BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

[CBQ] Re: Digest Number 2731 Naperville WReck

To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CBQ] Re: Digest Number 2731 Naperville WReck
From: "Bob Campbell" <amtrak347@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:18:13 -0000
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima; d=yahoogroups.com; b=XyfsYnKFqaWhXAh3njywQWvgEfvA8L1xyEUvbsD5+wYCdnOtc1kizsLGegGhl1aHtxKL6/GAGJJ5TTkEsOO2brZLVHYrfz/6uCShTNI7XqR9Cqgz+wB2/pI8EUkWMhMD;
In-reply-to: <3ba.13bdda2.317eebe6@aol.com>
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
User-agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
--- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, Jpslhedgpeth@... wrote:
>
> You guys that want all the details on the Naperville wreck need to  
contact
>  
> Jim Christen
> 626 Morningside Drive
> Naperville, IL 60563
>  
> 630 357 1861
>  
> Jim has and knows everything anyone would ever want to know about 
the  
> event..He has photos and newspaper clippings and even a piece of 
the window  frame 
> from the SILVER INN.
>  
> Jim does not have and never will have e mail, but he'll be able to 
give you  
> any information you want.
>  
> Pete Hedgpeth
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Hi Pete -

I thought I would add a few comments of my own.  You're right about 
Jim Christen being a "storehouse" of information concerning the 
Naperville Wreck!  When I first hired-out on the "Q" I talked to a 
number of "old timers" about the wreck for some insight as to what 
happened.  Karl Rethwisch and I also discussed the accident 
extensively as he too, had a keen interest in the cause of the 
wreck.  What I recall from those discussions was that engineer Blaine 
had spent most of his career working yard jobs at Galesburg and had 
decided to try his hand at "thru" passenger service before retiring.  
Keep in mind, there was no "mandatory" retirement age for engineers 
in 1946 (that didn't occur until 1964, when mandatory retirement at 
age 70 was instituted).  Karl and I could not determine just exactly 
when Blaine took the passenger assignment, but estimated he had 
worked it less than a year at the time of the accident at 
Naperville.  This is not to take away from his abilities as a 
locomotive engineer, just that I don't think he had a lot of time 
running thru passenger, especially on the East End (Chicago-Aurora), 
with its close block signal spacing.  One thing to remember is at the 
time of the accident, signal sequencing went from green, to yellow, 
to red, in a distance of about two miles.  The operating practice at 
the time for a following train was to stay as close to the preceding 
train as possible.  This meant that engineer Blaine, after passing 
a "clear" (green) signal, would see that the next signal in advance 
would be "approach" (yellow) but just prior to passing under the 
yellow signal, it would turn "clear".  I would suspect this is the 
method of operation Blaine followed, ever since he crossed over to 
main #2 at Kedzie Ave. (try to guess how many signals that would have 
been, before he arrived abruptly at Loomis St.?; I have no idea).  As 
a matter of fact, I wouldn't be surprised, at a few of those signals 
the indication didn't change from yellow to green, but stayed yellow -
 the key here, in this case, was that Blaine could see the next 
signal, which would be red, briefly, then change to yellow.  In this 
situation, I would guess that Blaine backed-off on the throttle 
because he was catching-up too fast on #11.  This worked fine, pacing 
himself behind #11, until he got to block signal 2-27.1, just east of 
the Naperville Country Club and the east end of the right hand, 
sweeping curve into Naperville.  I am positive signal 2-27.1 was 
yellow when Blaine went by it as #11 was stopped in the next block. 
Block signal 2-28.1 was around the curve, on tangent track just west 
of the Columbia St. overhead road bridge (see page 169 in Bulletin 
#42).  My thoughts are that Blaine's view of that signal were blocked 
by the bridge stucture or if there was ANY vehicular traffic passing 
over the bridge at the time #39 was straining to see the signal, it 
certainly obstructed the view of signal 2-28.1.  Even if he could see 
the red signal, he was assuming that it would change to yellow before 
he got to it, just like it probably did previously.  By the time 
Blaine could see that the signal was staying red and he could see #11 
stopped ahead, it was just too late to stop short.  Due to the 
estimated three minute separation of the two trains, there wasn't 
much time for the flagman on the stopped #11 to go back a sufficient 
distance to flag down #39 traveling at 80+/- MPH.  After this 
accident, the most significant change in operation was to the signal 
sequencing; the addition a "flashing yellow" Approach Medium 
indication, between the green signal and the yellow signal, that 
remains to this day on the East End.  The flashing yellow added 
another block between the green signal and the red signal, which 
allows more time to stop.  To me, Blaine was a victim of circumstance 
and it cost dearly.  What a sad way to end a RR career and I'm sure 
it was on Blaine's mind until the day he died.

Bob Campbell
Naperville, IL

PS - I'll have to make a copy of this thread for Jim the next time he 
stops by for a haircut!  I'll have to remind him that the signal 
bridge concrete base for signal 28.1 is still there on the south side 
of main #3, if he's still looking for souvenirs! 





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>