--- In BRHSlist@y..., PSHedgpeth@a... wrote:
> Warren and Steve
>
> I'm always wanting to know more than I wanted to know when I
originally
> asked, but I'm really puzzled re your statement regarding the
difference
> between Q and Wabash orders.
>
> You say "Q orders would tell you to take siding and meet so many
trains, with
> engine numbers so and so for each train, wabash orders would tell
you to meet
> train no XXX. Thats it. could be 1,2 or three trains running ahead
of wabash
> xxx, was not metioned in their orders".... sounds like a "lap" to
me.
>
> If we're talking about meets between regular trains where the
inferior train
> is clearing the time of the superior train, then a meet with
another superior
> train would be something over and above what the inferior train
would have to
> do besides clearing the time of the superior train. I can't think,
though,
> given how freight trains run that the DS would just let freight
trains wander
> along clearing the schedule of other freight trains by superior by
> direction, and give them a meet with one of those trains but not
all of them.
> I've also heard of, but never participated, in an inferior train
running on
> the right of a superior train, or an inferior train putting a flag
on a
> superior train and then following him to a meeting point, but I
just don't
> understand what you are getting at....Why don't you tell us even
more than we
> really wanted to know????
>
> Also the practice of using some number other than the lead unit
number to
> designate an extra train is one of which I've never heard. That
could really
> lead to disaster.
>
> You guys need to read the case of the head on just north of
Donnelly, IA in
> early 1933 where the engineer of a northbound motor train
apparently mistook
> a MOW camp car made from a retired motor car on the siding for the
train he
> was supposed to meet and collided a mile or two north of Donnelly
with the
> train he was supposed to meet. The engineer and lots of others
were killed
> so it was never determined what actually happened. You can read
about this
> one, if you haven't, on the ICC Accident Investigation Website.
>
> Let's talk more about trains meeting other trains running ahead of
trains
> with which the first train has a meet, but first train knows
nothing of
> trains running ahead.........My head is spinning.....maybe you can
make it
> stop.....It's an interesting topic.
>
> Pete
>
>
pete, as a young hire, thought was a possible recipe for disaster and
think so today. this is what i remember of operating on the wabash.
may have gotten a thing wrong in my description, but i still remember
the conversation when i hired out with my dad and was going to work
on the branch. he cautioned about the wabash running trains ahead of
trains, not mentioned on the orders, mentioned that they would not
always have the number boards lit on the lead unit, as the Q did, be
ready to look at all of the units for the number boards to identify
the train. was most serious about not going to sleep at sheahan,
because of the wabash's thing of only mentioning the last train your
are going to meet at a meet. also was the subject of discussion in
the cab while setting at a meet while having a cup of coffee about so
and so had the meet, all went to sleep, and a train went by.
was my understanding you did not leave the meet if the train
mentioned had not arrived. if another number went by other than the
one in your orders, you stayed, that was the deciding factor. maybe
its a good thing i'm not running an engine today, might still be
sitting at sheahan waiting for the whatever number to arrive, from
1964. aways a little on the chicken side. <grin>
think we agree that their method of operating their road, if it was
as i described, left wide open the possibility of a misidentification
and thus the imagined result. or of never identifing and leaving. as
far as the meets, don't remember any this way, as only was one train
coming for the meet, or a meet and change engines. but still remember
the warning from dad. it must of happened at one time or another,
possibly to him, otherwise he would not of been so emphatic about
it. 'you got to watch it on the wabash' was how it started out....
warren
|