer & firemen have to take any immediate safety measures, or try to? Too late? 

Years ago I saw something in my hometown.I was siting at the trainstation the crew for the local.Came anyway 2 gp40-2 pulled out from the housetrack.Did some switching some cars.The train came back toward the station I tryed to warn them and so did a another crew member.But to late one locomotives where on the ground.The enginer was pretty level headed.They called some one and there was talk of having a big crane.To put the locomotive back on the track.The enginer had a idea.He got back to the locomotives and gunned it full power both units.I know that are so many reasons.That should have not worked but he got it back on the tracks.I had a hard time with it but he got the locomotive back on the tracks.This man had some big time skills.

I think we have fundamental misunderstanding about how train brakes work. If the brake pipe is broken, the air in the brake pipe exhausts to the atmosphere and the train brakes immediately apply in emergency. So if the "...air coupling mechanism..." did break, that would be a GOOD thing.

And I seriously doubt they would have rolled over. Even if the wheels got off the ends of the ties and began to dig into the dirt, they were next to an embankment that would have prevented a rollover.

Thank God they did'nt hit that doing 60 or 70 mph!!!It would have been much worse at higher speed,or at least it is when it happens on my layout!!!!

Regardless of whether the derail was controlled from the tower or from a hand-throw by the track, or whether this failed or that failed, the fact remains that the engine crew did not look at the rails they were about to use. If they had, this would not have happened.

John Korling, well there was this one time.  But it wasn't my fault.  LOL  We were working a work train laying fiber optic cable beside the track.  The fiber optic cable is fed into this huge plow car and as the plow plows a trench it also lays the cable.  (The plow car has 2 huge arms, 1 on each side, with a huge plow, like a horse drawn plow only bigger,  on the end of the arms).  Well, as we rounded a curve the fiber optic cable ran out so we had to stop and splice on more cable.  But, when we stopped the guys running the plow did not raise the plow out of the ground.  So, when we started pulling,  the plow was already dug in and caused the plow car to raise up on one corner and derail it.  Not like running thru a derail kind of thing.

BTW, this consist, plow car, cable rack car, and some miscellaneous cars would make a nice model, if you're into MofW cars.

Rick

Rick, I see you're local (I'm from Greensburg)... I'm assuming you worked for NS?  Where did you work out of, if you don't mind me asking?

Wow, I hope that there was not to much damage to the engine and tender. I wonder what the engineer was feeling after that happened?

Oh well, I never made a smart mistake in my life. As long as they learned from it and don't do it again it's best for the crew to get back behind the controls ASAP, if possible.

But, I'm wondering if this gang where properly trained or not to begin with.

When I took it to full screen, I noticed that the signal tower appears to have a red semaphore or flag out. Does the signal tower assist the engineer in this case or do they have to visually check the rails or com with the crew? 

Moonman, as I said in my post 6 above this one...

"Regardless of whether the derail was controlled from the tower or from a hand-throw by the track, or whether this failed or that failed, the fact remains that the engine crew did not look at the rails they were about to use. If they had, this would not have happened."

This incident at Quorn on the Great Central Railway has generated a lot of comment amongst UK railfans and the current (uninformed i.e. not official) opinion seems to be that blame might end up being divided between the signalman and the crew.

Nicole is right in saying that the trap point is rodded to the box; however, the fact that the driver sounds the whilstle is a standard response to an instruction/permission to move his train, so perhaps the interlocking with the signal failed.

Did the crew keep a proper lookout? well, not apparently, but we only see one angle and one segment of the event .... similarly, there are no hand or flag signals form the signal box and the man can be seen after the incident giving the whole situation a long stare through the windows of his door, so clearly he was surprised too.

All I can say is that events like this happen very very rarely in real life but very often on my O gauge railway, usually when we have visitors to see it happen! - but I don't then have to involve the Rail Accident Investigation Board (RAIB) - someone somewhere is going to be in a lot of trouble here on a Railway that has always been very efficient and professional in the way it is run.

As a footnote - Sir Topham Hatt - are U.S. railfans aware that originally he was (and still is in the UK) called the Fat Controller - but that (it is said) his name was altered for the U.S. so as not to upset anyone ......?

regards

David

At the end, I was waiting for a big hand to come down, pick it up, and put it back on the track... often seen on my railroad! 

Ed

Thanks, Rich. That makes sense, a basic safety tenet when operating anything. If you are the operator, it's your responsibility. No excuses!

I asked because I am not familiar with how railroad signaling devices operate. I have been reading the GCOR 6th edition, which I was able to find on the net, to get an understanding of operations.

Shortest.  Excursion.  Ever.

Jon

Good catch Rich! 

When I first put up that post I started to type something the air line not breaking but then my brain actually kicked in I changed it.  I meant to take out references to the air brake system exactly because if the hose came loose the brakes would have been in emergency which is just what the doctor ordered in this case.  Also I said coupling mechanism because clearly the tender end does not have american style knuckle couplers.

Like I said - Good catch. ( Also can't believe only one person called me out on it!)

Why is it always assumed that the people in charge know what they're doing and no one speaks up when they can see that they don't.  

ROTFL!!  Good one Wyhog. 

The Annual Derail Test...I gotta remember that one.

Just curious...  despite the time it would take for equipment to get there to put this poor unfortunate engine back on the rails;  Would they need to wait for the engine to loose pressure, cool down, etc., before attempting to rail it?

Technically no, as having any steam up really would not be an issue. However, in my opinion, I would cool her down slowly, dumping the fire and latter blow her out and drain all the water out of the tender at the same time. All that would drastically reduce the weight. 

If you watch it on YouTube to the very end, there is at least one other video to go along with it...plus another derailment.

Watching that video, I'm a little concerned that they're apparently backing that train up blind. The crewman (would that be the engineer be on the right side?) isn't even seen in the window until the derailment (though the cab and through a window on the tender). Even if that was the fireman, he should have been looking out the window as well.

Steve

On these locomotives (and every reasonably modern mainline UK loco except those built for the Great Western Railway) the driver (U.S. - 'engineer') is on the left of the footplate and the fireman on the right. As this loco is reversing towards the viewer, the driver is on our left.

At the start of the film clip, we see the fireman look down out of the cab, a routine act as he is checking that the injectors are working. The driver would have had his left hand on the regulator and be looking along the direction of intended travel with his back to the boiler. Because the cab is enclosed at the back we do have a view of the driver in this clip.

This is not likely to be a case of SPAD (signal passed at danger) as the driver would have been directed to move by the signalman.

There is now another interesting video on Youtube of the breakdown train arriving later that afternoon but I haven't yet seen any shots of the lifting itself.

David

The blower seems to be on (this is a jet of steam at the base of the chimney to assist with the draught and so encourage the fire) which suggests that they are not yet at sufficient speed to do without that.

Mlavender480, I worked out of Shire Oaks yard in Elrama, Pa.  Mostly, I worked on the road.  Taking loaded coal trains to Altoona and bringing the empties back the next day.

Rick

This is just in from a friend in England: "... the engine driver got permission from the signal-man to proceed beyond the stop signal but the signalman forgot to change the catch point and the driver forgot to check, resulting in the train ending on the ballast!!"

Sorry, interesting video, to say the least....but I am kind of lost.

1) this does not look like a switch/turnout

2) is it really something designed to  derail a train?

I found this bit of info to help me understand:

"The second type of derail is the "split rail" type. These are basically a complete or partial railroad switch which directs the errant rolling stock away from the main line. This form is common throughout the UK, where it is called trap points or catch points."

That leads me to think that:

1) the train in the video backed up to a point, then instead of going forward, went backward by accident

or

2) it was supposed to back up, but even though it does not look like a switch/turnout to me in the video....it really is one! And it was not aligned properly.

I am thinking 2. Am I on "the right track" here?

Sorry for the ignorance. It still was interesting to watch.

Greg

cngw,

There are many, many. locations on US railroads withe the same type of derail system. Lots of locations with single "movable point derails" and for absolute positive protection,i.e approaches to lift/draw/swing bridges, high traffic main line crossings at grade, and heavily used sidings, the "double movable point derail". When you want to be sure that the train is COMPLETELY derailed, the the twin "movable point derail" type is used.

As you can see in the video above, the twin point system works every time!

Concerning your other questions, please refer to Big Jim's post, directly above yours. He gives the answer as to WHY it happened.

A split point derail is essentially a switch to nowhere. Always works...

This video should serve as a reminder for the following: Maintain situational awareness, and ALWAYS double check switches and derails! That is what they pounded in my head going thru NS's Choo Choo U a few years ago.

Yep, it's no accident there was an accident!

As far as NS is concerned there are NO accidents.  Every "accident" can be prevented.  Case being, if someone on this crew would have looked...there would not have been an "accident".

Rick

WOW   I hate that for someone  !

Hey first post!  CN still uses alot of split rails.  Mainly since we kick cars down hill (no bowl) into blocks of cars with brakes/skates.  At least a few times a year due to mental errors one car never hits a car/skate (clear rail doh) and the split rail saves those cars going into a loaded amcrash.. i mean amtrak.

Pardon my ignorance but why would you want to intentionally derail a car in this way?  Seems to be an accident waiting to happen. 

As stated above, you would want to derail a car for a number of reasons. To prevent a car from rolling onto a high-traffic main line; to prevent a car from rolling into the drink at a drawbridge, etc. On a siding for a petroleum plant, you might not want a cut of tank cars loaded with gasoline rolling into the path of an on-coming passenger train, so you derail the cars before they get that far.