Re: [CBQ] Manual Block System; Rule 318(B)

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

WOW WOW WOW  Thanks Bud...It's a great  "shot in the arm" for me to realized that  "I've still got it"  when it comes to remembering old "railroad stuff"...I just finished my breakfast an hour ago and I have no memory of what I had, but I can remember old railroad stuff.

I was "waxing...old time stuff quite a few years ago and in my conversation  i used my usual  'That reminds me of..........fill in the blank"...My wife responded with her often expressed feeling expressed by  "EVERYTHING REMINDS YOU OF SOMETHING"    I tucked that lilttle quip away and often use it when I find that the OLD MEMORY BANK"   is still functioning...With a "LAZER LIKE FOCUS"  on trivia from many many years ago.   

This is not the first time I have dropped a few  "disconnected nuggets" relating to some really old matter and, quite often some other old retired RAIL who has a memory kinda like mine popps up just like you did, BUD.   

Thanks for "jumping in Bud"...glad there's at least one other guy who has  "Still got it"....I don't know how old you are But i just turned   86 less than a month ago.  Born March 23, 1936. 

Pete  

-----Original Message-----
From: Bud Linroth <wcman8@gmail.com>
To: CBQ@groups.io
Sent: Tue, Apr 26, 2022 8:15 am
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Manual Block System; Rule 318(B)

Hi Pete and group.   You can read all about this incident on pages 30 through 35 of my Peoria Line book.  In the months following the incident, the surviving crew members of the westbound train were dismissed and about the same time the operator resigned with only 20 years service.  Later the matter went to a Public Law Board and the referee found the train crew innocent and reinstated them and they were paid for all the time that they were off.  The operating rules that these crews were operating under was the Consolidated Code of Operating Rules, Edition of 1967.  Rules 222-A and 222-B instructed crews to only observe the paddles of the train order signal during daylight operations, not the roundel.  The accident occurred at 6:17 PM. on May 24, 1972 and the sun did not set until 8:23 PM. that day.  Any trainman or engineer woulkd tell you you could not see the light in the small roundel during daylight but you can sure see the paddles which are 10 times larger. The sun shining through the red roundel making it look green had nothing to do with it. The crew was looking at the paddles, both the head and rear ends.

The referee noted in his decision that the westbound crew was transported to Oak Hill to relieve a "dead' crew and before they left they asked Galesburg Yard management why they were not changed to train 104 which was ordered hours earier.  This was the common practice but management told them that train 104 was about to leave so they would go to Oak Hill as ordered.  The referee noted in his written decision that the westbound crew knew that they would meet train 104 at either Gilson or Yates City and therefore would be expecting to get this meet order at Yates City.  I worked with this conductor many times and I assure you that he and the rear brakeman would be on the back platform of the waycar to get their orders while passing Yates City.  There were other factors involved such as the time the orders were taken was written in black ink and later written in blue ink.  To say that the crew misread the train order signal is a grave injustice to the memory of those 4 employees who lost  their lives in this incident.  Bud Linroth.

On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:07 PM jpslhedgpeth via groups.io <jpslhedgpeth=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

Charlie

RE:  Yates City...seems like I once saw on the ICC Report investigation list there was an interesting matter which occured regarding a misreading of the Train Order Signal...

Seems like IIRC that there was a changed meet or wait order to be delivered at Yates City and the OP had "gone to supper" and left the signal at Stop..well the train came along and misread the TO signal because the low sun was shining through the glass "roundal" and the engine crew hence thought t hat they had a clear order board and hence did not get the meet or wait order and there was a "bad one as a result.   

I know this memory reference is somewhat garbled, but it was an interesting one of a lifetime things that could never happen,but DID.

Does this   prod anybody's memory awake?   I have no idea of the month or year...maybe in the 1940's.

Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: Charlie Vlk <cvlk@comcast.net>
To: CBQ@groups.io
Sent: Mon, Apr 25, 2022 4:32 pm
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Manual Block System; Rule 318(B)

All-

This also brought a smile to my face….

….my late and much missed friend Joe Legner had a fixation about Yates City….and would kiddingly ask “Have I ever told you about Yates City….” every time he would run into you.

Charlie Vlk

 

From: CBQ@groups.io <CBQ@groups.io> On Behalf Of ken thompson
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 12:32 PM
To: CBQ@groups.io
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Manual Block System; Rule 318(B)

 

Bill and Duncan,

 

You guys really put a big smile on my face when I opened this email this morning.  There is a wealth of information that I will put to use from these orders and clearances.  One thing that I didn't know was what number series were used for orders and slow orders on the Peoria Subdv. back then.  Now I know.  From the times given I should be able to figure out what train number the extra trains were.

 

If there's any way to do it I'd love to see how one of the permissive form C's was filled out.  Before I started to research the Manual Block System I didn't know such a form existed.

 

Thank you guys for preserving these forms and making them available.  It's more than I could have hoped for.

 

Ken Thompson

So. Milwaukee 

 

On Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 10:02 AM William Hirt <whirt@fastmail.com> wrote:

Ken,

The attached listing of train orders and contents from Yates City might
help answer some of your questions. It is a few years earlier than you
want, but the operation was the same.

I have a handful of Permissive Form C's in my collection for various
locations, but they appear to be pretty rare.

Duncan Cameron and myself put the train orders in our collection into
electronic form about 10 years ago and posted them in the Yahoo files
area for the group I believe these were moved to the new files area on
group.io for the current group Yahoo when was shut down.

Bill HIrt

On 4/24/2022 2:25 PM, ken thompson wrote:
> Group,
>
> I'm modeling the Peoria and Galesburg Subdivision in 1964 and am
> trying to get a better understanding of the manual block system as it
> was used on the Burlington.
>
> On my layout I've used Timetable and Train Order operation for a
> number of years now and have a pretty good understanding of how that
> works.  There were no passenger (1st class) trains or even 2nd class
> trains on the Peoria Sub. in 1964, so all trains ran as extras, with
> Westward trains superior to Eastward trains.  It was all dark
> territory without any train order signals.  Peoria, Yates City, and
> Galesburg were train register stations and trains leaving or passing
> these stations were required to have Clearance Form A when the
> operator was on duty.
>
> I'm assuming that with the manual block system that extras were still
> required to have a train order such as To: C&E Engine 303  "Engine 303
> run extra Galesburg to Peoria" plus Clearance FormA when departing 
> Galesburg and another Clearance Form A when passing Yates City as
> required by rule. I'm also assuming other train orders were issued for
> meets and slow orders etc.
>
> In my copy of the Hannibal Div. TT No. 5 for April 1964. for the
> Peoria and Galesburg Subdv., it states: Manual Block System; Rule
> 318(B) in effect.  Rule 318(B) says "A train may be permitted to
> follow a train other than a passenger train into a block under
> Permissive Indication, or with permissive Form C, on the authority of
> train dispatcher, provided ten minutes have elapsed since the passage
> of the last preceding train.
>
> So, my question is, was the manual block system mainly used for
> spacing trains traveling in the same direction and would the sections
> of track between Galesburg  and Yates City, and between Yates City and
> Peoria be considered the "blocks" in the Manual Block System?   Would
> the block station operators relay by phone the passage of trains
> leaving their block station to  both the dispatcher and the next block
> station operator?
>
> Ken Thompson
> So. Milwaukee
>

_._,_._,_

---

   Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#63625) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [archives@nauer.org]

_._,_._,_