Pete,
Well Pete, you and Archie and them of me are both
older. Leo is younger.
I agree about 99 percent of the "the intimidation
factor". While that is not the way it should be done
that was the way it was done.
I can say that Table Rock was rather poor Dispatching.
The more that you change ideas the more that it can be
done with errors.
As to Maiden Rock WI after almost 20 years and working
there and part of the investigation I still have no
idea of what or why it happened.
Russ
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jpslhedgpeth@aol.com>
To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 05 February, 2009 11:55
Subject: Re:: [CBQ] Re: 1958 Wreck and the intimidation factor
>A couple of days ago I mentioned that after sufficient time had elapsed for
>all who wanted to participate in the discussion of the 1958 wrecks at
>Chugwater and Bloomfield to have read or reread the ICC reports that I
>wanted to comment upon what I have termed "the intimidation factor".
>
> I don't know the age of those of you who have commented thus far..one
> person says that he has been on "both sides of the investigation table"
> which might indicate he has considerable RR experience and would have some
> idea of what goes on in cab and waycar.
>
> My own railroad experience goes back to 1956 when I hired out as a
> brakeman on the Lincoln division in June while a student at the University
> of Nebraska.? I worked summers 56 57 58 on the Lincoln and Wymore
> divisions...
>
> At that time there were plenty of the "old head"...I mean really old head
> enginemen and trainmen working...Some with seniority back to the early
> "teens".? The attitudes of these guys varied from actively hostile to
> reasonably tolerant to helpful if they could see you were trying to do
> your job right and had a decent attitude.....Those in the middle class
> were in the majority and those of the totally opposite spectrum occupied
> the other ends.
>
> The attitude of some of the old head engineers...(all of my experience was
> on the head end, since I never had enough "whiskers" to told a rear end
> job) was that "you don't tell me anything, I wont' tell you anything until
> you do something wrong and then I'll "eat your A... out"..to use the
> vernacular of the day.....Being of the non-rebelious type and having a
> healthy respect for those in authority, as were most of my generation I
> was hesitant to ever make any comment as to how the train was being
> operated....The militaristic attitude of railroad management at that time
> was reflected almost in totallity by the operating crafts....."You don't
> question what I do or say"...keep your mouth shut.....
>
> To question where an engineer was running to fast or was, apparently
> overlooking a train order, just wasn't done....Now before you guys jump on
> me about what the rules say and you shouldn't have been so reticent etc
> etc etc....I'm not supporting this situation...I"m just telling you..."HOW
> IT WAS".....and IT WAS WHAT IT WAS.
>
> In the case of the Bloomfield matter the fireman had continually warned
> the engineer that he was "on the time of 30" and didn't receive a
> "satisfactory answer"...also the conductor allowed? the engineer to go by
> the last possible escape point without taking any positive action...Many
> of the conductors were hesitant to "run the train from the waycar" and
> were very reluctant to "pull the air"...This conductor apparently was
> ready to do so, but he let it go too long.
>
> For a personal example.? In 1957? I was head brakeman on a through freight
> turn between Lincoln and St. Joseph MO.? The engineer was an old head,
> nortorious for fast running and bad attitude...I had been forewarned of
> his tendencies.? On the down trip as we approached Tecumseh, NE where the
> train order signal is not visible until you come around a curve not far
> from the depot.? We expected to pick up an order....We were running at, or
> a bit over the 55 mph freight train speed...It was just about dusk.
>
> We came around the curve and saw the the order board was red, but the
> Operator was not on the platform...You would think that George would have?
> "shut off" or given some indication that he was going to stop...he did
> nothing...he stared straight ahead and kept her wide open...We had one of
> the F7's or F3's...I got off my seat opened the door on the fireman's
> side, put my foot down on the step, grabbed the handhold overhead and
> waited.? We got closer and closer to the station and about the time we got
> to the end of the platform the OP came tearing out and stuck the hoop up
> just as? we went by...gues what..."I missed...The only time I ever
> did...The fireman yelled to George...He missed....George cursed and swore
> and began to set the air...I dropped off as soon as we got slowed down to
> where I could do it....The op got in his car and drove the orders up to us
> on the head end and we went on..
>
> George continued to bite and snap at me the rest of the down trip.
>
> Coming back the next day on No 61 we picked up an order at Falls City
> regarding our meet with No. 78 at Tecumseh?? Without going into the
> details, the order required No. 78 to take siding at Tecumseh...At Table
> Rock we picked up another order superseeding the first order and telling
> us to meet 78 at Elk Creek.? Along with this order was another order
> annulling the superseding order and changing the meet back to Tecumseh.?
> This order?BY ITS SILENCE required us to take siding at Tecumseh..I was a
> bit confused as to whether we were or not to take siding....This
> uncertainty required me to discuss the situation with George...but I
> wasn't about to risk another A...eatin;g.? So I continued in my uncertain
> state violating the tenants of Rule 108 which states..."when In doubt the
> safe course must be taken"...
>
> As we approached Tecumseh which lies on a curve and the east siding switch
> is near the east end of the curve the fireman...as they always did in
> those days in time of crisis...or pending crisis went "back in the engine
> room".? I was standing in the middle of the cab as we approached the
> siding switch...I still wasn't sure whether we were to head in or
> not....As we got closer I could tell that George wasn't going to stop for
> us to head in.??
>
> As we got by the switch and around to where we could see up to the depot
> there was 78 on the Mainline standing at the depot...George made a heavy
> brake application and got us stopped well by the switch...We backed up and
> headed in...As we pulled up the siding and approached 78's head end who
> should climb off of 78's engine but Trainmaster-Road Foreman O.W.Wells
> II.? (Archie you can tell O.W. III about this).? Wells, climbed up into
> our cab and said..."What's the matter George...can't you read your
> orders"..George just glared at him, not saying anything.
>
> Of course there was an investigation...I thought...Oh oh...my railroad
> career is over before it got started....Well, it wasn't too bad.?The
> investigating officer asked me if I knew we should have taken the
> siding...I replied.."truthfully"..I wasn't sure...Because of my being a
> "new hire" I got no discipline.?? George maintained that he knew we were
> to take siding, but just didn't get stopped quite in time.? Well it didn't
> sell. ?George was restricted to branch line service.
>
> The next spring I went down to the TM office to check up as to whether I
> could hire on again summer of 58.? Billy Loos the TM was in the office and
> the subject of the Tecumseh matter came up..Billy asked me something about
> George...I told him...George didn't know we were to head in and I wasn't
> sure...Billy said..."I didn't think so"...He's been wanting me to put him
> back ont he mainline, but I'm not going to do it"...I guess I got a bit of
> "revenge", but what I said was true...but maybe not the best thing to do.?
> George finished his railroading days on the Lincoln-Nebraska City local.
>
> Someone in a recent post wondered how an entire crew could go "brain dead"
> and forget an order...Well, on the ICC website there is a report of an
> affair on the CGW, I don't recall the year...A passenger train picked up
> an order at Diagonal, IA to meet a light engine at Arispe IA, just five
> miles downt the line....The whole crew overlooked the order which they had
> held less than 15 minutes and they passed the meeting point and hit the
> light engine just south of that point.
>
> Well, that's my theory and personal example of the "intimidation
> factor"...like it or not...believe it or not...that's how it was..
>
> What say you Archie and Leo.
>
> Pete
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: richard haave <therrboomer@yahoo.com>
> To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 5:36 pm
> Subject: Re:[SPAM]Re: [CBQ] Re: 1958 Wreck
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Two more comments on this head on:
> ?
> I witnessed time and time again where the whole crew seems to
> simultaneously go brain dead?over some event.
> ?
> In this case the other crew members said they warned the engineer, but as
> the record shows, none took?the required action of stopping the train.? In
> incidents such as these, one question ALWAYS comes up at the formal
> investigation:
> ?
> "Mr (insert name) will you please tell us what action you took to stop the
> train.......?
> ?
> We all now know the answer was,?no action was taken.??Therefore each crew
> member, except perhaps the inexperienced brakeman,?was jointly responsible
> with the engineer.
> ?
> During my time in the industry I've been on both side of the investigation
> table. Neither side is recommended.
> ?
> I can not imagine the angst the other crew members must?suffered for the
> rest of their lives knowing their inaction caused the deaths of their
> fellow employees/friends.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> 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/
|