Re: [CBQ] E-5 wreck

["jpslhedgpeth via Groups.Io" <jpslhedgpeth=aol.com@groups.io>]

Thanks Bill  Glad you enjoyed the "old stuff" DVD....Tom Jurgens, the producer and Idea man on this project deserved 98% or the credit..We sure found out that "producing" a DVD or any other like project is not an easy or simple project.

Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: William Hirt <whirt@fastmail.com>
To: CBQ <CBQ@groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Oct 29, 2018 10:22 am
Subject: Re: [CBQ] E-5 wreck

Pete,

Thanks for the correction. I am enjoying the DVD I bought from you at the fall meet. The Lincoln folks and you did a great job.

Bill Hirt

On 10/29/2018 9:43 AM, jpslhedgpeth via Groups.Io wrote:

Bill et al..trivia technicality...This part of the old St. Joe Division was at the time of this affair actually CTC.  It had formerly been double track abs..I can't recall the Number of the rule(s) that cover this operation..CTC was put it  IIRC in 1958 or early 59..One of the double tracks making up the old double track operation was removed.  Napier as a TO station was closed about that time and Forest City was set up to handle orders for northbound trains going to Lincoln over the old Wymore Division.  The TO signal blade covering southbound trains was removed and the ETT specified that trains going to Lincoln via Falls City had to receive clearance at Forest City.

This has nothing to do with the subject at hand, but I just had to "declaim" on the matter.."just because it's me"

Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: William Hirt <whirt@fastmail.com>
To: CBQ <CBQ@groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Oct 29, 2018 9:01 am
Subject: Re: [CBQ] E-5 wreck

The Burlington Lines rulebook effective May 1, 1951 states:

"RESTRICTED SPEED - Proceed prepared to stop short of train,
obstruction, or switch not properly lined and to look out for broken rail.

REDUCED SPEED - Proceed prepared to stop short of train, obstruction, or
anything that may require the speed of a train to be reduced."

There is no definition what those speeds are in the rulebook that I can
find.

I looked through the St. Joseph Division Employee Timetables prior to
and after the wreck. There is no definition listed defining Restricted
or Reduced speed in them.

This was ABS territory. Zephyr speed limits were 75 mph, 65 mph for
regular passenger trains and 50 mph for freights.

Bill Hirt


On 10/28/2018 5:20 PM, Winton wrote:
> In my 41 years as an engineer I saw lots of photos of collisions at speeds under 20mph that resulted in terrific damage. Locos on top of one another, cars jacknifed and on top of one another. It all depends upon the speed and the weight of the trains.
> According to the 'Railway Signalling and Communications' article linked to above, the passenger train entered the siding at 25mph on a Restricting signal and had reduced to 5mph at the time they noticed the freight was on the same track. The passenger's engine crew bigholed it and abandoned ship. They stated that their train was stopped before the collision. Speed of the freight is not given.
> I do not have a CB&Q rulebook for 1960. I do have a Consolidated Code rulebook for 1967. That book has the Burlington signals in it. At that time a red over yellow was a RESTRICTING signal but the indication for it (how you were to operate) stated that you were to proceed at REDUCED SPEED. Reduced Speed has _no_ speed limit associated with it. Reduced Speed does _not_ require operation at 20mph or less. I ran trains on former CB&Q Alliance-Edgemont, Gillette-Sheridan-Huntley on BN starting in 1974 and thus I ran at REDUCED Speed a lot. If you could see a coupla miles ahead you could run at 49mph and still comply with REDUCED Speed rule.
>
> The article and my 1967 rulebook  states that rule 105 says Trains using a siding must proceed at REDUCED Speed.
> The article and my 1967 rulebook says that a red over yellow signal is a "Restricting" signal and operation is to be at REDUCED Speed.
> Therefore these 2 things allow the trains to operate at REDUCED Speed and do not require operation at RESTRICTED Speed.
> The speed limit diverging thru the turnouts was listed as 30mph. Therefore under the above conditions the trains could have been operating at 30mph in the siding while they occupied the turnouts.
> IF the siding itself did not have a lower speed limit on it then the trains could have legally accelerated after their entire train was in the siding and off the 30mph turnout _IF_ visibility allowed it. Obviously at night, and with the curves, even the 30mph limit on the turnouts would be excessive for Reduced Speed.
> However the article quotes a rule 530 as stating; Controlled sidings are not protected by signals between clearance points... trains must move at RESTRICTED Speed. There is no rule 530 in my 1967 CCOR. So if the article is correct, the rulebook in effect in 1960 at the time of the wreck must be somewhat different. And if that rulebook has a 20mph max limit for RESTRICTED Speed then both trains should have been under 21mph. The  passenger's engineer stated, according to the article, that he entered the siding at 25mph??
>
>
>
>

_._,_._,_

---

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#56113) | Reply To Group | Mute This Topic | New Topic

Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [archives@nauer.org]

_._,_._,_